There are at least 40 people in Oklahoma that are as smart as a house plant

so now because you were "free to reject" any assistance, regardless of reason, you now must prove your innocence?.
Click to expand...

Nope. What country do you live in?

In America, no one has to talk to the police, nor does anyone have to allow their property to be taken or searched without a warrant.

The police then have to establish a case against you, if they think they can, without your help. (Also, here in this country, the police then have to take that case to the DA who must agree to prosecute. Then the DA must convince a jury of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.)

This is the way that every one of the hundreds of thousands -- perhaps millions -- of police investigations every year are conducted in the United States. This is true from shoplifting up to mass homicide.

Just because it involves a gun doesn't make it any different than if it involved access to a particular kind of knife, car, crowbar, truck, rope, tire, carpet fiber, blood, ransom note, typewriters, Wusthof cutlery sets, dynamite, hand tools, etc.
 
The police then have to establish a case against you, if they think they can, without your help. (Also, here in this country, the police then have to take that case to the DA who must agree to prosecute. Then the DA must convince a jury of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.)
Click to expand...

although incredibly naive, in a perfect world i'd have to agree.

in reality....... good luck.

see what happens when the OK state police show up and want to ask you a few questions and you flat out refuse to cooperate, even though you are not required to.

refuse to offer handgun + refuse to answer questions = perpetrator

they get some crackpot judge to sign a warrant, and they let themselves in to do some "investigating"

as you sit back confident in the belief that you are completely innocent. they find nothing, but to show you that obedience is always best, they cite you for having a firearm present in the home that is not locked in a safe(example:it is a state law in mn). you are now a criminal.

now you get to scratch up big bucks for a lawyer, and kiss an extended amount of time from your life goodbye.

if you are lucky enough to PROVE your innocent, you don't get that part of your life back. perhaps you will have been painted as guilty in the eyes of many despite the verdict, or the dropped charges. you may even be able to keep your job throughout the whole ordeal, but still may have thousands of dollars in legal fees to pay.

yes sir, that there is real justice.

for many this may seem far fetched, but for an unlucky few, this is reality.
 
Well, since this is such an infringement of rights as some of you are claiming, then I am sure the NRA and all the civil rights groups will be all over this travesty...but they all seem silent so far.
 
I'm sure Larry Pratt will soon send out an e-mail to everyone claiming that this is new gun confiscation underway and telling everyone that it can only be stopped with donations to GOA. :rolleyes:
 
I'm sure Larry Pratt will soon send out an e-mail to everyone claiming that this is new gun confiscation underway and telling everyone that it can only be stopped with donations to GOA.
Click to expand...

Lol.

I picture him right now running around his room in a castle turret, muttering and tearing at his hair, every once in a while flinging himself at his keyboard to add a few words to the e-mail that will -- finally! once and for all! -- get enough money to put GOA in its rightful place at the top of the gun pyramid.
 
My concern would be if they were telling the truth when they said you'd get it right back. My buddy learned this the hard way.
His 13 year old daughter got in a bit of trouble. Cops said to bring her in to answer some questions and they PROMISED that she'd be going right back home.
They got there, no questions, cops arrested her and sent her to a juvenile detention facility 20 miles away. They freely admitted that they'd lied to him. "It makes our job easier".
He had to hire a lawyer to get her out. The lawyer told him that the police are permitted, by law, to mislead and outright lie.
 
Is this another stupid is as stupid does?

I am not sure why these people took their guns down but I know I would not have. I used to live in OK and talking about great folks! There are some great people there. My wife and I were talking yesterday about how much we miss the people because they are just real friendly and most are very smart people. I am sure the ones who took their guns down wanted to help or did not think much about it....or could it be the intimidation they felt from the local law enforcement officers? HUUUUMMMMM:barf:
 
Please explain specifically what civil rights are being violated and how.

It isn't the first as they aren't infringing freedom of speech in any way.
I know it isn't the 2nd Amendment because no infringement on the right to keep and bear arms has occurred.
It isn't the 3rd as no troops are being quartered improperly.
It isn't the 4th because no improper search or seizure has occurred especially since participation is voluntary.
It isn't 5-8 because they don't pertain, not yet anyway.
It isn't 9.
It isn't 10.
Click to expand...


You included a very partial list of my civil rights. They are the ones the Founders felt would be most likely to be infringed up by the Federal Government. Unfortunately what some of the Founders feared has come true and that is people will look at the list and think that it's a complete list and they will allow the Government to infringe everywhere it no specifically prohibited until all their rights are gone but those listed, and those listed will be so tightly corralled from all corners as to be just barely still in existence.

People have a basic right to be left alone. The LEO sending a letter to all those gun owners that is the equivalent to, "You are now a suspect in a murder until you come in and let us test your gun." The cooperation is voluntary in the same way working overtime at most jobs is "voluntary". Don't volunteer once and see how long you are working any regular hours. It's the very thinly veiled threat from those in power that we as free people might have to take from our boss since that's a voluntary arrangement, but we don't have to take from our government. Whoever approved this tactic should be out on his ***.
 
The police ask for certain assistance, which you're free to reject.
Click to expand...

And if you reject, you are instantly labeled a suspect, or the popular and oh so politically correct 'person of interest.'

It's not the request for assitance that bothers me, it's how those who have no obligation nor need to render such assistance will be treated as a result of their declining to wave their rights in effort to solve a tough case.
 
I guess some people aren't happy unless they have some "crisis" to complain about.

The bottom line is that rights and governmental authority coexist. If you are going to be a member of this society and claim all of the rights that you are due, then you also must respect the authority of the government where it is legitimate.

Its stupid to cry foul about the government violating your rights when you yourself won't allow the government to lawfully exercise its power.

In otherwords, its perfectly fine for the police to ask for voluntary cooperation. Anyone making an argument to the contrary is simply ignorant. Nor is it improper for the authorities to conduct an investigation for anyone who owns a weapon. It may come to the shock of some people here, but you have no right not to be investigated. Of course the government has to comply with the constitution while investigating you, but that doesn't create a right not to be investigated or not to be a suspect.

So this letter on its face isn't alleging anything unconstitutional. There will always be those who cause a hue and cry about such things, but thats life. Save the worry for something serious.


And if you reject, you are instantly labeled a suspect, or the popular and oh so politically correct 'person of interest.'
Click to expand...

So could you show me the constitutional right that preclude you from being a suspect or a 'person of interest'?
 
I am going to go out on a limb, here, considering:

A. I am not an American
B. I don't live in America
C. I am not particularly familiar with the US constitution
D. This being the "Legal and political" forum, people seem to take a lot of offense over others' opinions
E. I'm still sitting on the fence on this one.

So, here goes...

1. The investigative technique, or tactic, of the letter and the thinking behind it seems to be seriously flawed and looks, in my eyes, to be utterly ineffective. Eliminating wrong (guilty) suspects, making the wrong suspects (innocent) look more suspect, tipping off the perpetrators, wasting precious time and money etc etc. Does anybody have any idea of how many .40 Glocks there could be in the area? Is 60 even approximately plausible? Might there be 600? 6000? And how big is the area? How do they even know it was a Glock (can they actually determine the manufacturer from the fired slugs/casings)?

2. It doesn't seem to me that any rights were infringed by issuing the letter, but, as others have said, where does it stop? Polite requests, encouragement to cooperate, coercion, ultimatum, threat, where to draw the line?

3. On principle, I am with Pax. If I had recently bought a .40 Glock, or possibly any second hand gun, I wouldn't mind them checking it out. But this is also in my own self-interest, so it doesn't make me either a courageous, stand-up citizen nor a "collaborator of a hostile government" - just bright enough to eliminate myself and the gun I had recently bought from a potentially very nasty situation. If I had had it for years and knew it had been sitting in a safe since Christmas? Possibly, but not likely, partly out of principle, but mainly out of laziness. But then again, what was done to the two little girls may have caused me to do "my civic duty" as a good citizen.

4. Going after Glock owners/gun owners.
The "slippery slope" argument about the Honda Civic and how far the government should be allowed to go seems to amuse those here who have no reservations about letting their guns be tested, but there is a very valid point to it.
Where does it end? Glock owners? Honda Civic/gun owners? It was mentioned somewhere that the possible suspect drove a white Ford or Chevy pick-up, IIRC. Who to go after? Ford owners? Chevy owners? Anybody who has a white pick-up? Or access to one? Anybody who has, or has access to, a pick-up?
And remember, the possible suspect may have been American Indian. Do you want to go down that path? Round'em all up? Don't think so.

So, on this one it seems I can't make my mind up either way.

B.A.

Oh, by the way: None of the above applies to my country.
 
This thread takes the cake.
Click to expand...

Agree with that but for me the surprise so many agree with this type of law enforcement, since 9/11 law enforcement is using the terrorist threat to use a "shotgun" approach to law enforcement, search everyone, suspect everyone, etc simply this is wrong in a free country, should we have house to house searches, traffic checks for papers, fingerprints, DNA swab, etc., very slippery slope here guys try to remember authority will get worse in their request each time you accept. My family/friends been in law enforcement for years and have seen the changes first hand.
 
I have an idea on this, they may in fact have one, possibly two prime suspects who are known to own .40 caliber Glocks. They issued the letter and are now waiting and watching to see what the prime suspect/s do.

If its not something like that or very similar, then who ever thought up the 'bring in your gun plan' is not very bright.
 
nate45,
Good point. The police may know more than they are letting on. If not, I agree, not the most cunning plan.
 
nate45 said:
If its not something like that or very similar, then who ever thought up the 'bring in your gun plan' is not very bright.
Click to expand...

No kidding. I don't know what they thought this would accomplish.
Maybe, Oklahoma cut way down on their police training budget and the
recruits sit around playing the "Clue" board game.

It's Bubba with the Glock .40 at the Piggly Wiggly!
 
There is no problem with the police REQUESTING assistance of the community. The problem with this article and the police action in this case is that they are going to begin investigating the people who don't volunteer their weapons for testing. They have no evidence (beyond circumstantial) that any of those 20 people have done anything wrong. How will these stops go? For all we know, they'll be using a SWAT team to breach the houses of these 20 non-compliant people because there's a gun in the house and that could present a danger to standard officers........

The argument some are making, "if you've got nothing to hide...." is TOTAL BS! This is communistic thinking through and through. They tried something like this up here in Reno when a young college girl was found raped and murdered about 6ish months ago. They believe they had DNA from the attacker, and action groups started calling for a required sample of DNA from all people who fit the attacker's profile. That profile was: white male, 18-24 years of age.

The idea that they can call me up and request to search my private property because I fit a certain profile is the exact sort of thing the founding father's wanted to get us away from as colonial citizens were often found guilty of crimes after a British officer barged into their home and "found" (planted) evidence of wrong doing so they could seize the house. If I was one of the 20 people being investigated because I didn't bring my gun down for requested testing, I'd be calling a lawyer and getting ready for my lawsuit.


For those people who are ok with this gun request, let me pose it in a different way. Let's pretend there was a brutal hit and run in your town, little old lady gets plowed down and hurt very badly. A small cart she was pushing is known to have caused some sort of crack on the grill of the truck, but witness' on scene can only describe the vehicle as a "small, late model, white pick up truck" and that's the best description they can provide. Police could very easily search the DMV records, and find out how many people are driving a truck match that description. They put out a request that anyone driving one of these trucks come in for a "volunteer" inspection. When only 50% of registered vehicle owners show up and they don't feel they got the vehicle, they start going door to door to ask why these people didn't show up. Are you ok with this, like you're ok with them test firing your gun?
 
Last edited:
The "slippery slope" argument about the Honda Civic and how far the government should be allowed to go seems to amuse those here who have no reservations about letting their guns be tested, but there is a very valid point to it.
Click to expand...

yep...

when it comes to the legal system "the slippery slope" is called precedent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top