i was just at a buddies house picking up some ammo and showing him my new ar 15 and he asked me why i bought it and i said i wanted to get one now in case this new "assault weapons" ban and i use that term loosely goes into effect and i made a remark that ounce i owned my ar 15 that they couldnt take it away from me for no reason and he said under this new ban that they could come into my home and take it for no reason. is this true??
illegal search a seizure question
- Thread starter hkusp1
- Start date
- Status
vranasaurus
New member
For the most part in order to come into your house and sieze anything government agents will need a warrant.
If a new law bans possession of "assault weapons" and has no provision for grandfathering already possessed and or manufactured weapons it would make your possession of said weapon illegal.
If the government had information that you possessed an illegal weapon in your home. They could use that information to get a warrant and come into your home and sieze said weapon and subsequently charge you with a crime. It wouldn't be siezed for "no reason" it would be siezed because it violated the law.
It's a very simple look at one scenario.
Just because you possess it now doesn't mean said possession won't be made illegal in the future. The previous AWB had a grandfather provision but there is no telling what some future law may say.
Also, what new ban is your friend talking about?
If a new law bans possession of "assault weapons" and has no provision for grandfathering already possessed and or manufactured weapons it would make your possession of said weapon illegal.
If the government had information that you possessed an illegal weapon in your home. They could use that information to get a warrant and come into your home and sieze said weapon and subsequently charge you with a crime. It wouldn't be siezed for "no reason" it would be siezed because it violated the law.
It's a very simple look at one scenario.
Just because you possess it now doesn't mean said possession won't be made illegal in the future. The previous AWB had a grandfather provision but there is no telling what some future law may say.
Also, what new ban is your friend talking about?
Last edited:
chemgirlie
New member
It exists only in the minds of the potential authors.
vranasaurus
New member
That's the thing. There is no new awb.
There is none. It doesn't exist. No such legislation has passed either house of Congress, and chances are none will. Until and unless such legislation is passed, there is no way to know what would or would not be in the bill.
That said, the US government can't just seize private property -- they have to pay for it. There is simply no way the Feds could pay for all of the so-called assault weapons owned by individuals in the US. The far more likely approach (which was used in the expired 1994 assault weapons ban) would be to grandfather existing guns.
Furthermore, the Federal government simply does not have the manpower to start searching people's homes and confiscating firearms.
In other words, your buddy doesn't know what he's talking about.
eaglesnester
New member
2nd amend and search and seizure
Do we not have protection against the government taking legal
aquired private property?
Do we not have protection against the government taking legal
aquired private property?
JustDreadful
New member
Hah! Well done!
#18indycolts
Moderator
thats because the manpower is in Iraq.
guns and more
New member
I don't know. Ask the executives from AIG.
Even if the army was recalled from Iraq, they wouldn't have enough manpower to do it -- there's only about 130,000 troops in Iraq. Guys, the black helicopters aren't coming, the UN troops won't be invading your town, and Obama is not going to send troops to search your home. It won't happen.
He might pass a law similar to the 1994 assault weapon ban, but first it has to get through the House, Senate, and conference committee. And given that the Senate President and Speaker of the House have both said they are not interested in such legislation, it isn't happening anytime soon.
#18indycolts
Moderator
we could go on and on about that one...I agree with you about:
I totally agree with that. But think about it, if said ban was true then I believe that the entire U.S. military does have the manpower to go door to door. I know I know, it won't happen, like I said above, I agree with you on that. Not to get all hypothetical on you.
vranasaurus
New member
The logistics of door to door seizures is not only logistically daunting but they would almost certainly viate the 4th amendment.
What would most likely happen if a law had no grandfather provision is that they would seize them as they came up. If the government has information that you are in possession of a banned weapon they will get a warrant, sieze the weapon, and charge you with possession.
What would most likely happen if a law had no grandfather provision is that they would seize them as they came up. If the government has information that you are in possession of a banned weapon they will get a warrant, sieze the weapon, and charge you with possession.
Dern right hkusp1!
but I think it was meant more as a joke....
banning any sales of certain new guns would be the first step... then registration of what you have... unregistered then being illegal... then they have the list and they could pick away at that for years...
the real 'benefit' on the face of it would be that it would employee a whole lot of new LEO's. For some reason "more police" has always been a banner slogan for politicians on both sides.... one day we will live in a 'perfect world' where there is a policeman in every front yard I guess.
but I think it was meant more as a joke....
banning any sales of certain new guns would be the first step... then registration of what you have... unregistered then being illegal... then they have the list and they could pick away at that for years...
the real 'benefit' on the face of it would be that it would employee a whole lot of new LEO's. For some reason "more police" has always been a banner slogan for politicians on both sides.... one day we will live in a 'perfect world' where there is a policeman in every front yard I guess.
i know it is all in good fun blume357, It just seems like the new admin wants to disarm the american people rather quickly for some reason i mean aren't there more important things going on i.e. economy, drugs, crime, poverty, etc. You would think they would want more responsible citizens to help fight some of the bigger issues in the country.
True, the govt can't come into your home for no reason
But the fact that you live there is enough reason, if they word the request (warrant) the right way, and a judge (a member of the govt) agrees to it.
The Internet is rife with examples of govt officials, at all levels of enforcement, entering people's homes, for reasons they thought well and true. Only to later discover that they were in error. The sad thing is the number of times these incidents resulted to damage and suffering to the people and property involved.
The militarization of local police tactics over the past couple of decades is a topic of wide discussion, and engenders strong emotions. Care must be taken to remain civil and polite when discussing these kinds of things. Feelings don't matter nearly as much as rights and the laws.
Personally, no matter what new AWB dreams are filling the heads of the "public safety" extremists, their efforts are going nowhere right now. This can, and is likely to change. But no one can say with surety, just when.
I wouldn't worry about house to house searches for "assault weapons". If it ever gets to that point, it will be for ALL weapons.
Leaving behind you large numbers of people with deer rifles, revolvers and double barrels, who are very upset because you just stole their property, and maybe worse is simiply not a smart move.
But the fact that you live there is enough reason, if they word the request (warrant) the right way, and a judge (a member of the govt) agrees to it.
The Internet is rife with examples of govt officials, at all levels of enforcement, entering people's homes, for reasons they thought well and true. Only to later discover that they were in error. The sad thing is the number of times these incidents resulted to damage and suffering to the people and property involved.
The militarization of local police tactics over the past couple of decades is a topic of wide discussion, and engenders strong emotions. Care must be taken to remain civil and polite when discussing these kinds of things. Feelings don't matter nearly as much as rights and the laws.
Personally, no matter what new AWB dreams are filling the heads of the "public safety" extremists, their efforts are going nowhere right now. This can, and is likely to change. But no one can say with surety, just when.
I wouldn't worry about house to house searches for "assault weapons". If it ever gets to that point, it will be for ALL weapons.
Leaving behind you large numbers of people with deer rifles, revolvers and double barrels, who are very upset because you just stole their property, and maybe worse is simiply not a smart move.
- Status