Question for the more informed on CCW weapon

I too believe one shouldn't scrimp on quality. But quality doesn't always mean the most expensive. I remember a kid watching McQ with John Wayne and the scene where the police took his Colt Python after a shooting. He waited till they left went to his car trunk and dug out another one. This scene influenced me in that I try to have a multiples of each model I like. So as much as I would HATE to have any of my revolvers held for a while I can grab another one off the rack.
 
wogentry said:
I too believe one shouldn't scrimp on quality. But quality doesn't always mean the most expensive. I remember a kid watching McQ with John Wayne and the scene where the police took his Colt Python after a shooting. He waited till they left went to his car trunk and dug out another one. This scene influenced me in that I try to have a multiples of each model I like. So as much as I would HATE to have any of my revolvers held for a while I can grab another one off the rack.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of expensive pieces of junk out there in the gun world. Many are over advertised and highly rated until the actual purchasers shoot them.

As to having a firearm taken, if one gets to that event, the loss of a gun is not going to be their worry. If your gun is taken, then you are the suspect. Then you have high lawyer fees, lost time from work, a possible criminal charge as well as prison time facing you. That my friend, is not a time to worry about a gun.
 
oldman45 said:
As to having a firearm taken, if one gets to that event, the loss of a gun is not going to be their worry. If your gun is taken, then you are the suspect. Then you have high lawyer fees, lost time from work, a possible criminal charge as well as prison time facing you. That my friend, is not a time to worry about a gun.
Click to expand...


I understand what you're saying but... Depending on who you shot, having a gun to defend yourself from retaliation might be your biggest worry!
 
Photoman44 said:
I understand what you're saying but... Depending on who you shot, having a gun to defend yourself from retaliation might be your biggest worry!
Click to expand...

It goes way past that.

Not just WHO but WHY.

Do you know anyone with a concealed carry permit that only owns one gun? I bet there are very few that has one single handgun. LE does not seize all a persons guns after a shooting in most cases although it does occasionally happen.
 
oldman45 said:
It goes way past that.

Not just WHO but WHY.

Do you know anyone with a concealed carry permit that only owns one gun? I bet there are very few that has one single handgun. LE does not seize all a persons guns after a shooting in most cases although it does occasionally happen.
Click to expand...

So for the current/former LEO's out there. What are the circumstances where a firearm will or will not be taken from an armed citizen after a self-defense shooting? I know "circumstances" covers a lot but are there general rules in place to handle these types of situations?
 
kyf said:
So for the current/former LEO's out there. What are the circumstances where a firearm will or will not be taken from an armed citizen after a self-defense shooting? I know "circumstances" covers a lot but are there general rules in place to handle these types of situations?
Click to expand...

Complicated question.

First, the police are not the ones to be concerned with. The District Attorney, Grand Jury and others will decide if charges are going to be brought against the shooter. Their decision will be based on the findings of the police.

If the officers feel that the shooting was justified and are certain that the gun used was the one used by the shooter, I would not think the gun would be taken. Example: Someone breaks into my home and I drop them. My gun is not going to be taken. Case closed. Self Defense. The shooting will still be reviewed by the DA and he would then decide no charges would be filed.

If the officers feel there was something that prompted the shooting such as a drunken brawl and there may not be an issue of self defense but rather emotional issues, then the gun would be retained until the DA made his decision. Of course the shooter is in for hours and days of questioning.

So if a gun is taken depends on other factors beside a shooting. Those factors also include the standing of the shooter in the community. If he is not a flight risk, he may get to retain the gun but the serial numbers will be taken and he may be asked to bring it in at a later date.

If there is no doubt the shooting was not self defense, then the gun and the shooter are going to be held.
 
oldman45 said:
Complicated question.

First, the police are not the ones to be concerned with. The District Attorney, Grand Jury and others will decide if charges are going to be brought against the shooter. Their decision will be based on the findings of the police.

If the officers feel that the shooting was justified and are certain that the gun used was the one used by the shooter, I would not think the gun would be taken. Example: Someone breaks into my home and I drop them. My gun is not going to be taken. Case closed. Self Defense. The shooting will still be reviewed by the DA and he would then decide no charges would be filed.

If the officers feel there was something that prompted the shooting such as a drunken brawl and there may not be an issue of self defense but rather emotional issues, then the gun would be retained until the DA made his decision. Of course the shooter is in for hours and days of questioning.

So if a gun is taken depends on other factors beside a shooting. Those factors also include the standing of the shooter in the community. If he is not a flight risk, he may get to retain the gun but the serial numbers will be taken and he may be asked to bring it in at a later date.

If there is no doubt the shooting was not self defense, then the gun and the shooter are going to be held.
Click to expand...

Thanks, that helps. In Colorado we have a "Make My Day" law that protects home-owners regarding home invasion. Good judgement and decision-making are absolutely paramount as a responsibility of ccw.
 
kyf said:
Thanks, that helps. In Colorado we have a "Make My Day" law that protects home-owners regarding home invasion. Good judgement and decision-making are absolutely paramount as a responsibility of ccw.
Click to expand...

Louisiana is head of the pack in laws favorable to honest citizens.

We have a Shoot the Burglar law. They do not have to be inside the home but just breaking in. You do not have to be threatened, just feel in danger.

We have a Shoot the Car Jacker law. As long as you are inside the car when someone is trying to take it, you are allowed to shoot them. The operative word is "inside" the car. You may not be held blameless if you shoot someone taking your car and you are not in it. Then you again would have to feel your life to be threatened.
 
This is a question which can only be answered in the aftermath of your own self defense situation.

Once the incident is over a lot of details can come into play when you see the instruments of the law at work. There have been self defense cases where the firearm used was not taken from the owner, and there have been cases where the entire contents of the defender's gun safe were confiscated by law enforcement in addition to the weapon used.

Generally speaking when LE takes someones entire collection it boils down to either a legal policy or an on the ground decision by the police supervisor. If the police feel that on initial contact something about the citizens' story doesn't add up the law will confiscate all of the weapons in the home at the time to ensure the gun the citizen used was indeed the only one fired during the incident.

As to the legal policy aspect, some states have laws on the books which disqualify people under criminal investigation from possessing or buying guns. A state issued carry or purchase permit may also be cancelled, revoked, or invalidated as a condition of being investigated for a crime, making firearm possession by the citizen illegal by default thus empowering authorities to seize every gun the person owns in addition to the one used in the shooting pending the disposition of the case.

Insofar as carrying a pistol of higher monetary value, the odds of one being involved in a defensive gun use period is rather low. The odds of any criminal encounter going beyond revealing the piece are even lower. For most of us this discussion is academic, which is not a state to complain about.

If lead really does need to fly it is very possible that no matter whether the Ed Brown custom 1911 is on the hip or in the safe the piece will still be taken by police for reasons already covered above. In the safe a $3000 pistol is a beautiful paperweight. On your hip it could save your life.

If the police do not seize the high-priced gun stored at home post shooting, one still must confront the practical truth that concealed carry will not be possible in jail and assuming no criminal charges are filed any collectors pistol still in our hypothetical citizen's possession will probably be sold to put food on the table, in light of the need to eat despite the lost job and outstanding legal bills resulting from the case.
This outcome assumes one is not found liable in a civil court for wrongful death.

Bottom line,one conclusion to draw is that are you are losing that expensive piece one way or another if shots are fired. You may as well lose it the Viking way.
 
I will say this and it may sound anti LE.

If any agency takes my gun collection after a shooting, then I will sue them for millions. If I am charged with a homicide, they still do not have the right to remove my guns. Before that can be done, I have to be found guilty of a felony. They also best have used a court ordered warrant.

Under the Domestic Abuse laws, they might could put them under a hold until a trial is held but other than that, I do not know of and neither does my best male friend (who happens to be a District Attorney with 26 yrs in that position) any law allowing for the seizure of all weapons from the home.

Since 1966, I have only seen all the guns in a residence taken four times and all those were in the 80's under Domestic laws.

People still have rights in this country and one of the problems now is people let the government do as they please without question or challenge.
 
My three current daily carry handguns range in today's replacement cost between $350 and $1000. If anyone of them were out of service for any reason I have others that would suffice until replaced.
Other than my Seecamp .380 anything I have could be replaced in less than 30 days. Since I carry it most it faces the greatest chance of use and therefore being held. Without it I would carry my M&P 340 or PM9.
 
Last edited:
Mickey D said:
They may take your whole collection if they feel you are a threat. :eek:

The gun will be your last worry.
Click to expand...

I still say that any agency cannot just come in and take ALL your guns unless you are prohibited by law to have them.

If it were possible, some anti gun politician could order all guns in their jurisdiction siezed for the good of the community in the interest of safety.
 
oldman45 said:
I still say that any agency cannot just come in and take ALL your guns unless you are prohibited by law to have them.

If it were possible, some anti gun politician could order all guns in their jurisdiction siezed for the good of the community in the interest of safety.
Click to expand...

Oldman45, here's a current case where the police did seize all of a person's firearms, Dennis Fleming of New Hampshire.

New Hampshire Man Arrested For Firing Gun Into Ground While Catching Suspected Burglar | Fox News
 
ogilvyspecial said:
Oldman45, here's a current case where the police did seize all of a person's firearms, Dennis Fleming of New Hampshire.

New Hampshire Man Arrested For Firing Gun Into Ground While Catching Suspected Burglar | Fox News
Click to expand...

Interesting to say the least.

However I bet he has his guns back very shortly. A felony arrest is a long way from a felony conviction. His charge will be pled down to a misdemeanor. It is likely a jury would be reluctant to convict a man for defending his property and a DA knows this. I predict the guns will be returned due to being illegally siezed if he has a clean past history. I am also not convienced that a police chief can order household items not related to a crime siezed. Who is to say the guns in the hosue did not belong to his wife or children?

I know I am going to ask a local chief today if it would be allowed in this area.

I also googled this and found many instances of gun collection seizures taking place and those I read about were declared illegal.
 
Last edited:
I read this a month or two ago, and just want to add for consideration. I'm pretty sure it was Ayoob (as usual) who said that iif you do have to shoot someone, and the DA says 'good shoot, no trial', you could be in for trouble still. Now you have to figure on castle doctrine/no duty to retreat staes but the idea is this: If you are not taken to trial, and you killed , say an 18 year old thug- then the family could sue you in civil court for killing their 'baby.' But if you go to trial, and are found not-guilty, then the family couldn't sue in a civil case. I'm pretty sure he cited an example of this happening. I am not a lawyer- just putting this out for consideration.
 
Chuck1217 said:
I read this a month or two ago, and just want to add for consideration. I'm pretty sure it was Ayoob (as usual) who said that iif you do have to shoot someone, and the DA says 'good shoot, no trial', you could be in for trouble still. Now you have to figure on castle doctrine/no duty to retreat staes but the idea is this: If you are not taken to trial, and you killed , say an 18 year old thug- then the family could sue you in civil court for killing their 'baby.' But if you go to trial, and are found not-guilty, then the family couldn't sue in a civil case. I'm pretty sure he cited an example of this happening. I am not a lawyer- just putting this out for consideration.
Click to expand...

The standards for a criminal case is more strict than in a civil case.

Often times a person is cleared criminally of wrongful action and then found liable in a civil proceeding. Not always but often.
 
Following through with my comment about talking with a Police Chief.

I spoke with two today. One is over a 670 man department, the other is over a 145 man department.

Both said there is no law that would allow them to take all guns from a home unless it was a matter of threat of family violence, self harm or finding a felony conviction.

Both also stated that taking of such would not be up to a DA but would require an order from a Judge.

So the seizure in question is most likely illegal.
 
In Oklahoma the law states:

"F. A person who uses force, as permitted pursuant to the provisions of subsections B and D of this section, is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force. As used in this subsection, the term 'criminal prosecution' includes charging or prosecuting the defendant."

This means that the defender can't be sued by the dead bad guy's family if the shooting or other use of force meets the criteria of the law.

OSCN Found Document:Physical or Deadly Force Against Intruder

One of the first cases where this law applied, a home invader was beaten down with a can of vegetables and subsequently died of his injuries. I don't thing the police seized all the canned goods in the house.

ECS
 
Last edited:
From what I understand, when it comes to law(s), is not how it's written, it's how it's interpreted, which I'm sure has a lot to do with how, or when, it's applied.
 
It ain't often ol Iggy is speechless, but I am now.:mad:
 
... "not always but often" is true, but look no farther than O.J. Simpson who was found not guilty in his criminal trial, but found liable for wrongful death in his civil trial. Of course, that was merely an expensive nuisance for him until his most recent screw-up. Anyway, if you're found not guilty in a criminal trial, you may find yourself getting sued in a civil trial. It will depend a lot on how the laws are written by the legislature in your state. I would not be thrilled about NY, for example. I wouldn't trust that system any farther than I could throw Chuck Shumer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
442/642 size vs. M&P 340?
Replies
7
Views
9K
DAdams
DAdams
M
Considering a Shield and have many questions
2
Replies
47
Views
10K
Jeb21
J
B
How did it feel when you first started carrying?
2
Replies
59
Views
8K
cracker57
cracker57
J
ankle holster question
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
Frizzman
F
M
Deep Concealment of a Handgun
2
Replies
42
Views
8K
Mphstiger1981
M

Latest posts

Back
Top