Let me start by saying that I know full well that some members of OSA likely hate Glenn Beck, but please put that aside if you respond.
A friend of mine watched a recent Glenn Beck show, and said that Beck has been suggesting that IF LEOs come to your home looking to collect your guns, you should not surrender them but have them arrest you. The more I thought on this, the more I was bothered by it. Here's why (and hopefully some LEOs and attorneys can shed some light on this). Here's a scenario:
Say you are just sitting down to dinner, and the doorbell rings. You go to the door and open it to find a number of LEOs who tell you that you must surrender your "illegal" guns or be arrested for possession of illegal firearms. Maybe they have a warrant or some other kind of legal document that gives them the authorization to do this. Naturally, you say that you have no intention of surrendering your legally owned guns to them, so you are arrested.
IF you are actually arrested for this charge, does your arrest constitute some form of probable cause, giving the LEOs justification to enter your home and seize all the guns that you have? I'm assuming that you would allow yourself to be arrested peacefully, because you don't want to get charged for resisting arrest.
Please correct me if I am wrong on this point, but don't the police take guns as evidence in a "crime" that somehow involves guns, and that even if you are found innocent, those guns are never returned to you? Or does that only happen when a gun is actually used in committing the crime in the first place? Or is there any difference?
So back to our scenario. The LEOs place you formally under arrest, you are handcuffed while your wife and kids watch, and no sooner do they escort you to the backseat of a patrol car when other LEOs enter your home without your consent, start searching and find your guns, which they then take as evidence.
Let's say the charges stick and you are charged. Bottom line: they have your guns and won't give them back. Let's say the charges don't stick and you are released. Bottom line: they have your guns and won't give them back. Think about it. The authorities could do this to everyone, and then drop all the charges (making sure that the press is nearby to take note of the compassionate, tolerant legal system), but they still have your guns.
Is this a plausible scenario? I'm no legal scholar, so I don't know if the parameters of probable cause would work in such a scenario.
A friend of mine watched a recent Glenn Beck show, and said that Beck has been suggesting that IF LEOs come to your home looking to collect your guns, you should not surrender them but have them arrest you. The more I thought on this, the more I was bothered by it. Here's why (and hopefully some LEOs and attorneys can shed some light on this). Here's a scenario:
Say you are just sitting down to dinner, and the doorbell rings. You go to the door and open it to find a number of LEOs who tell you that you must surrender your "illegal" guns or be arrested for possession of illegal firearms. Maybe they have a warrant or some other kind of legal document that gives them the authorization to do this. Naturally, you say that you have no intention of surrendering your legally owned guns to them, so you are arrested.
IF you are actually arrested for this charge, does your arrest constitute some form of probable cause, giving the LEOs justification to enter your home and seize all the guns that you have? I'm assuming that you would allow yourself to be arrested peacefully, because you don't want to get charged for resisting arrest.
Please correct me if I am wrong on this point, but don't the police take guns as evidence in a "crime" that somehow involves guns, and that even if you are found innocent, those guns are never returned to you? Or does that only happen when a gun is actually used in committing the crime in the first place? Or is there any difference?
So back to our scenario. The LEOs place you formally under arrest, you are handcuffed while your wife and kids watch, and no sooner do they escort you to the backseat of a patrol car when other LEOs enter your home without your consent, start searching and find your guns, which they then take as evidence.
Let's say the charges stick and you are charged. Bottom line: they have your guns and won't give them back. Let's say the charges don't stick and you are released. Bottom line: they have your guns and won't give them back. Think about it. The authorities could do this to everyone, and then drop all the charges (making sure that the press is nearby to take note of the compassionate, tolerant legal system), but they still have your guns.
Is this a plausible scenario? I'm no legal scholar, so I don't know if the parameters of probable cause would work in such a scenario.
