Use it and lose it

[StrawHat]

BB57, not sure in what state you practice law but the many times I was in court as a cop, prior behavior was never a substantiating circumstance indicative of a crime. Jurors were told to disregard the mention and lawyers were reprimanded.

Also, as a cop I was not in the position to determine if a crime had been committed. That was up to the Prosecutor or the Grand Jury.

I am surprised it works that way in North Carolina.

Kevin

 

[ISCS Yoda]

Meanwhile, those of us who can't afford to easily replace a Colt, S&W Performance Center, Kimber Eclipse or a SIG P22X Equinox, much less an Ed Brown, Les Baer, Nighthawk, etc are carrying less expensive firearms which are perfectly suitable for self-defense that we can afford to replace, and more expensive firearms are reserved for the range and are far more precious to us because they have to be saved up for, ergo they're not as easily replaced.

This whole thread makes me laugh. I have to wonder if there is anyone on this Forum, except maybe a brand new shooter who just joined (has to be both, I'll wager) who doesn't have another gun to carry if his or hers is confiscated after a shooting, permanently or temporarily.

Moreover, while NONE of the expensive guns listed above in the quote interest me, if you own one of those fancy firearms what are the odds that that is the sole gun that you own? You might hate to lose, even short term, your 686+PC but, seriously, was that your first gun purchase and the only gun in the house? People who own such firearms are firearms aficionados and I will blanket wager some sum of money that not one gun owner in America who owns a premium firearm owns just that firearm. With exceptions for grandchildren who just turned 21 or got married and a Les Baer 1911 was in the wedding present or coming of age present.

People, as a rule, carry well made firearms for personal defense without resorting to multi-zero dollar guns. What can you do with a Nighthawk or a 686+PC that you cannot do with a Rock River 1911 or any K or L frame (not including competition shooting)?

I think that the last thing anyone truly worries about is the seizure of a firearm after a justified shooting. Admittedly, there are a whole lot of new shooters out there who do only own one gun presently but we're back to my wager - do you think some new shooter who is in need of a self defense firearm for the first time in his or her life bought a Les Baer or a PC gun of any kind?

Not too many folks will buy a Ferrari as their first car, either.

 

[biku324]

I've never seen a weapon used in a killing or wounding in my jurisdiction NOT taken as evidence. Whether the homicide or injury ends up being justifiable is not a determination to be made at the scene, it's a decision made by either the DA or a grand jury. To make their decision in a just manner, that means being certain the firearm witnesses and participants say was used truly was the one used and that it was in the same condition when the evidence is forensically examined and/or considered in court as it was at the time. This includes apparent suicides.

I'd add that New Mexico has a really good system for death investigations; it involves police, the office of the (state) medical investigator, and district attorneys at a minimum. In a very clear case of self-defense homicide, the shooter might not go to jail but the firearm used dam' well better be taken as evidence and sent for forensic examination. Doing less means disciplinary action for the officer(s) who did not collect all relevant evidence; within our system it would be police malpractice.

In any deadly shooting in which I fired any rounds, my duty weapons were taken (I was always given replacements from district inventory immediately) for forensic examination.

 

[Lou_the_welder]

A friend of mine had his shotgun confiscated, and needed a lawyer to get it back. And when the cost exceeded the price of the shotgun, he still wanted it back. (They wouldn't give him the time of day to get it back either)

He asked politely for his shotgun back. There wasn't any, "we're gonna give it back to you, just wait" or "our investigation isnt over". It was a flat out "no!". And "get outta here".
Finally when he got it back, it was all scratched up like they threw it on top of a pile of other metal .

"Choose wisely"

 

[biku324]

That's unacceptable.

 

[Muss Muggins]

He seems to be discussing what happens during the investigation, not the trial. Federally, and in Missouri state courts, you can't bring up prior criminal history unless the defendant testifies. If the charge is such that it can't be brought without a qualifying prior conviction, the parties almost always, if not always, will stipulate that the defendant meets the requirements for the charge to be brought, and that is all.

I can always tell a BB57 post is coming when I start at the bottom and scroll up . . .

BB57, not sure in what state you practice law but the many times I was in court as a cop, prior behavior was never a substantiating circumstance indicative of a crime. Jurors were told to disregard the mention and lawyers were reprimanded.

Also, as a cop I was not in the position to determine if a crime had been committed. That was up to the Prosecutor or the Grand Jury.

I am surprised it works that way in North Carolina.

Kevin

 

[stansdds]

A friend of mine had his shotgun confiscated, and needed a lawyer to get it back. And when the cost exceeded the price of the shotgun, he still wanted it back. (They wouldn't give him the time of day to get it back either)

He asked politely for his shotgun back. There wasn't any, "we're gonna give it back to you, just wait" or "our investigation isnt over". It was a flat out "no!". And "get outta here".
Finally when he got it back, it was all scratched up like they threw it on top of a pile of other metal .

"Choose wisely"

Some jurisdictions are highly "anti-gun" and this sort of thing can happen.

 

[rockquarry]

A friend of mine had his shotgun confiscated, and needed a lawyer to get it back. And when the cost exceeded the price of the shotgun, he still wanted it back. (They wouldn't give him the time of day to get it back either)

He asked politely for his shotgun back. There wasn't any, "we're gonna give it back to you, just wait" or "our investigation isnt over". It was a flat out "no!". And "get outta here".
Finally when he got it back, it was all scratched up like they threw it on top of a pile of other metal .

"Choose wisely"

There might be more to the story than the selected bits depicted here.

 

[Muss Muggins]

There always is . . .

There might be more to the story than the selected bits here depicted here.

 

[03hemi]

Have carry insurance like USCCA and carry the best you can afford.

 

[LoboGunLeather]

A friend of mine had his shotgun confiscated, and needed a lawyer to get it back. And when the cost exceeded the price of the shotgun, he still wanted it back. (They wouldn't give him the time of day to get it back either)

He asked politely for his shotgun back. There wasn't any, "we're gonna give it back to you, just wait" or "our investigation isnt over". It was a flat out "no!". And "get outta here".
Finally when he got it back, it was all scratched up like they threw it on top of a pile of other metal .

"Choose wisely"

Might just be me, retired, time on my hands, and a degree of intolerance for bureaucratic nonsense, but I would be suing them for full value plus court costs, plus legal fees, and request punitive damages.

If nothing else, I would make sure they got some good exercise running back and forth to the courthouse, producing documents, explaining policies and procedures (see what those nice publications say about safeguarding property!), and sitting around in hallways for hours, days, weeks, months waiting for each one's turn on the witness stand. My attorney would probably have an investigator inside their property room with cameras for days documenting their practices, and doing it under a court order.

Any time a public official comes into possession of an item of property there is a duty to safeguard that property and take all reasonable steps to prevent damage or loss. In most states public officials who willfully or negligently fail to perform a lawful duty may be subject to criminal charges of misfeasance in office (or some similar terminology).

 

[BB57]

BB57, not sure in what state you practice law but the many times I was in court as a cop, prior behavior was never a substantiating circumstance indicative of a crime. Jurors were told to disregard the mention and lawyers were reprimanded.

Also, as a cop I was not in the position to determine if a crime had been committed. That was up to the Prosecutor or the Grand Jury.

I am surprised it works that way in North Carolina.

Kevin

It worked the same way every time I was in court and testified in a case.

However, I'm not talking about what happens later in court, I'm talking about what happens on scene.

Even in a traffic stop, the officer will check ID and check for wants and warrants. That is not prohibited. Using that information to support a decision to arrest or not is just common sense.

In other words, if the shooter claimed he was pulled from the car, and the guy he shot or shot at has a history of arrests and convictions for similar behavior, it supports the shooter's statement, and gives it additional credibility. Add in a few witnesses who support his side of the story and there's a strong case for letting the guy go home, rather than arresting him and possibly putting his already traumatized kids in foster care while dad sits in jail. The DA can still decide to charge him later.

The reverse is also true. If the shooter makes that claim, but also has a prior record of criminal arrests or convictions for assault, disorderly conduct, etc, an officer will probably have a great deal more skepticism in believing the shooter was totally innocent of any precipitating or exacerbating behavior in the events leading up to the shoot.

 

[Protected One]

Might just be me, retired, time on my hands, and a degree of intolerance for bureaucratic nonsense, but I would be suing them for full value plus court costs, plus legal fees, and request punitive damages.

If nothing else, I would make sure they got some good exercise running back and forth to the courthouse, producing documents, explaining policies and procedures (see what those nice publications say about safeguarding property!), and sitting around in hallways for hours, days, weeks, months waiting for each one's turn on the witness stand. My attorney would probably have an investigator inside their property room with cameras for days documenting their practices, and doing it under a court order.

Any time a public official comes into possession of an item of property there is a duty to safeguard that property and take all reasonable steps to prevent damage or loss. In most states public officials who willfully or negligently fail to perform a lawful duty may be subject to criminal charges of misfeasance in office (or some similar terminology).

Would that everyone so treated went to these lengths, then we could get the fools to stop such behavior.

 

[Chief Wiggums]

If you're in a Stand Your Ground or Castle doctrine state, if you use your weapon in self defense, will it always be confiscated? Is it dependent on the circumstances?

In this situation , having my firearm confiscated by LEO , is going to be a minimal concern....

My concern is the lawsuit that will be coming my way....

Bad guy breaks into my house - I shoot the bad guy...
phone call #1 is to LEO
phone call #2 is to U.S. Concealed Carry Association | Born to Protect

If bad guy lives , I will get sued
If bad guy does not live , I will get sued

 

[sigp220.45]

I've worked several shootings that weren't prosecuted due to claims of self-defense, some of which were pretty shaky.

I've never been contacted about a civil suit. I was the lead investigator, so if a suit had been filed I would have been. Lawyers sure weren't shy about bugging me about DUI fatalities and accidental deaths.

I know at least one local CCW class that is basically a live infomercial for USCCA. Its like getting the hard sell on a time-share.

 

[Muss Muggins]

Same here. I used to get contacted about every six or eight months for five years regarding a Toyota 4 Runner that rolled over, shredded the top, and killed four members of a family, with a two-three year the only survivor. Same with a police pursuit of a naked man who carjacked an old lady at the hospital after he balked at inpatient mental health treatment that ended poorly. At the time, I was a white shirt in a public safety department. We did police and fire, equally. All I did on both was supervise the extrication operations at the crash scenes . . .

I've worked several shootings that weren't prosecuted due to claims of self-defense, some of which were pretty shaky.

I've never been contacted about a civil suit. I was the lead investigator, so if a suit had been filed I would have been. Lawyers sure weren't shy about bugging me about DUI fatalities and accidental deaths.