Police seizing guns before crime is committed
- added August 7, 2008
- 36 responses
-
-
-
- goldenways
- added this
-
-
- related topics
-
- News (20634)
- WTF (12255)
- World (2500)
- Law (1231)
- USA (835)
- Police (800)
- Guns (331)
- Connecticut (30)
- Unconstitutional (16)
Using a unique state law, police in Connecticut have disarmed dozens of gun owners based on suspicions that they might harm themselves or others.
The state's gun seizure law is considered the first and only law in the country that allows the confiscation of a gun before the owner commits an act of violence. Police and state prosecutors can obtain seizure warrants based on concerns about someone's intentions.
State police and 53 police departments have seized more than 1,700 guns since the law took effect in October 1999, according to a new report to the legislature. There are nearly 900,000 privately owned firearms in Connecticut today.
Opponents of a gun seizure law expressed fears in 1999 that police would abuse the law. Today, the law's backers say the record shows that hasn't been the case.
"It certainly has not been abused. It may be underutilized," said Ron Pinciaro, coexecutive director of Connecticut Against Gun Violence.
Attorney Ralph D. Sherman has represented several gun owners who had their firearms seized under the law. His latest client was denied a pistol permit because the man was once the subject of a seizure warrant.
"In every case I was involved in I thought it was an abuse," said Sherman, who fought against the law's passage.
The report to the legislature shows that state judges are inclined to issue gun seizure warrants and uphold seizures when challenged in court.
Out of more than 200 requests for warrants, Superior Court judges rejected just two applications — one for lack of probable cause, and another because police had already seized the individual's firearms under a previous warrant. Both rejections occurred in 1999. The legislature's Office of Legislative Research could document only 22 cases of judges ordering seized guns returned to their owners.
Rep. Michael P. Lawlor, D-East Haven, is one of the chief authors of the gun seizure law. In his view, the number of warrant applications and gun seizures show that police haven't abused the law.
"It is pretty consistent," said Lawlor, the House chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
Robert T. Crook, the executive director of the Connecticut Coalition of Sportsmen, questioned whether police have seized more guns than the number reported to the legislature. Crook said the law doesn't require police departments or the courts to compile or report information on gun seizures. The Office of Legislative Research acknowledged that its report may have underreported seizures.
"We don't know how many guns were actually confiscated or returned to their owners," Crook said.
Police seized guns in 95 percent of the 200-plus cases that the researchers were able to document. In 11 cases, police found no guns, the report said.
Spouses and live-in partners were the most common source of complaints that led to warrant applications. They were also the most frequent targets of threats. In a Southington case, a man threatened to shoot a neighbor's dog.
The gun seizure law arose out of a murderous shooting rampage at the headquarters of the Connecticut Lottery Corp. in 1998. A disgruntled worker shot and killed four top lottery officials and then committed suicide.
Under the law, any two police officers or a state prosecutor may obtain warrants to seize guns from individuals who pose an imminent risk of harming themselves or others. Before applying for warrants, police must first conduct investigations and determine there is no reasonable alternative to seizing someone's guns. Judges must also make certain findings.
**continues,click link to read**
The state's gun seizure law is considered the first and only law in the country that allows the confiscation of a gun before the owner commits an act of violence. Police and state prosecutors can obtain seizure warrants based on concerns about someone's intentions.
State police and 53 police departments have seized more than 1,700 guns since the law took effect in October 1999, according to a new report to the legislature. There are nearly 900,000 privately owned firearms in Connecticut today.
Opponents of a gun seizure law expressed fears in 1999 that police would abuse the law. Today, the law's backers say the record shows that hasn't been the case.
"It certainly has not been abused. It may be underutilized," said Ron Pinciaro, coexecutive director of Connecticut Against Gun Violence.
Attorney Ralph D. Sherman has represented several gun owners who had their firearms seized under the law. His latest client was denied a pistol permit because the man was once the subject of a seizure warrant.
"In every case I was involved in I thought it was an abuse," said Sherman, who fought against the law's passage.
The report to the legislature shows that state judges are inclined to issue gun seizure warrants and uphold seizures when challenged in court.
Out of more than 200 requests for warrants, Superior Court judges rejected just two applications — one for lack of probable cause, and another because police had already seized the individual's firearms under a previous warrant. Both rejections occurred in 1999. The legislature's Office of Legislative Research could document only 22 cases of judges ordering seized guns returned to their owners.
Rep. Michael P. Lawlor, D-East Haven, is one of the chief authors of the gun seizure law. In his view, the number of warrant applications and gun seizures show that police haven't abused the law.
"It is pretty consistent," said Lawlor, the House chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
Robert T. Crook, the executive director of the Connecticut Coalition of Sportsmen, questioned whether police have seized more guns than the number reported to the legislature. Crook said the law doesn't require police departments or the courts to compile or report information on gun seizures. The Office of Legislative Research acknowledged that its report may have underreported seizures.
"We don't know how many guns were actually confiscated or returned to their owners," Crook said.
Police seized guns in 95 percent of the 200-plus cases that the researchers were able to document. In 11 cases, police found no guns, the report said.
Spouses and live-in partners were the most common source of complaints that led to warrant applications. They were also the most frequent targets of threats. In a Southington case, a man threatened to shoot a neighbor's dog.
The gun seizure law arose out of a murderous shooting rampage at the headquarters of the Connecticut Lottery Corp. in 1998. A disgruntled worker shot and killed four top lottery officials and then committed suicide.
Under the law, any two police officers or a state prosecutor may obtain warrants to seize guns from individuals who pose an imminent risk of harming themselves or others. Before applying for warrants, police must first conduct investigations and determine there is no reasonable alternative to seizing someone's guns. Judges must also make certain findings.
**continues,click link to read**
-
-
-
-
- goldenways
- 1 month ago
-
There was a post about this before, it is unconstitutional gun control!!!!
-
-
-
-
- regjoeschmo
- 1 month ago
-
-
Please remember these things. This is the beginning of disarming Americans. Under the constitution citizens have the right to bear arms. I am not a lover of guns, because in the wrong hand........ But to defend yourself
-
There are so many things wrong with this concept that I can't begin to write them all. Unconstitutional comes to mind. This is absurd and and outrage in a free country. Let's see what other rights under the Bill of Rights we can remove based on an idea that someone may be a danger by exercising them. What garbage.
-
and so it begins...
-
-
-
-
- Ayahuasca2012
- 1 month ago
-
-
This just seems like a really localized version of the Patriot Act. Only instead of empowering the federal government to seize, detain and disarm any citizen is deems a threat (no evidence necessary) this law is empowering the State government to just disarm anyone it wants.
-
their planing to seize all our power,and so they begin by taking our right to bear arms.
-
This is F'd up.
-
-
-
-
- rightbrain
- 1 month ago
-
-
One half of me wants to say that the right to bear arms was written into our constitution under much different circumstances than today, and gun ownership is not necessary.
The other half of me takes into consideration the circumstances of today and thinks about going out to buy a gun.-
-
-
-
- mookster_07
- 1 month ago
-
-
Makes me glad I don't live there. It's hard enough to prove intent in court. I wonder what kind of evidence is required, or at least has been required thus far, to prove intent worthy of taking a weapon. Also, I'd like to see the demographics concerning which groups are being disempowered of their right to bear arms.
-
-
-
-
- dariustwin
- 1 month ago
-
-
For being the "Constitution State", Connecticut is the worst when it comes to Citizens' Rights.
Another sad day for those of us who embrace our 2nd amendment rights..
Interesting times are ahead....
Ride on! -
I'm amazed the NRA hasn't picked up on this. Typically when the words "control" or "regulation" are mentioned in the context of firearms of any kind, they invoke Charlton Heston's name and then run to Washington like a pack of underfed puppies in order to remind everyone how much cash they spread around The Hill.
The fact that the law has stayed on the books for almost ten years is also kind of curious.
I'm not the biggest fan of letting just anyone own a gun...because, let's face it, not everyone should, but this idea of seizing personal property "based on concerns about someones intentions" comes way too close to Gestapo tactics for my comfort. -
We've all know just how well a Pre-Emptive Strike Plan worked in the recent past.
-
What the fuck is this the Minority Report?
-
i'm all for it , so long as it isn't me .
-
somebd call Tom Cruise ... I think we might need some pre-cogs
-
This is just the beginning. Gun laws are changing all over the country. Soon an honest citizen won't be able to protect them selves.
-
Looks like a CZ 85 in the picture. Nice piece.
-
Wow, what an infringement on their rights.
Luckily, there's been less than 200 guns taken a year, which isn't that bad.
But still, I fail to see how this is justified in any sense unless the person didn't fit the requirements to own the gun or something. -
Police are beginning to disarm communities and make them that much more unable to fight back when the cops are beating, shooting, and tazing us all to death. With the bad examples of police behavior we've been seeing lately, maybe we should be confiscating THEIR weapons.
-
The victims of this law don't even have to be convicted of a Thought Crime, only suspected of one.
-
That's . . . unconstitutional.
-
-
-
-
- Egnatius212
- 1 month ago
-
-
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
anybody got tom cruise cell phone number if they get my gun ill cap a few before i go down
-
-
-
-
- TexasPatriot67
- 1 month ago
-
-
I am guessing most of the 200 seized guns per year are based on tips from family members who suspect a sibling or child is suicidal or perhaps homicidal. This seizure represents .02% of all guns in the state.
OMG!!!
In 4,500 years they will have them all!!!!!! -
"Lawlor said there have been no challenges on constitutional grounds because of the way the law was written... Sherman said it is... because a test case would be too costly for average gun owners."
That's where the NRA comes in. -
ive always wondered , did we kill someone who would of discovered the cure for cancer or aids, did we murder the person who would of discovered an alternative energy device or maybe we shot the person that would of destroyed the earth. who knows
-
You want to believe that everything is conspiracy theory and then you here about this "proactive gun seizure in Connecticut.
But there is a stark reality to the government groupthink about firearms that is illustrated in this video.
THIS REALLY HAPPENED!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm5PC7z79-8
BTW I am NOT a gun owner.-
-
-
-
- Pericles1978
- 1 month ago
-
-
This is the beginning of a feeble weak unarmed populus. It's right out of the Nazi play-book.
-
-
-
-
- bansheewail
- 1 month ago
-
-
They have read Hitler's History, and wish to repeat it.
Login/Registration is required to add a response.
