Confiscation in Seattle?

[WARFAB]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-06/seattle-police-begin-gun-confiscations-no-laws-broken-no-warrant-no-charges

The new “red flag” law, which has taken hold in other states already, allows the courts and law enforcement to take away guns from individuals they deem are dangerous and they’ve just begun the confiscation. A man living in the Belltown neighborhood of Seattle, Washington became the first individual in the state to have his firearm confiscated without any formal arrest or charges. The man was not identified by authorities.

Neighbors complained that the man had been “staring” at people through storefront windows while wearing a holstered firearm. He was not brandishing his weapon by any account, and open carrying is legal in the area, so he was abiding by the law. Other residents also complained that the man’s open carrying made them feel “uncomfortable” and “unsafe.”

Are more news stories like this going to start popping up? I'm suddenly feeling a bit self conscious about the fact that I live in New Yorkistan.

Me: Well this is just an isolated incident, and even if it's going to start happening more frequently I'm sure it will only happen in really liberal states.

Also Me: Aw dang, I live in a really liberal state.

[Norm DeGuerre]

yep
and unless you're rich there won't be any "due process"
this oughta really lite up BPS

[thughes]

"I'm worried about that guy Dave that works in the marketing department. He's always talking about guns, looking at gun websites, and reading gun magazines. Last week he was really angry about something management did, I'm afraid he may bring a gun to work and hurt somebody. I don't think he'll go full retard but just to be safe I should probably at least voice my concerns to the authorities. Better safe than sorry......"

And that's how it starts, folks!

[Norm DeGuerre]

I know someone like that .! come to think of it his name is Dave too ..

[WARFAB]

I hear that it's a seller's housing market in the Rochester area. I could probably get top dollar if I decided to move to a free state.

[big flash]

this is not ok

[blackpowdershooter30]

How much is your liberty worth to you? That’s all I have to say

[Norm DeGuerre]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R_LuBwf76w

[Norm DeGuerre]

1. The seizure of guns without any hearing at all.The laws all contain an “ex parte” provision that allows the state to temporarily seize a person’s guns without even notifying the gun owner or giving him a chance to be heard. This is the quintessential denial of due process. The Fourth Amendment makes clear that a person cannot be denied of liberty (to exercise one’s constitutional right to bear arms) without due process of law. This confiscation is “temporary,” but it can easily lead to long-term or permanent confiscation.
2. Based on the testimony of one unrelated person.The confiscation order can be based on the testimony of only one person claiming that the gun owner poses a risk to the safety of himself or others. The law deceptively says that it has to be the testimony of a “family member.” [Most of the “red flag” laws, such as the one in Washington State, do not limit who can claim the gun owner poses a risk to the safety of himself or others to family members.] But “family member” is defined to include “former dating partners” and anyone who has ever lived with the defendant. So a jilted former boyfriend or girlfriend, or even a roommate from years ago, could easily set in motion the disarming of a lawful gun owner.
3. Using a very low standard of proof.The standard for obtaining an ex parte order against a gun owner is absurdly low – one need only show “reasonable cause” to believe that the person may pose a risk. That’s even lower than the “probable cause” standard for obtaining a search warrant. In addition, the judge is forced to rush his decision and issue the confiscation order on the same day of the ex parte hearing. Within two weeks of the ex parte hearing, a hearing with the gun owner present must occur; the purpose is to put in place a long-term confiscation order. But even at that hearing, the standard of proof is far below the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard used in criminal trials. Rather, it need only be shown by “a preponderance of evidence” that the person poses a risk of injury to self or others. What kind of evidence? Things like the “reckless storage” of firearms and drinking habits can be considered. If you keep a handgun in the bedside table and drink beer regularly, you may [be] in trouble.
4. Shifting the burden of proof to the gun owner.The long-term confiscation order lasts up to a year, but may be renewed indefinitely. Once it is in place, it becomes very difficult to remove. To have the confiscation order lifted, the gun owner must prove he does not pose a threat to himself or others. Proving a negative is nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, the bill even authorizes local law enforcement to charge the gun owner a storage fee for confiscating and storing his guns.

[WARFAB]

But it's no big deal. What gun owner doesn't have the spare time and money to attend hearing to defend his/her self from a random accusation? It's not like the gun owner would have problems wth the expense of potential lawyer fees, and I'm sure once everything is settled the guns will all be returned in exactly the same condition they were when they were taken. There won't be any loss of value or anything.

Edit: My phone keeps trying to auto-correct "gun" with the word "fun".

[thughes]

Edit: My phone keeps trying to auto-correct "gun" with the word "fun".

smart phone

[Norm DeGuerre]

The legislation would prohibit anyone under 21-years-old from buying or possessing commonly-owned semi-automatic rifles, high-capacity weapons that can hold more than ten rounds, their subsequent attachments, and .50-caliber rifles and cartridges. They would have 90 days to turn in their guns to the government or become criminals.
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/full...ID=14&Session=

[WARFAB]

The fact that .50 cal rifles are part of this just goes to show that the whole thing is based on fear, ignorance, and control instead of actual safety. They probably didn't even specify BMG vs. Black Powder. Hopefully they include black powder so the Fudds actually start paying attention.