(Michigan) Taking their guns. Prosecutor aims to end seizures if no crime

Oatka

New member
http://www.mcrgo.org/

Under the same heading at Michigan Coalition for responsible Gun Owners website.

Taking their guns. Prosecutor aims to end seizures if no crime

Sunday, June 4, 2000


By Steven Hepker
Staff Writer

Alexander Nagy was speeding on his way to a pistol shoot in Jackson one day last year when a state trooper stopped him on I-94 and seized his registered guns.

Although never charged with a crime, Nagy lost his $2,500 pair of matched Smith & Wesson Model 41 semiautomatic pistols.

"It was no different than if they walked into my house and confiscated my guns," said Nagy, of Trenton.

Jackson County Prosecutor John McBain, who declined to issue a criminal charge against Nagy, agrees. He is pushing legislation to change state law.

"I can't believe it was the Legislature's intent to seize guns of people who are not convicted of a crime," McBain said. "I am tired of dealing in cases where there was no crime, and yet the people lose their guns."

He cited a more recent case in which Cindy Williams of Parma Township lost her 20-gauge shotgun to state police after she shot in the air to get the attention of a crew of state prisoners cutting trees along a county drain on her land.

Again, Williams was not found guilty of a crime, but police kept her gun, a sentimental gift from an old friend.

"They stole my gun, and I don't believe for one minute that it was destroyed and melted down," she said.

The move outraged citizens and several area politicians, McBain said.


Proposed legislation

McBain has submitted proposed legislation to state Rep. Mickey Mortimer that would allow gun confiscation only when a crime is proven. He also sought support from Ted Nugent and the National Rifle Association.

Williams said she was protecting her property from trespassers and she never intended to shoot anyone. Nagy was anticipating an enjoyable day at the gun range, a few miles from where he was stopped by a state trooper.

Nagy, whose competition pistols featured custom grips, Tasco Red Dot scopes and expensive gunsmithing, also doubts his guns were destroyed. But records of the state police Firearms Records Unit indicate they were melted on May 6, 1999.

The state melted 7,314 handguns, 4,063 rifles and shotguns, and 7,448 knives, BB guns and other weapons last year at an undisclosed blast furnace.

No one has a record of how many were actually linked to crimes. That guns can be seized permanently without a conviction is what bothers McBain and others.

McBain said cops should seize guns involved in criminal activity, and not as a matter of course. He said the key to fighting gun crime is to push felony firearms - a mandatory two-year sentence - in all cases in which guns are used in crimes.

"Taking a man's target pistols has nothing to do with cutting crime," he said.


Gun taken during traffic stop

Nagy points out that his traffic citation didn't even add points to his driving record.

His mistake, besides speeding, was carrying his gun case in the back seat, instead of in the trunk, and then telling the police officer. Although he registered the guns, he did not have a permit to carry them - either a CCW or what is called a "hunting and target" permit.

Police said his guns were "readily accessible," which both McBain and Nagy said is a stretch of the concealed weapons law. The guns were not loaded.

Nagy said Wayne County's gun board, like Jackson's, restricts concealed weapons permits mostly to police and retired police. Most competition shooters, he said, do not have CCW or range permits, although he has since applied for one.

Law enforcement has interpreted the gun confiscation aspect of state law as absolute. "Not even a judge has the authority to return a confiscated gun," McBain said.

If anyone could have gotten his guns back, McBain said it was Nagy, whom he called a "pillar" of his community.

On the day he was stopped by Trooper Daniel Palmer, Nagy was wearing a hat and jacket emblazoned with the Taylor Pistol Club logo. He volunteered that the guns were in the car.

"I was taught to tell the truth in all cases," Nagy said. "I had nothing to hide."

"I don't believe his intent was anything but to go to Jackson to shoot in a pistol contest," Palmer wrote in his report.

Nagy also is friends with many state police officers who shoot competitively, and they apparently placed calls to Lt. Tom Finco, who was commander of the Jackson post and is now Blackman Public Safety chief.

Finco, however, pushed for the gun seizure in court, citing Michigan's concealed weapons statute.

"I went to Judge (James) Justin and said that the gun belongs to the state for destruction," Finco said. "The law is clear."

Finco said he would oppose a change that would require a conviction for gun seizures.

"Suppose a husband points a gun at his wife and she does not want to testify. By law, we can keep the gun now and he can't use it next time," Finco said.

McBain, Mortimer and musician Ted Nugent have joined forces to say that seizing guns without criminal convictions is wrong and downright un-American.


Legislator favors change

"It is government far overreaching, and I don't think we would allow anything else to be confiscated without judication," said Mortimer, R-Horton. "It's like being stopped for driving a motorcycle without a helmet, and they take your motorcycle."

Mortimer said he has submitted the proposed legislation for drafting, and hopes to bring it to committee this fall. Despite growing calls for more gun control, Mortimer said he expects plenty of support. "This is a property-rights issue, not a gun-control issue."

Nugent, who is a board member of the National Rifle Association, is a friend of police agencies across the nation, but not on this matter.

"We need to pounce on this issue and join forces with the prosecuting attorney to get decency and common sense back in the language of this concealed weapons quagmire," he said.

Nugent, who has a CCW permit and carries handguns, said he has talked with hundreds of police across America, and they are appalled at the excesses within their ranks.

"They know of the discretionary powers and the abuses thereof," Nugent said. "Most of them identify themselves as peace officers, here to serve and protect. We have to expose the abusers who are serving and protecting the criminal element."

- Reach reporter Steven Hepker at jcpnews@citpat.com or 768-4923.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Gun taken during traffic stop

Nagy points out that his traffic citation didn't even add points to his driving record.

His mistake, besides speeding, was carrying his gun case in the back seat, instead of in the trunk, and then telling the police officer. Although he registered the guns, he did not have a permit to carry
them - either a CCW or what is called a "hunting and target" permit.

Police said his guns were "readily accessible," which both McBain and Nagy said is a stretch of the concealed weapons law. The guns were not loaded.[/quote]

So, now let me pose a question. You are pulled over for speeding. You have on your hip (concealed and you have a carry permit) your M1911 given to you by your grandfather who carried it during WW-II.

Do you inform the cop that you are carrying, or do you keep your mouth shut and hope that he doesn't want to pat you down because you "look nervous"?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Law enforcement has interpreted the gun confiscation aspect of state law as absolute. "Not even a judge has the authority to return a confiscated gun," McBain said.[/quote]

"...Just doing my job, sir..."

Comming soon to a traffic stop near you...

And people wonder why they don't trust the government.

------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

~USP

"... I rejoice that America has resisted [The Stamp Act]. Three millions of people, so dead to all feelings of liberty as to voluntarily submit to being slaves, would have been fit instruments to make slaves of the rest of us." -- William Pitt, British Parliament, December 1765
 
Thank goodness there are still fine human beings like McBain et al.

I'm a bit surprised this is happening in Michigan. While I realize they are subject to the 'back East' illogic disease, I still thought there was a strong sporting and RKBA tradition in that state.

I'll probably get a few flames for this, but I think asset seizures have done more to poison the LEO - civilian relationship than any other action. And, that applies not only to this case, but also drug cases. From my perspective, this is theft under color of law, plain and simple. I don't give a rat's *ss if Congress and our legislatures have been clever enough to find a legal fiction to support this kind of action.

Fines, asset seizures and imprisonment should never be imposed without criminal convictions, IMHO. To do otherwise is theft.

Found a couple things on the web of interest in this area:

Forfeiture Endangers American Rights - http://www.fear.org/

Asset Forfeiture Manual - http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/aforfeit.shtml


Regards from AZ
 
What is most frightening to me about this sort of activity is that courts have not found against them on 4th Amendment grounds.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
[/quote]

Surely someone has taken their property-seizure-happy LEO to court and won based on a 4th amendment arguement?
 
Jeff,
I can not speak for all of Michigan. However, in spite of a strong heritage of hunting (and poaching) many people in west-central Michigan believe only madmen and criminals have any interest in handguns.

Over the past 25 years I've discussed this with more than a hundred people. Every one, bar none, including current members of the National Guard and Reserves, who voiced an opinion said that handguns should be strictly controlled or outlawed. 100%!

Most common reason? No "need".... :mad:

Very strange... :confused:
 
I suppose swearing out a warrant against the cop for armed robbery is out of the question?
Hmmm . . . let's see, the stolen, excuse me, the seized firearms are supposed to be destroyed, and not end up in some LEO's collection. :rolleyes:

Well, I'm not advocating anything, but suppose that a .30/06 rifle was stolen - errr, I mean, confiscated - along with the ammunition. If some of the ammo also taken happened to have a case stuffed full of Bullseye, nobody could possibly be hurt by firing it; after all, we can trust that ALL the confiscated goods are being properly destroyed, can't we? So the biggest danger would be if the legitimate - errr, I mean previous - owner accidentally fired this round himself.

Hmmmmm . . .
 
Anyone who thinks that these N.G.s, Reserves, cops, etc., who say all handguns (except theirs) should be confiscated, won't come to kill you and your family when ordered by Big Brother & Big Nanny, in order to confiscate your firearms... better get your wills in order. Your heirs will appreciate your forethought.

J.B.
 
In Michigan to transport a firearm you need to be going "directly" to/from a place of repair, or a place to shoot. Now here is the kicker, confirmed by the State Police.

If you are going to shoot you need a valid membership card for the range, or you need to apply for a "Hunting and Target CCW", which requires an FBI and State background check and 120 days to complete. So, local DNR ranges are public but no membership cards are available, so "technically" to use them you need to pay money ( $15 total ) and wait 120 days to "legally" go to the range.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by USP45:
So, now let me pose a question. You are pulled over for speeding. You have on your hip (concealed and you have a carry permit) your M1911 given to you by your grandfather who carried it during WW-II.

Do you inform the cop that you are carrying, or do you keep your mouth shut and hope that he doesn't want to pat you down because you "look nervous"?
[/quote]

There was a thread on this question a few months back. I asked our County Sheriff by e-mail, and the Department's legal counsel replied that in Florida, there is no legal requirement to inform the officer that you have a permit and are carrying, but that it is considered "prudent" to tell the officer. I guess they're trying to avoid a knee-jerk reaction when the officer just happens to notice that 1911 as you get out of the car.

As for the original topic, the guy stopped for speeding definitely has a case against the cop who took his pistols, provided he was in compliance with the state laws on how to carry in a car. The woman who fired the shotgun into the air might not have a case, if she was viewed as communicating a threat. I don't know the laws up there in the Frozen North.

I have a question, too: Let's say you stop at the 7-11 one night and while you're there, an armed robber comes in and the situation degenerates to where you shoot him -- legally, fully justifiable self-defense. In that case, do you just holster the weapon and go home, or may they confiscate the weapon until a grand jury no-bills you?
 
The short answer, no.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Scott:
I have a question, too: Let's say you stop at the 7-11 one night and while you're there, an armed robber comes in and the situation degenerates to where you shoot him -- legally, fully justifiable self-defense. In that case, do you just holster the weapon and go home, or may they confiscate the weapon until a grand jury no-bills you?[/quote]

Let's just imagine the can of worms that is opened up on this one...

So they decide to confiscate your gun. Are you arrested? Are you formally charged with a crime? Do they then go to your house and confiscate all of your other guns? (Do you give them the combination to your safe?)

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> "Not even a judge has the authority to return a confiscated gun," McBain said.[/quote]

SO you just used your gun in self-defense, you were found not guilty and freed. Guess what, you never see that gun again. Thanks for playing.

...until a grand jury no-bills you...

Perhaps you didn't read in the original story. The person (Williams) was not found guilty of a crime; the police still took her shotgun.

If you are not arrested, further if you are found not guilty (or are not brought to trial) then you should not have your property confiscated.


------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

~USP

"... I rejoice that America has resisted [The Stamp Act]. Three millions of people, so dead to all feelings of liberty as to voluntarily submit to being slaves, would have been fit instruments to make slaves of the rest of us." -- William Pitt, British Parliament, December 1765

[This message has been edited by USP45 (edited June 12, 2000).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HankB:

Well, I'm not advocating anything, but suppose that a .30/06 rifle was stolen - errr, I mean, confiscated - along with the ammunition. If some of the ammo also taken happened to have a case stuffed full of Bullseye
[/quote]

Sounds like the basic Vietnam trick...all good *except* that an absent-minded guy like me could get hurt through poor memory.

Personally, I love the idea of booby-trapped safes, etc. (electrically hot parts, or mini-Claymores) as that would make thieves less likely to get away with murder (official critters who'd arrest or kill people, then loot). Might have to start learning the tricks just in case the skill comes in handy someday.

I imagine that any safe could be rigged with a "don't open me" compartment which would house a zero-delay charge. Most explosives, AFAIK, require a detonator to explode and wouldn't pose a danger in case of ahouse fire...or would they? Detonators, I would imagine, aren't *that* different from large primers...

[This message has been edited by Oleg Volk (edited June 12, 2000).]
 
This was not the first time a MSP Trooper or two "impounded" a shooter's firearms on a traffic stop. One case had a deer hunter going north on I-75 when he was stopped for some violation. He was asked where he was going during the stop and if he had any firearms in the vehicle, zipp his rifle(s) and pistol(s) were gone in an eyeblink, never to be seen by him again. The Trooper sounded very proud of himself in the newspaper article.
barf.gif


The MSP, as an organization, is very anti CCW/private firearm ownership etc.


------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
"If there be treachery, let there be jehad!"
 
All right all you amateur attorneys out there: How can you possibly reconcile this statute;

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>

28.434 Unlawful possession; weapon forfeited to state. [M.S.A. 28.100 ]
Sec. 14. All pistols, weapons or devices carried or possessed contrary to this act are hereby declared forfeited to the state, and shall be turned over to the commissioner of the Michigan state police or his designated representative, for such disposition as said commissioner may prescribe.
[/quote]

with this part of the Michigan State Constitution

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN OF 1963

ARTICLE I. DECLARATION OF RIGHTS

MCL Const. 1963, Art. 1, | 6 (1992)

| 6. Bearing of arms.

Sec. 6. Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.
[/quote]

and this part of the US Federal constitution?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Fifth Amendment

...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. [/quote]

This one is begging for constitutional review, and there is no way that crap about no judge being able to review the decision can possibly be true.



[This message has been edited by Dizzipator (edited June 12, 2000).]
 
My son is headed for the UP of Michigan shortly for a job. Upon researching the law through the NRA website I found out about their antigun climate this article highlights. I had to advise him that at the moment I do not recommend he take his revolver. Luckily he will probably be in MI a year at most. I advised him to pick his next state more carefully.

Ironically enough, I got my degree in Police Administration from Michigan State in 1965. Haven't been back to MI since--now I know why. Pathetic.

------------------
 
However, Robert, if your son has a valid CCW from his/your state it is valid in Michigan. If he keeps his home state license plates and DL, he will remain an non-Michigan resident and his CCW will remain in effect. Should he become a Michigan resident, by the act of obtaining a Michigan DL, he will not be able to use the CCW here.

------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
"If there be treachery, let there be jehad!"
 
I see this as a very serious infringement upon the BOR.

The 4th, and 5th Amendments are being pi$$ed upon here.

Search & Seizure of assets.

Due process of law. If not charged, and therefore not judged by a Jury of peers.

(No crime committed)+(No charges filed)+(Punished for it)+(No jury) = TYRANNY!!!

Fairly simple math here folks.

Best Regards,
Don

------------------
The most foolish mistake we could make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms;
History shows that all conquerers who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.
Adolf Hitler
-----------------
"Corrupt the young, get them away from religion. Get them interested in sex. Make them superficial, and destroy their rugged- ness.
Get control of all means of publicity, and thereby get the peoples' mind off their government by focusing their attention on athletics, sexy books and plays, and other trivialities.
Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance."

Vladimir Ilich Lenin, former leader of USSR

[This message has been edited by Donny (edited June 13, 2000).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg Volk:

Personally, I love the idea of booby-trapped safes, etc. (electrically hot parts, or mini-Claymores) as that would make thieves less likely to get away with murder (official critters who'd arrest or kill people, then loot). (snip) Most explosives, AFAIK, require a detonator to explode and wouldn't pose a danger in case of ahouse fire...or would they? Detonators, I would imagine, aren't *that* different from large primers...

[This message has been edited by Oleg Volk (edited June 12, 2000).][/B][/quote]

Storing primers in your safe, say, on an "inside the door" shelf, would have consequences if some JBT's started drilling or cutting into the door without presenting you with a valid warrant. In the aftermath, well, you were just trying to keep them secure, weren't you?

House fires could be a problem...
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Donny:
(No crime committed)+(No charges filed)+(Punished for it)+(No jury) = TYRANNY!!!

Fairly simple math here folks.
[/quote]

What he said.
 
There is a simpler and more direct description of this "traffic stop gun seizure". THEFT UNDER COLOR OF LAW.

Perhaps to simple and or direct for some, but that is exactly what it amounts to.

As for what State Police Records might allege was the fate of the two target pistols supposedly was, I'm given to recall that "ANYONE CAN WRITE ANYTHING ON A PIECE OF PAPER".

[This message has been edited by alan (edited June 13, 2000).]
 
Back
Top