You actually had to use your gun

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can't believe this issue would ever cross someone's mind if and when they ever faced a situation where a gun is needed. I think the concern about liability and blowback goes into education and pre thinking that any SD gun owner needs to go thru in their mind long before a situation ever occurs. When the firearm is drawn in real life, all those issues should have been resolved long before.

Losing a gun as evidence maybe is something we should be concerned with and is why valuable and prized weapons are often called "safe" only. Don't carry, fly, or have a go to gun that is a family heirloom.
 
Lots of views and all are important.

Taliv is right, we don't talk about upgrading our home defenses - from the perspective of what you actually can do to the home itself. It's why I only indulge in noting that most discussions go directly to handling the complete failure to do anything at all and resorting to a firearm. The nature of a gun (only) forum forces us to consider what to do when a massive failure to prepare beforehand presents itself.

Those of us who were trained Combat Arms have a completely different perspective, all of it based on what you do to prevent self inflicted ignorance resulting in exactly what you were tasked to prevent.

So, focusing on the gun only and why you have it to protect your home, we see a variety of answers on how that needs to be addressed. It does depend on your local political climate and how the Authority Having Jurisdiction handles cases. The point is - you bought the gun and you DO intend to use it in an extreme situation. You buy ammo and practice. You do give consideration to when and how it might be used. You are not one of those who plans "to wake up with a knife at your throat," probably one of the more hilarious threats tossed out by posters.

Since it's High Road, you'll call the cops, they will arrive, proceed with clearing the house if they think it's necessary, maybe even cuff you.(We don't discuss hiding the body. :uhoh:) If you haven't looked into how YOUR jurisdiction handles it, you need to know - things like answering the door and opening it with your gun still in your hand might be expected by a seasoned LEO but the night shift usually gets rookies - who only know shots were fired and there are people armed doing it.

It's going to be a stressful and complicated time, more so AFTER the event.

Your gun is going out the door in police possession and if you intend to still defend your home then the long term plan needs to address it. That may be a quarterly discussion for some, but if it's getting buried in S&T then it's not being addressed to the larger forum population. Most of us buy guns for protection - there might be a few who wouldn't, that question was asked. Since most of us will, it's not getting discussed where the majority see it.

Since it's actually happening and does happen, it's a lot more fact based than some speculative scenario where the cops are going door to door confiscating them. Nope, they are right there IN YOUR HOME confiscating guns. As attested to by the posters above.

What started my thinking on this was a thread elsewhere and a discussion on the value of the gun to be used. It ranged from "use a cheap gun" to "it's a gun and it did its purpose, regardless of value." My concern is that if you do use it - kiss it goodbye for a long time. You still need a backup plan - which a lot of people admit on forums by addressing a second magazine, a second BUG, a trunk gun in the vehicle. If, in the worst case situation the police seize every gun they can expeditiously find in your home, will you be completely disarmed, or not?

How are you addressing that back up plan? Once again we are led to thinking about how to keep guns in the house that can be accessed after the incident. It's nice if the police don't take them, but can you absolutely guarantee that will continue to be the policy in the future?

I see residents of CA pondering that problem as we speak. NYC is already a defeat.
 
The question of rearming is dependent upon the laws of the state.
If charges are made I believe federal law prohibits purchase of firearms. We can listen to all the old cliches but one should have a clear understanding of how the law applies to their situation after a shooting.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
Lots of views and all are important.

Taliv is right, we don't talk about upgrading our home defenses - from the perspective of what you actually can do to the home itself. It's why I only indulge in noting that most discussions go directly to handling the complete failure to do anything at all and resorting to a firearm.

No.

Do not pretend that "fortifying" your residence means you won't have to use a firearm.

You can do all kinds of ambitious over the top stuff to fortify your home and you still might need to use a firearm. That doesn't mean what you did was a "complete failure".

On a gun forum the main topic tends to be guns, it's as simple as that.


I still don't see how there is anything more to your main point than "hide guns for after the police confiscate all of them"
 
It's been my experience in NYC that the arresting officer scratches his initials into the gun so that there is a chain of evidence, i.e., to show it's the same gun he confiscated at the time of the alleged crime. It then goes to the property clerks office where is is shrink wrapped into an evidence bag. Any ammo is bagged separately.

If you have other guns they will all be confiscated. Arrest to trial can sometimes take several years. After the case or trial ends, assuming you are found not guilty, the local district attorney will resist giving your guns back. No legal reason, just because it's an anti culture. After spending a fortune for a good attorney, you will probably have to expend additional funds for your attorney to make a written motion to get your legal property back. It will not be a priority to the judge and your motion may be pending for quite a while. During such time the police may "accidentally" dispose of your gun(s). They used to dump them offshore, now I think they have a contract with a hanger manufacturer, so they may be smelted down into wire for hangers.

Not pretty, but that's the way it is. Needless to say, it will be difficult to get whatever type of handgun license you may have had renewed, be it carry, premises, target, or hunting.
Nothing like legal <removed> making you a victim a second time - & doing it better than the criminal did the first time. What scum!
 
I don't see the issue. If you have concerns with being disarmed by an investigation, keep a spare gun in a safe deposit box.


But really, shooting someone in self defense is so unlikely, just how much effort are you going to make to "game" the aftermath? How many times do you expect to get hit by lightning?
 
My state is pretty gun friendly. Should I lose my carry piece to evidence and it kept me and mine safe, big deal. If I ever get it back, it'll probably go over the mantle with honor as the gun that saved my life.

If I don't get it back, I'll go buy a new one...how many people here wouldn't jump at the excuse to buy a new gun;)

If they raid my house (totally unlikely) and take ALL of my guns, I have a few courses of action:

1) The local DA is a customer of mine and very reasonable fellow. Maybe he could do something about it.

2) Get the spare from my office, unless they take that too.

3) Just buy a new gun to cover the bases of what I generally NEED a gun for (self defense, home protection, recreational target shooting). A boring ol' Glock would take care of that.

4) If buying one is out right against the law, I'm sure my 90 year old grandfather who is legally blind would probably loan me his .22 snubbie. Not my ideal, but it would be better than nothing.

5) Barring ALLLLL that, just hit up Cabelas and purchase a cap and ball .44. Ideal? Not at all, but if I were really concerned by my life, a piece of 150 year old tech beats nothing at all.

The long and short of it, I don't care what it costs me to protect my family. Money well spent.
 
I have a friend who's father in law was involved in a shooting, I think on an indian reservation, the federal courts were involved. I believe he was never charged, but I think I heard the pistol was in FBI lock up for around three years.
 
If anyone here knows what happens in California in such a case I would really appreciate same being posted.

This is an issue I have worried about, not least because we have the 10-day waiting period and if for example there were multiple BGs and some of them got away, one of those might get revenge ideas... but I thought, OK, I can just buy a second one to keep for a spare. But if the police take every single gun on your property, even one that was locked in a safe during the event, that changes things significantly.
 
I assume I will never get
Back the one back I used to defend myself. I have worried about other firearms being taken from my home and mitigated the risk. I'm sure all of us could easily come up with at least 10 ways to
Mitigate this risk. It's not that hard to do.
 
then the police may well search your home completely on the legal construct that other guns may have been used. They will be taken, too, and until it's forensically proven they weren't used in the incident and it covered up, held as evidence. And as evidence, case numbers are often inscribed into the metal on the flat surfaces, along with other annotations.

This is absurd.

First, you need to prove probable cause to get a warrant from a judge, not "maybe", especially after the smoking gun was collected on scene. A judge would laugh the asking officer out of his chambers. The unrelated gun is immaterial.

Second, on the dozens of firearms I've put into evidence, I've never inscribed a case number on the gun, and I've never seen that method before. The gun goes in a bag or in a box, and the case number is written on the bag or box, and an ATF form is attached. The gun will likely get processed for latent fingerprints and function tested. There is no reason to inscribe a case number on the finish.

The quoted stuff above is patently wrong.

Lastly, if *somehow* I lost a gun, even a $3000 Wilson Combat, in exchange for my life, then I'd be elated to be alive.

Right now, as you read this, several officers across the nation are making death notifications to next of kin for traffic accidents, overdoses, and umpteen other reasons. Life is fragile and precious. the average schmoe here cheats accidental death on the freeway daily, and we're worried about the boogy man engraving a case number on a gun?
 
http://www.dailypress.com/news/york-county/dp-nws-york-killing-20161004-story.html

"Deputies also confiscated 23 guns from the home. That included 17 handguns — 14 pistols and three revolvers — as well as four rifles, a shotgun and a "long gun," though court records didn't say which gun killed Di Fazio.

"You can't always take for granted that the one that seems most obvious is the one that was used," said sheriff's office spokesman Lt. Dennis Ivey. "That's why we took precautions to seize all of them.""
 
The lesson learned from the article above is that being suspected of being under the influence of drugs and/or alchohol and being charged with a second degree felony is NOT considered by authorities to be "a good shoot" (Post #1, first sentence in this thread).

From the article

Fogarty is charged with second-degree murder and using a gun in a felony in her husband's death. She is being held without bond.

When Fogarty was arrested, deputies said they thought she was under the influence of alcohol, saying they smelled alcohol and found "multiple empty alcoholic beverage containers" in the home, according to a search warrant affidavit in York-Poquoson Circuit Court.

When they later found several prescription bottles in the house, an investigator wrote that "based on the medications found ... Fogarty may have been under the influence of drugs as well."

Using a warrant, investigators drew two vials of Forgarty's blood to test for drugs and alcohol.

Among the various items seized from the couple's home were 17 empty "travel-size" bottles of liquor — Jim Beam whiskey, Bacardi rum, and Disarrono liqueur. Also confiscated were a half-full bottle of spiced rum, an empty prescription bottle of amphetamine salts and more than 30 other prescription bottles — some empty and some containing medication.

Deputies also confiscated 23 guns from the home. That included 17 handguns — 14 pistols and three revolvers — as well as four rifles, a shotgun and a "long gun," though court records didn't say which gun killed Di Fazio.
 
The lesson learned from the article above is that being suspected of being under the influence of drugs and/or alchohol and being charged with a second degree felony is NOT considered by authorities to be "a good shoot" (Post #1, first sentence in this thread).

From the article

Lawful use of lethal force in self defense is sometimes NOT considered by responding authorities to be "a good shoot". I Really hope we already know that lesson.

In fact, you probably know the name of a person who killed somebody in "a good shoot" who was charged with second degree murder. Every person reading this probably knows the same name, and it has surely happened ("a good shoot", charged with a serious crime such as second degree murder) to a hell of a lot of people...and plenty have probably been found guilty, too
 
Lawful use of lethal force in self defense is sometimes NOT considered by responding authorities to be "a good shoot". I Really hope we already know that lesson.

In fact, you probably know the name of a person who killed somebody in "a good shoot" who was charged with second degree murder. Every person reading this probably knows the same name, and it has surely happened ("a good shoot", charged with a serious crime such as second degree murder) to a hell of a lot of people...and plenty have probably been found guilty, too
I don't.
 

You don't what?

You've never heard of George Zimmerman? You know, the guy who was involved in "a good shoot" as determined by reasonable people as well as by a jury in a court of law, but was charged with second degree murder?

It is beyond ignorant to think that "a good shoot" (how do you define that, exactly, before authorities and/or juries have made that decision?) guarantees you won't be charged with a crime and all responding and acting authorities will just immediate recognize it as "a good shoot", pat you on the back, and send you on your way
 
Don't call me ignorant.


Zimmerman attacked and killed an unarmed child who was not involved in a crime. Being a gun owner doesn't make me so stupid that I don't think Zimmerman should have been tried AND found guilty.


Part of the responsibility of having a CCP is not going and looking for a fight that you'll have to use your gun for. If anything, carrying a gun and looking for altercations is 1st degree murder.

NOT a good shoot.
 
This is a good thread. It's true that there is a vast amount of people that plan very little for after using a weapon in a time of need.

I think living in a more gun friendly state is a good start. Obviously backing up your back up pistol is in order.

As long as I am in a defense situation involving my family the gun involved would be a tool and a gift to the local authorities if need be.
 
Don't call me ignorant.


Zimmerman attacked and killed an unarmed child who was not involved in a crime.

Uh, no, you must be thinking of something else

PS: A self defense shoot in which all evidence is examined by a jury who doesn't even come close to convicting of anything (and there was only a trial because of media lying and editing evidence and stirring up the sheep for ratings and appointing a special prosecutor because every sane person knew there was no crime) is "a good shoot". And yet, charged with 2nd degree murder. SOmetimes the wrong person attacks you and you are put through the wringer because of politics.
 
Uh, no, you must be thinking of something else

PS: A self defense shoot in which all evidence is examined by a jury who doesn't even come close to convicting of anything (and there was only a trial because of media lying and editing evidence and stirring up the sheep for ratings and appointing a special prosecutor because every sane person knew there was no crime) is "a good shoot". And yet, charged with 2nd degree murder. SOmetimes the wrong person attacks you and you are put through the wringer because of politics.
You seem confused about the difference between a 'preponderance of evidence' that demonstrates 'guilt beyond a reasonable doubt' and a "good shoot".

Zimmerman had a "not bad enough shoot to convict". He stalked, attacked and then killed a child resident of his own gated community. Nothing "good" about that.
 
The difference between shooting a victim, where the police later have to serve a search warrant for any and all guns, gun related items, accessories, and ammunition, including but not limited to a silver or gray handgun and brown holster described by witness, Jane Doe.

AND

Collecting a handgun from a scene where Jane Doe shoots an assailant, and stays on scene with the gun.

ARE very apparent.

In the latter scenario, no warrant will be issued. I've obtained countless search warrants. If Jane shoots someone and flees the scene, or conceals evidence, then I'm coming with a warrant. If Jane and the gun never leave the scene, then I can't get a warrant for unrelated guns.


George Zimmerman is NOT germane to this debate. He's a modern day Walter Mitty, who initiated and perpetuated a lethal force controntation while retaining the lethal force option soley in his possession. I fully support 2A, but not behavior such as Zimmerman's. Zim is no role model.


Finally, if cops were inscribing case numbers on guns, then there would be proof of it such as inscribed guns for sale at stores or on gun broker, and umpteen pictures on the internet. Proof would be abundantly easy to find, even with Bing.
 
You seem confused about the difference between a 'preponderance of evidence' that demonstrates 'guilt beyond a reasonable doubt' and a "good shoot".

Zimmerman had a "not bad enough shoot to convict". He stalked, attacked and then killed a child resident of his own gated community. Nothing "good" about that.

And you don't seem to understand what all of the available evidence indicates
 
And you don't seem to understand what all of the available evidence indicates
Zimmerman was on his phone, in his car and 2 minutes later the police arrived and Martin was dead.

How complicated can you make that?
 
Zimmerman was on his phone, in his car and 2 minutes later the police arrived and Martin was dead.

How complicated can you make that?

lol that's about 1% of the relevant info/evidence.

-

At any rate we are way off topic. IF there are any Zimmerman threads, perhaps find one and link it and we can go from there. If there aren't, that's probably a reason.

At any rate, this thread should get back on track.
 
Second, on the dozens of firearms I've put into evidence, I've never inscribed a case number on the gun, and I've never seen that method before. The gun goes in a bag or in a box, and the case number is written on the bag or box, and an ATF form is attached. The gun will likely get processed for latent fingerprints and function tested. There is no reason to inscribe a case number on the finish.

The quoted stuff above is patently wrong.

Took me a minute and a half to find an example.

29534283214_e72a25c0cc_o_d.jpg

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2012/jun/17/miller-dc-police-damage-soldiers-guns/

Luckily mine wasn't marked like that when it was in their custody although it did have a clump of metal wire that they used as a crude flag that scratched the crap out of it.

I've seen the practice of scratching/inscribing the case number or the officers initials or badge number into the metal before. Different police depts have different policies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top