tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post4432472514878101097..comments2020-04-11T03:30:02.282-05:00Gary R. Welshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-47432429358401062642009-02-20T23:59:00.000-05:002009-02-20T23:59:00.000-05:00Cam &amp; Co. on NRA News just played an interview with the Attorney for the citizen who&#39;s home and rights were violated. He said the city actually destroyed the two guns that were wrongfully taken from the lawful owner. What a travesty.<BR/>This kind of overreaching by political entities and government organizations is exactly why I am a supporter of the NRA.Weshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15808919199063109652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-89125997538395699642008-12-03T12:42:00.000-05:002008-12-03T12:42:00.000-05:00The fingerprinting doesn't apply to that individual's right to carry guns, merely to have THOSE guns released. Often when cars are towed or money is confiscated a credit/background check is done for liens and/or garnishes. Even if forfeiture doesn't end up statutorily being able to take the property, it can still be confiscated to settle the debts in question, normally child support.<BR/><BR/>Yes, guns are regulated just like cars, laser printers, and many other things. However, I would argue this is more of a PROPERTY rights issue, NOT a 2nd amendment issue. If someone was told they could never buy another handgun ever again until they were fingerprinted then I could say where everybody's argument is coming from. The fingerprinting is in regard to having property released, not restoring any rights. By that logic is it unconstitutional for someone to have to sign to have those guns released? If fingerprinting is an infringement on someone's rights, couldn't you say the same for having to 'utter' anything at all to get them back, even showing ID for that matter?Jasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00098975387467002921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-19997052673601219342008-12-02T16:11:00.000-05:002008-12-02T16:11:00.000-05:00Art, if the law says people can legally have guns in their house without filling out forms and being fingerprinted, why do you think it's okay for government to impose those additional requirements when government wrongfully confiscates their guns?<BR/><BR/>I guess then you wouldn't have a problem with your house being searched without probable cause. Hey, what the heck, if you're not guilty why would you object?Paul K. Ogdenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16137003328850866711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-42789194253494289512008-12-02T15:19:00.000-05:002008-12-02T15:19:00.000-05:00Why would any law abiding legal gun owner object to providing fingerprints to have his guns returned???artfugginshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05364503656694166926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-20910306120637582202008-12-02T04:58:00.000-05:002008-12-02T04:58:00.000-05:00I know a similar case, where a court order was issued, and yet the gun was still no returned in a timely manner. That case may also result in a lawsuit. This seems to be the status quo of law enforcement, at all levels. There were also posts on an Indiana gun owners forum that said you can't get a carry permit in Carmel unless you have a face to face meeting with the Chief. Of course the complaints were that when you call, there are only a handful of days the Chief is available. If this is true, folks need to start filing lawsuits. It is now customary to ask for lawyer fees anyway, so it likely will cost you nothing. Hopefully our police agencies will just follow the law and do these things in a timely manner instead of bumming around wasting time.<BR/><BR/>On a side note, one would be wise to obtain a very cheap pocket recorder and keep it near them at all times. This way, if you end up in a similar situation, all your lawyer has to do is get the officers to lie/make wrongfully claims during depositions. I think the case would be open and shut if that were to happen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-39709475753604853782008-12-01T21:55:00.000-05:002008-12-01T21:55:00.000-05:00typo - 1865-1964Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05237857691537702382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-25801160029756968822008-12-01T21:54:00.000-05:002008-12-01T21:54:00.000-05:00At every turn, in every age, government seeks to rob the people of their rights, always beginning with the right to possess weapons with which an individual might resist government violence. <BR/><BR/>The limitations on voting inflicted on black people from 1965-1964 were preceded by limitations on gun ownership.<BR/><BR/>All forms of government become, as they run their course, totalitarian. The US is is in the latter stages of this evolution - witness the planned 20,000 American troops to be deployed inside this country's borders, reminiscent of the "advisers" sent to Viet Nam in the early 60's.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05237857691537702382noreply@blogger.com