Man reports his pistol stolen, so police confiscate all his weapons and permits.

He was a criminal, apparently he admitted that he was when he reported the theft. Not necessarily the right thing, but it is what it is.
 
He was a criminal, apparently he admitted that he was when he reported the theft. Not necessarily the right thing, but it is what it is.
He was trying to do the "right thing" by reporting it stolen. He must have not been aware of this new law. How many people will find themselves in this same situation?
 
After all, he did have a cache of weapons in his home. :eek:
 
So note to self. Was in a locked box cable mounted to the floor. They must have used a slim-jim to get in and cut the cable.
That woulda been my story and I woulda stuck to it
Neither earthquakes, avalanches, nor two tons of dynamite could've shaken my story...
 
Well, I would say I feel sorry for him, but I have a hard time feeling sorry for irresponsible idiots.

If the car window had been broken out of a locked car, I might care. He basically violated every state's law on firearm storage...

1. Don't leave guns in the car overnight unless they are secured
2. Lock your damned car. We live in the real world.


The law up there is ridiculous, but it's the law and regardless he was negligent.
 
Well, I would say I feel sorry for him, but I have a hard time feeling sorry for irresponsible idiots.

If the car window had been broken out of a locked car, I might care. He basically violated every state's law on firearm storage...

1. Don't leave guns in the car overnight unless they are secured
2. Lock your damned car. We live in the real world.


The law up there is ridiculous, but it's the law and regardless he was negligent.

agree. But grabbing the other firearms in his residence????
 
agree. But grabbing the other firearms in his residence????

Maybe. I don't know what the repercussions of the law he broke is. If it's a felony, he loses his guns. The only issue I really have with it is he's not been convicted of anything yet, but he did admit to it. It's a slope I'm not interested in standing on, but not a hill I'll die on. He F'ed up. Big boy rules have big boy consequences. Sucks for him. Lesson for us...
 
And as a side note, this was also passed in the law that took effect Oct 1st:

Ghost Guns
A new law generally prohibits anyone from (1) completing the manufacture of a firearm without
subsequently obtaining and engraving or permanently affixing on it a unique serial number or other
identification mark from the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) (i.e., creating a “ghost gun”) or (2) manufacturing a firearm from polymer plastic that is not detectible by
a walk-through metal detector. Under the new law, these actions are class C felonies, punishable by
up to 10 years in prison with a two-year mandatory minimum sentence, up to a $10,000 fine, or
both (PA 19-6, most provisions effective October 1, 2019).
 
Maybe. I don't know what the repercussions of the law he broke is. If it's a felony, he loses his guns. The only issue I really have with it is he's not been convicted of anything yet, but he did admit to it. It's a slope I'm not interested in standing on, but not a hill I'll die on. He F'ed up. Big boy rules have big boy consequences. Sucks for him. Lesson for us...
a class A misdemeanor
 
a class A misdemeanor

Ok. Then confiscation should be off the table until after court. Being a "gun crime" he's probably in violation of his CCW and would possibly lose his right to possess firearms while on probation for the misdemeanor(common requirement). He should have the opportunity to get rid of or have someone else take possession of his guns though.

Of course it varies from State to State. I'm only familiar with NC in these situations.
 
Last edited:
Capt. Richard Conklin told The Register the state believes storing a firearm in a car – even a locked car – is not “a prudent thing to do.”

“A car is like a glass box. If you take out any of the windows, it is no longer locked,”
Conklin said.

So wtf does he expect us to do when we have to go in a posted location? That was a pretty stupid statement.
 
Capt. Richard Conklin told The Register the state believes storing a firearm in a car – even a locked car – is not “a prudent thing to do.”

“A car is like a glass box. If you take out any of the windows, it is no longer locked,”
Conklin said.

So wtf does he expect us to do when we have to go in a posted location? That was a pretty stupid statement.
Technically, my house is a glass box too.
 
They are doing nothing more then making criminals with the intention of confiscation weapons from anyone possible. Free men cannot be controlled but if you make criminals out of everyone, most of them will comply and you can control them.

Freedom is seen as a privilege in this country instead of a right and it's both sad and frightening.

And yes, he was stupid for not locking his car. I don't care if there was a gun in it or not, leaving your car outside and unlocked into today's world is not wise.
 
Another new law generally prohibits storing a handgun in an unattended motor vehicle if it is not in the trunk, a locked safe, or a locked glove box. The penalty ranges from (1) a class A misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in prison, up to a $2,000 fine, or both for a first offense to (2) a class D felony punishable by up to five years in prison, up to a $5,000 fine, or both for subsequent offenses (PA 19-7, effective October 1, 2019).

I'm surprised more NE States haven't passed similar laws. First time a gun is stolen shame on you now surrender you carry permit. Happens a second time well now your a felon and lose all your guns. I wouldn't be surprised if there were a mysterious rise in the amount of vehicles broken in to owned by gun owners.

This way the state gets to look like they're cracking down on gun crime and getting guns off the street without ever having to burden the criminal element who we all know are just misunderstood unlike gun owners who only care about thier guns.
 
Last edited:
You guys are being baited into having these convos by a self admitted convicted felon, who thinks he should still be able to own firearms.

He dumps a sensationalized article and title then sits back and watches the responses.
OP or article author?
 
You guys are being baited into having these convos by a self admitted convicted felon, who thinks he should still be able to own firearms.
Perhaps he posted as bait, perhaps not. Perhaps given his situation he's more attuned to rights violation issues. For the record, this prohibited person thing is a bunch of BS (as is how we deal with crime and criminals in general). It's also irrelevant to the case at hand.

Still, if the article in the OP is true, I see it as a dangerous escalation against gun owners in states that are rapidly becoming totalitarian while little to nothing is being done about it. People who are victims of a crime are having their property stolen under the farce of law. Saying that they failed to meet some standard for securing their gun may sound reasonable on the surface but it doesn't alter the fact that they were crime victims, nor does it answer who sets what arbitrary standard? There's a video out there, granted its make believe, about a couple in CA whose home is being broken into and by the time they get authorization for the release of the locks on their guns the intruders have already killed them. If they could, this is what some of these states would demand.

I would like to say that it amazes me that some here appear to be willing to accept such infringements as justified so long as it's colored as "law", but unfortunately it doesn't.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps he posted as bait, perhaps not. Perhaps given his situation he's more attuned to rights violation issues. For the record, this prohibited person thing is a bunch of BS (as is how we deal with crime and criminals in general). It's also irrelevant to the case at hand.

Still, if the article in the OP is true, I see it as a dangerous escalation against gun owners in states that are rapidly becoming totalitarian while little to nothing is being done about it. People who are victims of a crime are having their property stolen under the farce of law. Saying that they failed to meet some standard for securing their gun may sound reasonable on the surface but it doesn't alter the fact that they were crime victims, nor does it answer who sets what arbitrary standard? There's a video out there, granted its make believe, about a couple in CA whose home is being broken into and by the time they get authorization for the release of the locks on their guns the intruders have already killed them. If they could, this is what some of these states would demand.

I would like to say that it amazes me that some here appear to be willing to accept such infringements as justified so long as it's colored as "law", but unfortunately it doesn't.

It isn't that most of us are "willing to accept such infringements as justified" it is that we live in NC, I have zero influence in the political climate of that state nor its elected officials. The fact that it is even being discussed here at all is pretty solid proof that many of us are not fans of what is going on. The issue is "what are you going to do about it?" So, what are >you< going to do about it? Are we running into the streets screaming "WOLVERINES!!"? Or are we having a discussion about it so we can better counter this type of law and reasoning for when the anti-gunners here attempt the same thing?

And looking back through the responses there is 1 member who has less than a healthy dose of sympathy for the guy. So the "Some here" is more like "This one dude kinda isn't all in on burning down the state over this."
 
Back
Top Bottom