-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Refusing to return guns becoming more prevelant
- Thread starter D-Ric902
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
The only way that is going to stop is to find a lawyer that will work on a percentage, sue the crap out of them for the guns back, the cost of the guns, your time, your legal fees, and anydamnthing else you can dream up. Then that needs to be done over and over and hit the *******s where it hurts.
They have practically unlimited budgets, so they can just stand back and say "screw you, what are you going to do about it?" and if you don't have deep pockets or a lawyer friend, you are out of luck. You really can't fight city hall unless you have a bunch in the bank and are willing to risk it over a principle.
They have practically unlimited budgets, so they can just stand back and say "screw you, what are you going to do about it?" and if you don't have deep pockets or a lawyer friend, you are out of luck. You really can't fight city hall unless you have a bunch in the bank and are willing to risk it over a principle.
Some years ago here in Mishawaka an older gentleman fatally shot a home intruder with a 38 Special (I think). Months after his being cleared of any pending charges he still hadn't got his pistol returned to him. He finally saw the Mishawaka chief out somewhere and questioned him about it. The pistol was returned the following week.
It's all who you know and how gun friendly the local government is.
It's all who you know and how gun friendly the local government is.
That article makes me angrier than anything I've read in a long time--I'm literally seeing red. Make gun owners jump through a bunch of legal hoops to get their guns back that weren't required to legally own them in the firs place, after the guns were illegally seized in clear violation of both the Second and Fifth Amendments? Thank God for the work of organizations like the NRA and Second Amendment Foundation. These heinous cases of government intrusion and overreach should be publicized and the pressure must be kept on to curtail this nonsense!
223 Gunner
Master
Yet more proof that our Government is corrupt at every level. We need to get back to the vision our Founding Fathers had for our Country.
Lawsuits aren't a significant deterrent, it's not like this is funded out of their retirement fund. Ultimately, it affects us, the taxpayer.
Indiana has two provisions for seizure and retention, either as evidence of a crime or as a result of an IC 35-47-14 procedure before the Court. In the latter case the police responded to a call and seized firearms or else presented the court with an affidavit for a search warrant, and then the State has 48 hours to file an affidavit (if seized w/o warrant in course of a call), and 14 days to present evidence at a hearing. In both of those cases the State must allege that the person is dangerous.
Then at hearing the court has to find the person 'dangerous' by clear and convincing evidence, but that person can then petition the court after 180 days (and every 180 days thereafter) to get the gun(s) back, and only has to prove by a preponderance of evidence that they are no longer a danger to themselves or others.
Obviously going the warrant route is not a slam dunk. The State has to get PC to search, and then C&C evidence to retain. For 180 days.
Now, if you live in a county where We the People have put a black-robe fever type on the bench, this could be problematic.
If the gun was seized as evidence, and the charges were dropped, gun goes back. Even if the person was convicted of a gun crime, they might still get their gun back...
If the police are holding your gun, go to the court and get an order.
AFAIK these are the only routes to seizure in Indiana, unless say the court imposes a term of probation that the person should not have a firearm, but usually a family member can take possession while probation is in force.
Then at hearing the court has to find the person 'dangerous' by clear and convincing evidence, but that person can then petition the court after 180 days (and every 180 days thereafter) to get the gun(s) back, and only has to prove by a preponderance of evidence that they are no longer a danger to themselves or others.
Obviously going the warrant route is not a slam dunk. The State has to get PC to search, and then C&C evidence to retain. For 180 days.
Now, if you live in a county where We the People have put a black-robe fever type on the bench, this could be problematic.
If the gun was seized as evidence, and the charges were dropped, gun goes back. Even if the person was convicted of a gun crime, they might still get their gun back...
If the police are holding your gun, go to the court and get an order.
AFAIK these are the only routes to seizure in Indiana, unless say the court imposes a term of probation that the person should not have a firearm, but usually a family member can take possession while probation is in force.
What in heavens name is a PC search, and then what is C&C evidence to retain, something like cash & carry?
HNIWYM
The above stands for 'Have no idea what you mean'.
femurphy77
Grandmaster
This exactly! I'll preface with what I'm about to suggest with the with this; I know a large percentage of law enforcement people are trying to do their jobs the best they can while causing as little discomfort as possible to those of us that do our daily thing without crossing any lines but I'm a BIG advocate of LEO having to carry malpractice insurance as so many other professionals now carry and reset the system so the individual is responsible for his actions on BOTH sides of the thin blue line. When corrupt officials are sucking off the public teat and know it doesn't cost them "Personally" anything why should they care.
Make it hurt them personally and a LOT of this crap will stop.
(Shields up, prepared for attack)
Maybe there should be a stipulation in the protection that a person that enjoys the protection from a lawsuit due to being a government employee only enjoys that protection while working within the confines of the law. Step outside of the law, you also step outside of the protection it gives you. Maybe this exists already but is not pursued.
Good luck with that.
That will take a total house cleaning from the big boy/girl chairs to the janitors.
223 Gunner
Master
Yes, I know. And most likely we will never see that.
