Gun Owner and RP supporter RAIDED at whim of congressbitch

[Doktor_Jeep]

I have an even stronger word on mind.


http://www.nypost.com/seven/07212008/news/regionalnews/gun_seizure_lawsuit_120836.htm

[torchbearer]

hmmmmmmm

[hypnagogue]

Interesting news. More facts needed for an opinion of course.

[jkm1864]

Bleeding heart liberals gotta love them because they never see past their stupid emotions.. Just imagine all the people whom are going to die due to criminals having guns and the honest people being disarmed. I have always felt that criminals that shoot people do so because they are cowards and their is no concern for retribution because the honest citizen isn't packing 24/7.

[ladyjade3]

Hmmm... sounds like he *might* possibly have been behaving like a nut.

[Kalifornia]

Hmmm... sounds like he *might* possibly have been behaving like a nut.


Im not sure 'behaving like a nut' is probable cause for a raid of your home and seizure of all your weapons.

[synapz]

im not sure 'behaving like a nut' is probable cause for a raid of your home and seizure of all your weapons.

qft +1

[Maverick]

"The office staff felt that Razzano's behavior was disruptive and threatening," said Lt. Kevin Smith, a police spokesman.

Razzano's home was raided the next morning.

That's all they had to go on? "Disruptive" or "threatening behavior" are rather subjective assessments. Also, consider the source of those accusations.

We'll have to see what other information comes out of this. I hope they had something more concrete to go on if they want to try to justify the raid.

[Kalifornia]

That's all they had to go on? "Disruptive" or "threatening behavior" are rather subjective assessments. Also, consider the source of those accusations.

We'll have to see what other information comes out of this. I hope they had something more concrete to go on if they want to try to justify the raid.

Im guessing they went with 'doctrine of preemption'.

[Maverick]

Im guessing they went with 'doctrine of preemption'.

I'm thinking it's time we just got on with it, and refer to law enforcement as Pre-Crime Units, amirite?

http://aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/department_of_precrime.jpg

[Kalifornia]

I'm thinking it's time we just got on with it, and refer to law enforcement as Pre-Crime Units, amirite?

http://aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/department_of_precrime.jpg

Isnt that the whole justification for the criminalization of drugs?

[Maverick]

Isnt that the whole justification for the criminalization of drugs?

Because if you smoke a little weed, we all know that means you're definitely going to go out and mass-murder 20 people :rolleyes:

And what's with arrests for "paraphenalia?" Just possessing something that could possibly be used for an illegal activity that's only illegal because you could maybe go out and do something bad, is in and of itself illegal. What bullshit.

[Kalifornia]

Because if you smoke a little weed, we all know that means you're definitely going to go out and mass-murder 20 people :rolleyes:

And what's with arrests for "paraphenalia?" Just possessing something that could possibly be used for an illegal activity that's only illegal because you could maybe go out and do something bad, is in and of itself illegal. What bullshit.

Just about all victimless crime law falls into one of those crazy categories. Gun control, drug war, prostitution, you name it.

The real enemy is the preemption doctrine.

[Maverick]

The real enemy is the preemption doctrine.

And that's why I said we should just go ahead and establish ourselves a Department of Precrime. At least then we're being honest about it.

[Kalifornia]

And that's why I said we should just go ahead and establish ourselves a Department of Precrime. At least then we're being honest about it.

True. I think Im gonna go kick every socialist and fascist I can find preemptively in the nuts.

[Doktor_Jeep]

Hmmm... sounds like he *might* possibly have been behaving like a nut.



yes, go ahead and think that.

To think otherwise might be too scarey for you.

It's always easy to justify the actions of those who set precedents to crush you at their whim, than it is to fully realize what happened and handle the scarey truth.


I expect the same things went on in the minds of many who were packed into frieght cars, then shoved out of them at places where the smell of burning flesh hung in the air. Yet they still obeyed and did not fight back, because all of the evidence before them bore a truth that they could not handle either.

[Doktor_Jeep]

True. I think Im gonna go kick every socialist and fascist I can find preemptively in the nuts.

Remind me not to get into WWII reenactments around you lest I find the old chicken bag in my back pocket.

And anyone who wants to think that that guy had it coming for "being a nut", let me tell you, I have been in situations where people would put words in my mouth, and hyperventilate and ninny acting scared to get what they wanted, trying to get others to do it for them.

I guess it has to happen to some of you morons before you get it. But you will get it alright, and I won't shed a tear over your bleached bones on the roadside.

[Kalifornia]

Remind me not to get into WWII reenactments around you lest I find the old chicken bag in my back pocket.

And anyone who wants to think that that guy had it coming for "being a nut", let me tell you, I have been in situations where people would put words in my mouth, and hyperventilate and ninny acting scared to get what they wanted, trying to get others to do it for them.

I guess it has to happen to some of you morons before you get it. But you will get it alright, and I won't shed a tear over your bleached bones on the roadside.

woah there pard, I was the one defending your boy. Its a man's constitutional right to act crazy. last I checked, getting a bit heated isn't probable cause for invadinf a mans home and seizing his property.

[newyearsrevolution08]

wow um ok then.


Remind me not to get into WWII reenactments around you lest I find the old chicken bag in my back pocket.

And anyone who wants to think that that guy had it coming for "being a nut", let me tell you, I have been in situations where people would put words in my mouth, and hyperventilate and ninny acting scared to get what they wanted, trying to get others to do it for them.

I guess it has to happen to some of you morons before you get it. But you will get it alright, and I won't shed a tear over your bleached bones on the roadside.

[nobody's_hero]

Sadly, there just aren't enough facts (the article was either hastily written, or there was bad investigative journalism). I mean, "unpopular" political beliefs? I think that describes everyone on Ron Paul Forums. Doktor Jeep, thanks for sharing this.

I can't even tell by reading the article whether or not the guy is going to get a trial. That would throw up some bright red flags if he doesn't.

[acptulsa]

Enough said, I think:

"The office staff felt that Razzano's behavior was disruptive and threatening," said Lt. Kevin Smith, a police spokesman.

If this is the best they can do for a press release, I think it's safe to assume this was the best they could do for a warrant. If this was the best they could do for a warrant, the cop who requested it and/or the judge who issued it needs to go, as either the cop lied to the judge or the judge is an idiot and a tool. The woman could stand to be impeached, too, though there would probably be less success there...

[Alex Libman]

I hope she gets killed with 2,000 very sharp pencils.

[B964]

The information is to vauge to know what is going on.
On the surface "disruptive behavior" is weak and would be hard to imagine (but possiable) a warrant based on that alone.

This lady got elected by people in that area, so it is not hard to think that some of the police and judges there are on her side and will do what she wants.

[Primbs]

If the guy is so dangerous, why are they not arresting him, but only taking his guns.

He could probably just buy more guns.

[John E]

If the guy is so dangerous, why are they not arresting him, but only taking his guns.

He could probably just buy more guns.

very good point

[CoreyBowen999]

If the guy is so dangerous, why are they not arresting him, but only taking his guns.

He could probably just buy more guns.

so true..

[acptulsa]

If the guy is so dangerous, why are they not arresting him, but only taking his guns.

He could probably just buy more guns.

Why would gun manufacturers encourage gun control?

[TruckinMike]

On the surface "disruptive behavior" is weak and would be hard to imagine (but possiable) a warrant based on that alone.

Most power mad sheeple react to a man being upset, loud, or angry as being dangerous. I protested my increase in property taxes and had a hearing with a county appointed Non-biased:rolleyes: panel. As I waited for my turn to plead my case there was a man (70+ years old) pleading his logical arguments. They returned with their opinion -- which was absurd -- and the man told them in a loud voice how the cow ate the cabbage( w/ no cursing) ---- They then called the sheriffs department on him -- two deputies showed up, but the man had already left.

This man was not dangerous, but the government thugs on the panel wanted to exert their power.

The point is --
"The office staff felt that Razzano's behavior was disruptive and threatening,"

...when I hear stories like this I think of that man in the tax hearing.

TMike

[B964]

Most power mad sheeple react to a man being upset, loud, or angry as being dangerous. I protested my increase in property taxes and had a hearing with a county appointed Non-biased:rolleyes: panel. As I waited for my turn to plead my case there was a man (70+ years old) pleading his logical arguments. They returned with their opinion -- which was absurd -- and the man told them in a loud voice how the cow ate the cabbage( w/ no cursing) ---- They then called the sheriffs department on him -- two deputies showed up, but the man had already left.

This man was not dangerous, but the government thugs on the panel wanted to exert their power.

The point is --

...when I hear stories like this I think of that man in the tax hearing.

TMike

Your right, they are exerting thier power, and it is a power they have. If I was to call the police because I had an upset,screaming customer(which I have had, but never needed the police for) they may come over and settle them down or escort them out. Would they get a warrant to sieze thier property at home? No. If a congresspersons office calls them it seems to be different.
Based on the information we have, I love to see the complaint and warrant.

[Uriel999]

If the guy was causing a scene and being disruptive, he should have been removed from the premises and that is all. Unless he verbally threatened to come back and shoot up the place, then they had no right to come disarm him. This article doesn't give enough information. However, I find it interesting that Carolyn McCarthy who is some huge anti-gun nut sent in her armed thugs to take away that dudes guns...Hrmmm :rolleyes: If she is so anti-gun then I propose she start disarming police officers in her district.

[Doktor_Jeep]

woah there pard, I was the one defending your boy. Its a man's constitutional right to act crazy. last I checked, getting a bit heated isn't probable cause for invadinf a mans home and seizing his property.

No no no. I only answered you in the first sentence. The rest is for the knucklhead patrol who appear to think we all have to "use tact", wear pastel sweaters and slacks, and act like Stuart Smally.

[JohnMeridith]

wow, what a joke, if he was being disruptive enough to warrant this, he should have been legally detained at the time of the complaint, which wouldn't warrant a house raid.

[Godfather89]

McCarthy, I cant stand her... She's unconstitutional and she let her emotions dictate what she will do in office. I am staunchly against her, I live in Nassau County here on Long Island, trust me not everyone on Long Island is stupid as she is. She lacks reason she's uncompromising, she see's the guns as bad, hey is you take the guns away than some murder will use something else: Bombs, knives... Its not the weapon that kills its the people, she does not understand that. Her emotions dictate her actions not her reason, but than she tries to rationalize on her emotions, leading to a sad argument.

[Doktor_Jeep]

McCarthy, I cant stand her... She's unconstitutional and she let her emotions dictate what she will do in office. I am staunchly against her, I live in Nassau County here on Long Island, trust me not everyone on Long Island is stupid as she is. She lacks reason she's uncompromising, she see's the guns as bad, hey is you take the guns away than some murder will use something else: Bombs, knives... Its not the weapon that kills its the people, she does not understand that. Her emotions dictate her actions not her reason, but than she tries to rationalize on her emotions, leading to a sad argument.



Nassau, eh? I was raised in Port Washington.

[ChickenHawk]

I'm thinking McCarthy's husband could have used one of those guns...

[clytle374]

I'm thinking McCarthy's husband could have used one of those guns...

Somehow that logic can not be used with her type.

[Godfather89]

Nassau, eh? I was raised in Port Washington.

North Shore person uh? LoL, j/k... Yeah, I live in Central Nassau... But yeah McCarthy justifies gun banning based off of emotions and has no real reason.