How much is too much? (with a twist)

[BillCA]

Remember, there is no database of firearms you own. Keep your mouth shut, your doors closed and your safe(s) locked and out of sight.

You've made this statement twice so I thought I should address it. I know of at least two states (CA & MA) that have a database of firearms (in CA it's handguns only). Police responding to an incident at your address can be told if firearms are present before they even arrive.

Some cities may be able to do this as well. Chicago, for instance, will know of legally registered firearms via their Chicago permitting system and if the person has a FOID (firearms owner id) card. In many shall-issue states, police will know if you or your address is listed on a CCW permit.

Philidelphia, some years ago, was going to create a citywide mapping system that showed every house and indicated if that house had licensed any vehicles, animals, firearms, parolee, outstanding warrant, etc. with the help of some IT students at Carnegie-Mellon. It was supposedly defunded when people found out and gave loud protests about privacy.

So to say that cops "won't know" is misleading.

In addition, a shooting inside your home is a crime scene. That changes some of the rules. Police have a lot more lattitude in "looking around" the house. If they walk into a room and see something "unusual" in their experience, they will take notes and photographs. Unusual might be your spare room set up for reloading. Or your bookshelf might contain titles like "In Gravest Extreme", "No Second Place Winner", "Combat Shooting Techniques" and other titles that will garner attention. Just having a B-27 Silhoutte target with a tight group center of mass pinned to a door or wall, would be photographed.

So, if officers are looking around and see reloading equipment for .38, 9mm, .40, .45 and .44 and you shot the guy with your .38, they will ask where the other guns are. If they are locked in your safe, you can decline to open it and force them to get a warrant. That will mean cleaning up the mess they make in forcing the safe open with a locksmith.

Win-Lose, The state of CA is not exactly known for being a bastion of liberty either. Of lawyers I've talked with, all of them believe that if a DA attempts to introduce the fact that you own a large collection of firearms besides the one used, they will know the prosecution's case is weak and/or politically motivated. And they will object and make motions for mistrial if such is introduced without proper relevancy and foundation.

In a civil trial, the plaintiff's lawyer can try to use it, however a good lawyer will immediately push back by asking the jury if it would be relevant that someone in an auto crash owned 75 automobiles or just the one involved in the crash (and similar analogies). He can defuse this whole "gun nut" thing if he's worth his money.

 

[BillCA]

Guns will always be demonized in the press, even when the owner lives an exemplary life and dies in his sleep.

So true. Unfortunately, when people with numerous guns make the news it's usually because of some newsworthy event. And that means the gun owner is probably more focused on staying out of jail than seeing news accounts.

I know of only one lawsuit against a media corporation over their portrayal of a shooting.¹ And that ended up being settled out of court. Media are careful to try to protect themselves. It gets down to how the article is worded and which words the reporter selected vs. quoted from sources.

¹ As I recall, the gun owner was described as having "hundreds of military surplus uniforms, bayonets, artillery shells and even grenades in his garage". This made him look like some extremist milita type. The truth was that he sold those items at gun shows and flea markets. This was known to the reporter before the report was published, yet he was portrayed as some kind of whacko.

 

[Skans]

Ok, Bill, I get your point. If you happen to live in the 2 or 3 states (or various cities) that openly violate 2nd Amendment rights, you're right - just about anything can and will be used against a law abiding gun owner who defends themselves against an intruder. Sad, but true. Thankfully, I don't live in such a state so I tend to forget about those more anti-gun states when i write.