Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Police Seize McCloskey's Firearm

No. You support the Police not liberty

There's a good chance that the Marxist persecutor (local tyrant) filed the SW application and once rubber-stamped by a like minded, black-robed Marxist jackass (another local tyrant) it was sent to the police to be served.

A very good chance.

This.

Isn’t there something about probable cause? Oh hell it doesn’t matter as long as the police do as they are told. Libs always find an excuse tp go around the law and some people just shake their head in agreement. Ed k

And that right there is the problem.

The only reason I bought AR type rifles was to be able to put up some sort of a fight when the government came for my other guns. Now we might actually need them for other purposes besides protecting our 2nd amendment rights. This is a really bad - good example of government over reach.

If you read the story as reported, I think the search warrant stated the rifle was seized as an item of evidence relating to charges pending.
Now don't start hollering at me, it's B.S. from the get go, but if I read it correctly...that was the pretense for seizing the rifle. The pistol was later surrendered to support the defense' claim that it was 'inoperable'. If the item displayed to discourage the trespassers was a hockey stick, it may have been seized as well. I am not defending the political operative/ prosecutor, just saying that this needs to play out...hard to imagine a successful prosecution with no crime by the property owners being committed. Brandishing a deadly weapon...ON PRIVATE PROPERTY?

Pam Biondi, the former AG of Florida, was interviewed on Fox last night. She said that confiscation of the AR15 was absolutely illegal in view of Missouri's Castle Doctrine.

After that I looked up Ohio's laws. In Ohio you are allowed to use deadly force to protect your property.

Then those same 'taxpayers' better get together and vote OUT those sorry SOBs in their gov't who DID this blatantly illegal/unconstitutional act..

They think the gun is an instrumentality of a crime, but haven't charged the person with a crime? That seems legally problematic for me. They seized his gun, but not the woman's? That doesn't feel right to me.

So it's the guns fault? I knew it! I would bet if the AR was painted in rainbow gay colors it wouldn't have been charged.

If I was the gun I'd claim racism.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/eric-schmitt-calls-out-kim-gardner

Missouri AG calls out St. Louis prosecutor, reveals history of politically motivated decisions

Based on responses here and on Liberal Gun Club Forum they are on their own. It's good they have plenty of assets to defend themselves.

It is not out of realm of possibility that another wealthy well-connected family has an eye for that hotel the two live in. It is also possible they did not pay into the BLM fund, therefore, they were not given a pass. With great wealth comes great responsibility, it looks like from now on not sharing will no longer be acceptable.

How do these people and their actions rate the same as drug dealers and bank robbers?

Also, if these were people in my economic group they would have no resources to hire attorneys to fight clearly unconstitutional police overreach. Courts are fine for those who can afford them.