Cops seize legal guns, neighbors say it's "too many".

[Anti Federalist]

UPDATE: Police Seize Over 300 Guns from Rockford IL Home

http://mystateline.com/fulltext-news?nxd_id=185655

(Rockford) -- More than 300 firearms were removed from this home on Auburn Street. It's a scene residents say they aren't accustomed too.

Coley Woods lives across the street from the home. He says, "I'm thinking it's an accident or something, but I look over and I see them with all them rifles."

"It's just un-real to see this many guns involved a regular residential neighborhood," says concerned resident McArthur Tennin.

Police were called to this home just after two this morning. They arrived after neighbors called about a burglary. When police got inside the home, they found empty shell casings and a variety of weapons, from shotguns to rifles.

Deputy Police Chief Greg Lindmark says, "some were loaded, some weren't some appear to be operable because they're old and then some to be fairly new."

Police say a 67 year-old man owns the home and the weapons. He is a legally registered gun owner.

"At the current time we're taking the firearms for safe keeping as evidence until we can further investigate this," says Deputy Chief Lindmark.

Neighbors say even though the weapons may be legal, they still pose a security threat to their neighborhood.

Woods' says, "Even if he's a registered gun owner or not, that just seems like its too many rifles."

Shortly after police arrived, the home was condemned and the guns were only part of it.

Deputy Chief Lindmark says, "When the police got to this residence they found a tremendous amount of garbage and different items stacked from the floor to the ceiling."

Police will run checks on all of the weapons to see if any were stolen or involved in any crimes.

As of late Wednesday afternoon, police haven't charged the homeowner. Police say he's out of town and they're still trying to get in contact with him. Police also haven't made any arrests in the burglary.

[oyarde]

No such thing as too many.

[Romulus]

Shall Not Be Infringed.

[oyarde]

Shall Not Be Infringed.

That says it all .It is the most simple sentence in the amendments.

[anaconda]

Definitely infringing.

[Brian4Liberty]

Police also haven't made any arrests in the burglary.

The only thing that they are supposed to do, and they can't do it.

[Anti Federalist]

The only thing that they are supposed to do, and they can't do it.

But they sure as shit can waltz in, while the owner is away, and just take his property.

[acptulsa]

Deputy Police Chief Greg Lindmark says, "some were loaded, some weren't some appear to be operable because they're old and then some to be fairly new."

I know someone who has 13,527 Beanie Babies. That's way, way too many. Yet I don't see the cops seizing them...

[Slutter McGee]

"When the police got to this residence they found a tremendous amount of garbage and different items stacked from the floor to the ceiling."

That many guns and ammunition, most likely inproperly stored and taken care of, in the hands of hoarder....could actually pose a legitimate danger to the neighborhood. Just saying.

Jeez, I have no problem with somebody having as many guns as they friggin want. But take care of them. Have some accessible, have some stored....but guns and ammo laying around on piles and piles of trash? Am I the only person that sees a danger here.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Pericles]

If the owner had been at home, somebody probably would have been shot.

[Anti Federalist]

"When the police got to this residence they found a tremendous amount of garbage and different items stacked from the floor to the ceiling."

That many guns and ammunition, most likely inproperly stored and taken care of, in the hands of hoarder....could actually pose a legitimate danger to the neighborhood. Just saying.

Jeez, I have no problem with somebody having as many guns as they friggin want. But take care of them. Have some accessible, have some stored....but guns and ammo laying around on piles and piles of trash? Am I the only person that sees a danger here.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

If this person is a "hoarder" I'll guarantee there were much more dangerous things stored in the home than firearms and ammo.

Gas, chemicals, paints and thinners; all a much bigger safety hazard than modern, centerfire ammo.

So what are you suggesting, that the cops keep his legally owned property until he cleans up?

Or just keep it permanently?

[LibertyEagle]

Slutter, I for one do not agree. Who is to define "too many"? Who defines how they must be stored? Are we now to have a litmus test for how many stacks one can have in our house?

The man had not committed a crime. The police had no right to confiscate his guns. None.

Now, we may disagree with how he stored them, and some may even not like that he had so many. But, like so many other things, those would fall into the category of NONE OF OUR BUSINESS.

[Anti Federalist]

If the owner had been at home, somebody probably would have been shot.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing, the homeowner stood a good chance of getting shot had he been unfortunate enough to be around when the enforcers showed up.

[Bruno]

Are the police now in the business of making laws? How many is too many? 4? 12? 57? 122?

[Slutter McGee]

If this person is a "hoarder" I'll guarantee there were much more dangerous things stored in the home then firearms and ammo.

Gas, chemicals, paints and thinners; all a much bigger safety hazard than modern, centerfire ammo.

So what are you suggesting, that the cops keep his legally owned property until he cleans up?

There is only one question. Do the firearms, in their current condition, and in the homes current state, pose a legitimate risk to neighbors...or children (don't know if that is applicable). The presence of firearms alone is not enough. But if a legitimate risk is involved, and I do mean legitimate, then I have no problem with the police holding legally owned firearms.

The problem here is the word "legitimate". Such situations, even if they are legitimate, can open up the door to future abuse. I recognize that.

I am not making a judgement here. Most of the stuff you post is black and white. Gross violations of consitutional rights and liberties. I am just saying that this time, the situation seems a little bit more grey.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[heavenlyboy34]

Slutter, I for one do not agree. Who is to define "too many"? Who defines how they must be stored? Are we now to have a litmus test for how many stacks one can have in our house?

The man had not committed a crime. The police had no right to confiscate his guns. None.

Now, we may disagree with how he stored them, and some may even not like that he had so many. But, like so many other things, those would fall into the category of NONE OF OUR BUSINESS.

Agreed, 10000%.:cool:

[michaelwise]

I would suggest the police help the man sell some of those fire arms so he can pay for a cleaning lady. 300 guns is worth a lot of money. The man probably has about $100,000 worth of merchandise there.

[Anti Federalist]

Slutter, I for one do not agree. Who is to define "too many"? Who defines how they must be stored? Are we now to have a litmus test for how many stacks one can have in our house?

The man had not committed a crime. The police had no right to confiscate his guns. None.

Now, we may disagree with how he stored them, and some may even not like that he had so many. But, like so many other things, those would fall into the category of NONE OF OUR BUSINESS.

Not only that, but they dragged them out of the house and threw them in a heap on the lawn and then into cop vans.

http://mystateline.com/images/Multi_Media/mystateline/nxd_media/img/jpg/2010_08/0a5ae95e-dbcd-90f4-51c9-62cf7ce23a66/raw.jpg

http://mystateline.com/images/Multi_Media/mystateline/nxd_media/img/jpg/2010_08/98eeca1f-db18-acc4-c58d-bdf0fc510313/raw.jpg

http://mystateline.com/images/Multi_Media/mystateline/nxd_media/img/jpg/2010_08/8939c70c-f8e7-9cf4-79ae-24a614795ae5/raw.jpg

If there were any high quality firearms in that heap, that treatment went a long way towards ruining them.

[acptulsa]

Are the police now in the business of making laws? How many is too many? 4? 12? 57? 122?

Four!!

Oh, you weren't talking about Beanie Babies, were you? Never mind.

[Dr.3D]

People who have a problem with "hoarders" are little more than gossipy small minded people who should tend to their own business. As for having a large number of firearms, a person can only use one or two at the most at a time. The rest of those firearms can sit there and be in storage in the home and not cause any problem on their own.

People need to mind their own business!

[acptulsa]

People who have a problem with "hoarders" are little more than gossipy small minded people who should tend to their own business. As for having a large number of firearms, a person can only use one or two at the most at a time. The rest of those firearms can sit there and be in storage in the home and not cause any problem on their own.

People need to mind their own business!

Thank you. It doesn't take but about twelve seconds of rational thought to realize he doesn't have enough room in that house to have the Chinese Army over for a keg party. Therefore, even if he can operate one with his feet, that only makes one percent of the hoard that could be dangerous to someone at any one time.

[Pericles]

Are the police now in the business of making laws? How many is too many? 4? 12? 57? 122?

is this a trick question? You can never have too many weapons.

[Anti Federalist]

The problem here is the word "legitimate". Such situations, even if they are legitimate, can open up the door to future abuse. I recognize that.



Agreed that this story is a little "gray" but I still maintain that the threat from arms and ammo is minuscule compared to threats from common household chemicals, improperly stored.

That opens a can of worms if such a fungible word as "legitimate" is used as a guideline to what cops can do in such a situation.

The fact remains, the house was empty, there was no threat of danger or safety issues readily apparent from the outside, the only reason the cops showed up was because of the burglary call.

Had that not happened, no one would have been the wiser.

[Bruno]

is this a trick question? You can never have too many weapons.

it was a rhetorical question :)

[Humanae Libertas]

Are the police now in the business of making laws? How many is too many? 4? 12? 57? 122?

Having a single firearm is too many to these cops.

[acptulsa]

Having a single firearm is too many to these cops.

Yet I'll wager that not one of them has less than three at home.

[Slutter McGee]

People who have a problem with "hoarders" are little more than gossipy small minded people who should tend to their own business. As for having a large number of firearms, a person can only use one or two at the most at a time. The rest of those firearms can sit there and be in storage in the home and not cause any problem on their own.

People need to mind their own business!

Hoarders are often the business of neighbors. Often they create unbearable stench, attract rodents and pests which can infest in neighbor's properties, lower property values dramatically, and pose a health danger to others.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Dr.3D]

Hoarders are often the business of neighbors. Often they create unbearable stench, attract rodents and pests which can infest in neighbor's properties, lower property values dramatically, and pose a health danger to others.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Yeah, we need to make a law that people need to wash their dishes and clean up their homes everyday. I'm sure that would make a lot of busybody people happy.
/sarcasm

Just because someone doesn't live the same way as the majority of people, it doesn't mean those people should have to conform to the majority.

Yeah, complain about the smell, rodents and pests, but don't bother the person if they live in a messy home. We don't need nosy neighbors inflicting their standard of living on those who don't live up to their expectations.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Hoarders are often the business of neighbors. Often they create unbearable stench, attract rodents and pests which can infest in neighbor's properties, lower property values dramatically, and pose a health danger to others.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Please back statist bullshit advocating the use of force against innocent individuals up with some facts.

Sincerely,

LFOD

[KCIndy]

So far, I've not seen the most pertinent question asked:

HOW DID THE POLICE KNOW ABOUT THE GUNS IN THE FIRST PLACE???

Did the homeowner shoot his mouth off? (no pun intended) Did someone see the guns and rat him out?

OR:


Police say a 67 year-old man owns the home and the weapons. He is a legally registered gun owner.

There's yer problem right there.... :mad::mad::mad:


PS if shoes were guns, my wife would be arrested for having an "arsenal" in our house... :rolleyes:


EDIT: Okay, just re-read it. Didn't catch the part about the burglary call.... I guess I pulled the trigger too early on that one. (Pun intended!)

[Bruno]

So far, I've not seen the most pertinent question asked:

HOW DID THE POLICE KNOW ABOUT THE GUNS IN THE FIRST PLACE???

Did the homeowner shoot his mouth off? (no pun intended) Did someone see the guns and rat him out?

OR:



There's yer problem right there.... :mad::mad::mad:


PS if shoes were guns, my wife would be arrested for having an "arsenal" in our house... :rolleyes:

The homeowner wasn't home. Did you miss this part?

Police were called to this home just after two this morning. They arrived after neighbors called about a burglary. When police got inside the home, they found empty shell casings and a variety of weapons, from shotguns to rifles.

[KCIndy]

The homeowner wasn't home. Did you miss this part?

Police were called to this home just after two this morning. They arrived after neighbors called about a burglary. When police got inside the home, they found empty shell casings and a variety of weapons, from shotguns to rifles.


Yeah, somehow I actually did miss that.... I've already posted an "edit" correction at the bottom of the post... my mistake! :o

[Dr.3D]

"At the current time we're taking the firearms for safe keeping as evidence until we can further investigate this," says Deputy Chief Lindmark.

Shouldn't this read.... "At the current time, we can't find anything to charge this man with, so we are keeping his property until we can find something to charge him for." ???

They have no right to keep the property of an innocent person. From where do these people get their training?

They can't determine his guilt till they come up with a charge to pin on him.

[Slutter McGee]

Please back statist bullshit advocating the use of force against innocent individuals up with some facts.

Sincerely,

LFOD

I have already stated that I find the confiscation of fire arms from the individual questionable, but I simply recognized that this is not as black and white as most cases on here.

Surely we agree that the only limits that should be placed on private property use should only come when such uses violate the equal rights of others to be secure in their property. Which is kinda what I said.

But apprently you can't fucking read. Guess that makes me a statist.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

I have already stated that I find the confiscation of fire arms from the individual questionable, but I simply recognized that this is not as black and white as most cases on here.

Surely we agree that the only limits that should be placed on private property use should only come when such uses violate the equal rights of others to be secure in their property. Which is kinda what I said.

But apprently you can't fucking read. Guess that makes me a statist.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

I appreciate the point you are trying to make with your argument but unless the owner of the firearms in question was shooting into other people's homes unprovoked than it is absolutely nobody elses business how they were stored in his home.

IF the man does have a hoarding issue than it is nobody else business but his and his families. Is he piling garbage on someone else's property? The article did not indicate that he was so if the neighbors have a problem with it than maybe they should make the decision to move and let someone live in their home who does not have a problem living there.

You and I have NO right at all to dictate how this man should live it is afterall his personal choice to keep his place like that. You may not agree with his lifestyle but you do not have to live there and if we cannot believe in personal freedom for those we disagree with than do we really believe in it at all?

[erowe1]

How many guns do they have at the police station?

If it's not too many for the government, then it can't be too many for anyone else.

[devil21]

I have already stated that I find the confiscation of fire arms from the individual questionable, but I simply recognized that this is not as black and white as most cases on here.

Surely we agree that the only limits that should be placed on private property use should only come when such uses violate the equal rights of others to be secure in their property. Which is kinda what I said.

But apprently you can't fucking read. Guess that makes me a statist.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Please explain how being a hoarder means his gun collection is violating someone else's rights and security. I would appreciate some legal backing for your argument.

This is also assuming the whole "hoarder" portion of the story is true, rather than a cover story for the cops to justify their theft.

[aGameOfThrones]

Hey, hey, hey, Slutter McGee's comments are too many and pose a danger to liberty minded people around here. MOD, can you ban Slutter for our security? Sheesh...

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Hoarders are often the business of neighbors. Often they create unbearable stench, attract rodents and pests which can infest in neighbor's properties, lower property values dramatically, and pose a health danger to others.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

That is called a mother fucking assertion.


I have already stated that I find the confiscation of fire arms from the individual questionable, but I simply recognized that this is not as black and white as most cases on here.

Surely we agree that the only limits that should be placed on private property use should only come when such uses violate the equal rights of others to be secure in their property. Which is kinda what I said.

But apprently you can't fucking read. Guess that makes me a statist.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

That is called not being able to comprehend the mother fucking english language. It is also backing a mother fucking bullshit assertion with hot air because there are absolutely no citations whatsoever for any studies or evidence on the subject matter of hoarding, rodents, pests, property values, or health dangers to substantiate any use of force.

Sincerely,

LFOD

[Danke]

He did have too many. He should have been sharing them with the neighbors.

[oyarde]

He did have too many. He should have been sharing them with the neighbors.

He may indeed shared with his neighbors if he was asked, he is probably , now , wishing that his neighbors are more like that instead of what he has.

[Kylie]

He did have too many. He should have been sharing them with the neighbors.

This is more along my line of thinking.


I sure wish this guy was my neighbor, because when the shit goes down, I know whose house to go to in order to protect the neighborhood.

[jclay2]

Does anyone have any suspicions about this anonymous call in of a burglary? Are we really expected to believe that there was someone there trying to break in to this old man's house? Isn't it possible that cops saw that this man had 300 guns and wanted an excuse to go hunting for an indictment of some sort? If I had to guess, I bet the cops knew that the man was gone and saw it as an opportune moment to call in a burglary, so they could go and "protect" (search and seize) his property.

[nobody's_hero]

Does anyone have any suspicions about this anonymous call in of a burglary? Are we really expected to believe that there was someone there trying to break in to this old man's house? Isn't it possible that cops saw that this man had 300 guns and wanted an excuse to go hunting for an indictment of some sort? If I had to guess, I bet the cops knew that the man was gone and saw it as an opportune moment to call in a burglary, so they could go and "protect" (search and seize) his property.

I'm surprised the 'burglary' call hasn't received much attention in this thread.

I don't find it suspicious though, or that there was any sort of conspiracy involved.

I do think that it is entirely plausible that the neighbors wanted something done about all the guns the guy had, couldn't think of anything that would get the cops to just go in on a complaint about a 'guy having too many guns,' so they made up some bullshit fake burglary 911 call (which is illegal) to get cops to check the place out.

The cops arrived, got a case of "tunnel vision"—still thinking they were in "crime-fighting mode,"—one thing led to another, and they snatched up the guns without a warrant.

The guns should be returned, and whoever made the 911 call should be issued a citation (or whatever the penalty for false 911 reports is in that jurisdiction).

[Dr.3D]

I'm surprised the 'burglary' call hasn't received much attention in this thread.

I don't find it suspicious though, or that there was any sort of conspiracy involved.

I do think that it is entirely plausible that the neighbors wanted something done about all the guns the guy had, couldn't think of anything that would get the cops to just go in on a complaint about a 'guy having too many guns,' so they made up some bullshit fake burglary 911 call (which is illegal) to get cops to check the place out.

The cops arrived, got a case of "tunnel vision"—still thinking they were in "crime-fighting mode,"—one thing led to another, and they snatched up the guns without a warrant.

The guns should be returned, and whoever made the 911 call should be issued a citation.

Well, there was no search warrant. A search warrant must state what is being searched for. If there is no search warrant, then I can't see how they can legally take anything from the home.

At best, a door or window would have to have been open or broken for the police to even be able legally to enter the home.

Essentially, I see a case of illegal search and seizure here.

[oyarde]

I'm surprised the 'burglary' call hasn't received much attention in this thread.

I don't find it suspicious though, or that there was any sort of conspiracy involved.

I do think that it is entirely plausible that the neighbors wanted something done about all the guns the guy had, couldn't think of anything that would get the cops to just go in on a complaint about a 'guy having too many guns,' so they made up some bullshit fake burglary 911 call (which is illegal) to get cops to check the place out.

The cops arrived, got a case of "tunnel vision"—still thinking they were in "crime-fighting mode,"—one thing led to another, and they snatched up the guns without a warrant.

The guns should be returned, and whoever made the 911 call should be issued a citation (or whatever the penalty for false 911 reports is in that jurisdiction).
My bet would be next door as well.

[paulpwns]

Slutter's attempt to derail fails again...

LOOOOSER ( in Ace Ventura voice)

[nobody's_hero]

Essentially, I see a case of illegal search and seizure here.

Certainly. Whoever the ranking officer was who made the decision to seize the weapons should be demoted and those who took part in it need a good ass chewing/suspension/etc.

That's not likely to happen unless a lot of people flood the mayor's office with calls, though.

[Volitzer]

Authoritarian haplophobic gun grabber !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[sailingaway]

Does it say what gave them probable cause to enter the house to begin with?

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I hate the police and busy-bodied tyrant neighbors.

[heavenlyboy34]

No such thing as too many.

FTW!! :D:cool:

[oyarde]

Certainly. Whoever the ranking officer was who made the decision to seize the weapons should be demoted and those who took part in it need a good ass chewing/suspension/etc.

That's not likely to happen unless a lot of people flood the mayor's office with calls, though.

Yes , I do not think this will stand up to any scrutiny at all.

[VirginiaRising]

So let me get this straight....

Local police can do whatever they want now. At least to the private citizen...

Did I get it right?

[pcosmar]

Glad to see most of the folks here "get it".

couple of thoughts though,
Hoarder??? How about collector. But then in the Stazi mentality, anyone that has more than they can immediately use of anything is a "hoarder". Food, Gas, survival supplies etc.

The second thing is Who made the call about a burglar?
Was there really a call? Or was there any evidence that there was a crime at all?
Or was this orchestrated by someone with a motive? A grudge or unfounded fear?

Lastly, regardless of how this began,,The police have no business nor right to seize property unless court ordered after due process.
that IS the bottom line.
:(

[nobody's_hero]

Does it say what gave them probable cause to enter the house to begin with?

Perhaps if the house appeared to have been broken into (of which details are missing from the story), then officers might have been justified to investigate further. When they started snatching up guns, they committed an unlawful seizure. —Unless they actually believe that a burglar entered the man's house and left 300 guns all over the place, which would be a silly conclusion to come to, in any case. It's a stretch for the deputy police chief to call these guns "evidence" in a burglary case. If so, I wish somebody like that would rob my house.

There are a lot of details missing from this story, the more I consider it.

[Golding]

If the police want to make arrests on a burglary, they ought to start with arresting themselves. Does a neighbor have the right to grant permission of entry to someone else's property? I suspect they don't. Did the police have a warrant to enter or to confiscate any property?

The best question to ask is "How many is too many?"
The police will likely BS the question, but the only true answer is on the first page of this thread. There's no such thing.

[Dr.3D]

The only burglary that took place in this case was when the cops stole the mans guns.

[Legend1104]

So... the guys home was broken into and the thief didn't take enough stuff.... so... the police came and finished the job??? Is that about right?

[Rael]

If you wanted to shoot someone, would it be easier holding one gun in your hand, or trying to hold a dozen?

[pcosmar]

If you wanted to shoot someone, would it be easier holding one gun in your hand, or trying to hold a dozen?

Yes, but if you are a gun collector,,one is a very small collection.
:rolleyes:

[james1906]

This is more along my line of thinking.


I sure wish this guy was my neighbor, because when the shit goes down, I know whose house to go to in order to protect the neighborhood.

+1

I want this guy and Joe Horn living in my neighborhood.

[Rael]

Yes, but if you are a gun collector,,one is a very small collection.
:rolleyes:

I think you missed my point. I'm saying that if their neighbor was a dangerous lunatic, he would only need one of those guns to kill someone, so it makes no sense to say that having more guns can be more dangerous.

[Paleo]

I think there are way too many mindless blathering sheep in rockford, IL

[GunnyFreedom]

If there had actually been a burglary, wouldn't all those weapons be gone? Especially with their distortion-elevated street value in Illinois?

[mrsat_98]

Certainly. Whoever the ranking officer was who made the decision to seize the weapons should be demoted and those who took part in it need a good ass chewing/suspension/etc.

That's not likely to happen unless a lot of people flood the mayor's office with calls, though.

demoted ROFLMAO Locked up.

http://www.ci.rockford.il.us/government/police/index.cfm Police Website. You know what to do.

[Slutter McGee]

That is called a mother fucking assertion.
That is called not being able to comprehend the mother fucking english language. It is also backing a mother fucking bullshit assertion with hot air because there are absolutely no citations whatsoever for any studies or evidence on the subject matter of hoarding, rodents, pests, property values, or health dangers to substantiate any use of force.

Sincerely,

LFOD

You seriously want me to present you evidence of this? Here is one example. When a hoarder has children living in unsanitary conditions. THAT justifies the use of "force". I am not going to go around finding scientific evidence for everything i state...especially when said comment is a matter of common sense.

Oh, and your constant use of "mother fucking" sounds ridiculous. Just use the word "fuck." Especially if you are going to repeat it. I would try using "fuck" as an
infix. Brings out originality.

My "assertion" was that you should learn how to read. Because if you had then you would know that I had also said I didn't think that the use of force was good, because even if legitimate it opens up the door for future abuse.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[MelissaWV]

No such thing as too many.

I don't know... I mean, if the guy's actual house were made of guns, and his furniture, and if he had his lawn inlaid with casings, and so on and so forth (a toilet made of handguns... hmm...), that might be "too many." Of course, even then I wouldn't support the police charging in. I'd support the guy's neighbors and family having a chat with him about his obsession :p

[Dr.3D]

You seriously want me to present you evidence of this? Here is one example. When a hoarder has children living in unsanitary conditions. THAT justifies the use of "force". I am not going to go around finding scientific evidence for everything i state...especially when said comment is a matter of common sense.

Oh, and your constant use of "mother fucking" sounds ridiculous. Just use the word "fuck." Especially if you are going to repeat it. I would try using "fuck" as an
infix. Brings out originality.

My "assertion" was that you should learn how to read. Because if you had then you would know that I had also said I didn't think that the use of force was good, because even if legitimate it opens up the door for future abuse.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Think about the children! Don't you care about the children? :rolleyes:

[pcosmar]

I don't know... I mean, if the guy's actual house were made of guns, and his furniture, and if he had his lawn inlaid with casings, and so on and so forth (a toilet made of handguns... hmm...), that might be "too many." Of course, even then I wouldn't support the police charging in. I'd support the guy's neighbors and family having a chat with him about his obsession :p

That would be too COOL.
" a chat with him about his obsession " No, how about opening an attraction. A museum even.

Though some might be offended at the destruction of collectible guns in the construction, just the 'cool" factor would be a draw.

Still,
NOT too many.

[MelissaWV]

That would be too COOL.
" a chat with him about his obsession " No, how about opening an attraction. A museum even.

Though some might be offended at the destruction of collectible guns in the construction, just the 'cool" factor would be a draw.

Still,
NOT too many.

lol I said "might" be "too many." If you're a neighbor, you might have something to say about something like that popping up. Substitute something you dislike for the guns and you'll see what I mean. I also didn't say the chat had to be negative! Having a chat along the lines of what you just said (an attraction, etc.) would be constructive. Hell, the neighbors would be smart to get in on the action by offering some parking spots in exchange for a portion of income. Property values of houses next to an eyesore go down. Property values of houses next to a well-run exhibit? They might even go up :D

[Slutter McGee]

Think about the children! Don't you care about the children? :rolleyes:

"Think about the children" is often the excuse for government intrusion into everything we do. It is used as the end all argument statement. But in this case, it is applicable to the conversation, is not an appeal to emotion. So while I certainly appreciate sarcasm in any situation, it is still misplaced.

I know a woman who kept her dead fetuses in her freezer with the frozen weenies all eleven kids got for dinner everynight before they went to bed on top of piles of dirty dipers and trash. That isn't an exageration. Again, this is not an appeal to emotion, but simply an example of a situation in which children are at risk in a specific environment and it is a legitimate function of the government to step in. That does not mean I support the CPS nazis invading peoples homes for every little thing.

The point is pretty simple. If what you do on your property violates the rights of others, or negatively affects another's property, it is often but not always a legitimate function of government to step in.

Now to get back to the point of the thread. Does that mean they have a right to take the guns....probably not, but we don't have all the details.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[MelissaWV]

...
I know a woman who kept her dead fetuses in her freezer with the frozen weenies all eleven kids got for dinner everynight before they went to bed on top of piles of dirty dipers and trash. That isn't an exageration. Again, this is not an appeal to emotion, but simply an example of a situation in which children are at risk in a specific environment and it is a legitimate function of the government to step in. That does not mean I support the CPS nazis invading peoples homes for every little thing.

The point is pretty simple. If what you do on your property violates the rights of others, or negatively affects another's property, it is often but not always a legitimate function of government to step in.

...

Have you ever asked yourself why, if you know this is going on and you're so repulsed by it, you don't do anything to better this woman's situation? Or, if you think it's Government's role to storm in there and help those children out, you haven't ensured that has happened?

[Slutter McGee]

Have you ever asked yourself why, if you know this is going on and you're so repulsed by it, you don't do anything to better this woman's situation? Or, if you think it's Government's role to storm in there and help those children out, you haven't ensured that has happened?

I didn't know about it until the government did step in. The woman always seemed weird, but there was no evidence of such extremely unhealthy living conditions. My point was simply that it was a legitimate function of local government to intervene.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[ninepointfive]

What part of "Shall Not Be Infringed" do you disagree with, Slutter?

This man can arm a militia. Surely, that's something scary for a person who fears them.

Now I think your post collection in this thread is too many.
I need to bust in to your place so I can conficate your millions of bits of information. It's simply too many bits.

press delete. Forum saved! phew!

[Slutter McGee]

http://lubbockonline.com/stories/050609/loc_436811285.shtml

Incase any of you think I am full of it.


"It knocked us down," Kari Kotara said. "It was atrocious. You could smell it from the front porch - you could smell it back to our unit."

Jurors saw for the first time Tuesday pictures of the home where police found five of Ramirez's children huddled in the backyard and two near death inside.



They found squalid conditions and the dead fetus in a baby wipes box in a refrigerator. Rotten food, clothing and trash covered the floors and filled the washing machine and oven. Dirty diapers cascaded out of a closet and onto the floors covered in bugs and roach eggs. The bathroom was piled high with toilet paper caked with blood and human waste.


The youngest child was naked, her vaginal area swollen from laying immobile in her crib. Ramirez's second youngest child lay on a soiled mattress, lice crawling in her hair, unable to lift her head. Feces soaked through her diaper and dried urine ate her skin, Kotara said.
The skin breakdown was so severe, just putting in an IV could cause a serious infection.
Technicians had to clean the dehydrated, emaciated 2-year-old just to administer aid. They later had to decontaminate themselves and their ambulance to keep from exposing other patients to the bacteria covering the child.

"She was so depleted, you could count every rib all the way down," Kotara said.

There is plenty more out there. But...damn that evil government stepping in for the welfare of children. And yes I would have called the police on her if I had known.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Slutter McGee]

What part of "Shall Not Be Infringed" do you disagree with, Slutter?

This man can arm a militia. Surely, that's something scary for a person who fears them.

Now I think your post collection in this thread is too many.
I need to bust in to your place so I can conficate your millions of bits of information. It's simply too many bits.

press delete. Forum saved! phew!

Dude, you are missing my argument completely. We should be able to have as many guns as we want. My point is simply that environmental situations can often pose a serious risk to others. And when police step in, these situations create something that is not quite as simple as " SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"

Sincerley,

Slutter McGee

[Bern]

Re: OP - I'd be more outraged at the confiscation if either the owner were home or the house weren't basically open to the world after being broken into.

The neighbors are retarded.

[ninepointfive]

Dude, you are missing my argument completely. We should be able to have as many guns as we want. My point is simply that environmental situations can often pose a serious risk to others. And when police step in, these situations create something that is not quite as simple as " SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"

Sincerley,

Slutter McGee

Okay. So you are saying the home and it's effects may have been a threat which infringes upon the liberties of the neighbors?

[Slutter McGee]

Okay. So you are saying the home and it's effects may have been a threat which infringes upon the liberties of the neighbors?

not so much a threat, but more a potential danger to others property. Again I don't know the details. And if no potential danger was present then I disagree with confiscation of firearms. But the hoarder issue does complicate things.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Promontorium]

Igorning the police stealing guns issue for obvious signature having reasons,

Hoarders are usually literally insane. Gossipy? Lol, hoarders bury themselves in their own waste and die disgusting deaths leaving landlords to clean them up. My friend recently got a job cleaning up dead hoarder caves and has some lovely stories.

Not saying hoarders are dangerous to others, but they do destroy themselves. Sometimes hoarders have enough money to store up valuable items, apparantly like this guy, others keep hundreds of jars of urine and feces.

I think the police overreacted to his crazy house, but I'm sure they'll be forced to return the guns and he can go back to his crazy ways.

[andrewh817]

No such thing as too many.

The neighbor should define too many.... and explain how he got to that conclusion. Is it a magical number? Is it based on function? Chances are he wouldn't have a good answer.

[pcosmar]

Now to get back to the point of the thread. Does that mean they have a right to take the guns....probably not, but we don't have all the details.


Damn. What other details do you need.
It is illegal to take someones property without due process.


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

All the required details are known.

[Pericles]

This man can arm a militia.

A worthy goal for any citizen of means.

[oyarde]

A worthy goal for any citizen of means.

I like that.

[Philmanoman]

There should definitely be a "war on hoarders".
They are dangerous animals...need as much protection from them as possible...world would be a better place.

[Danke]

There should definitely be a "war on hoarders".


You're right! I'm writing a congressman.

[aGameOfThrones]

There should definitely be a "war on hoarders".
They are dangerous animals...need as much protection from them as possible...world would be a better place.


At least there is a show about hoarders---> http://www.aetv.com/hoarders/