Buffalo Police Confiscate Registered Guns Of the Deceased

You are not hearing what I have said.Taking an arm to a gun dealer is the next in the chain of events.
The police could very well advise you but if they had a local program of running serial numbers, you relieve your self of much responsibility. . . As far as storage is concerned, as a Libertarean I am sure you may want to avoid the govt. as much as possible but all the way up the chain, from local to state to FBI, you will be aided, fully by advice if not direct aid through these agencies. Probating and security of firearms are ligitimate local, state and federal concerns. You do get that ALL unattended firearms are part of a police responsibility. Whether the firearm is left in the side of a road or left in an abandon home after death, it is a public safety issue., not one for a gun dealer first.

 

It may seem we are in disagreement but we are not. Once, I helped in the removal of firearms without the police because the deceased was a good friend and I knew what to do. Yes, I did final take the weapons to a gun dealer. But, I did check with the local police to see if they had any requirements themselves and I knew the executor was tired up with a lot of other items. So, we are not really in disagreement because these arms were never unattended or in danger of being that way.

 

Good response

 

The issue at hand is the continued implementation of more and more requirements that must be complied with in order for currently held, legally owned property to remain classified as legal, under threat of confiscation and destruction of said property, and loss of constitutional rights for noncompliance, even if said noncompliance was unintentional. Under what authority codified into the constitution is such nonsense regarded as acceptable?

 

The issue at hand is, fear mongers are hypocrites. The police in the article are doing what the representatives of the people of that city want. You know, the same people found in the constitution. The people of Buffalo are not trampling on the rights of those in Tucson. So, why should anyone else care ? It is a different state isn't it. How can they do it ? How about the tenth freak'n amendment.. Deal with it. All politics are local.
state law says that if the permit holder dies, [COLOR=#1B8EDE !important]the estate[/COLOR] has 15 days to dispose of the guns or turn them in to authorities, who can hold the weapons up to two years. LoHud.com reported that violation of the law by survivors is a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail and a fine.

 

Really? Which law did this fall under when it was voted for?

Yessir, just like the SAFE act that the People of New York demanded.

 

"state law says that if the permit holder dies, the estate has 15 days to dispose of the guns or turn them in to authorities, who can hold the weapons up to two years. LoHud.com reported that violation of the law by survivors is a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail and a fine."

Are you from NY.? This is the state law. You have a problem with it because you are a resident where ? What ever happened to states rights ?if you are going to believe part of the article, you can't pick and choose not to believe another.

 

States don't have rights, the people in the states have rights.

Policies that are enacted by city councils and bureaucrats are not the will of the people.

It matters because this is the United states of America, and it is our responsibility as US citizens to stamp out anything that infringes on the Constitution, and the BoR specifically.

 

It's none of your business. There are no federal laws that address unattended fire arms. The people of the state of NY elected the officials that made the law. Not only that, the people in the Town of Buffalo are free to voice their opinion. In case you forgot, we have elections. This does not infringe upon the constitution. This is typical of you dweebs. You are for states rights when it suits you and you want federal intervention when they have no authority. Where were you when the state of Michigan poisoned their citizens ?
Oh. They were poor people. They don 't count.

 

This is as much my country as it is anyone else. Last time I looked the 1A was still there, and it is certainly as much my business as it is yours.

What is typical of you dweebs is that you want to decide for everyone else what they should think, and what they should do. Your post is an excellent example of that.

The people of New York did elect some of these people who betray their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. It's obvious the people in this country are tired of the liberal agenda, so we'll just have to wait and see what happens I guess.

As far as Flint goes, I condemn the actions of the liberal city council that made the decision to poison it's residents. It's what they do: ban, confiscate, and infringe on our freedoms because they believe they have a Divine Right to decide what is best for everyone else.

I am for the freedom of every American to live their lives free from the tyranny of others who seek to interject themselves into every aspect of our lives "for our own good". I am for the right of every American to be innocent until proven guilty. I am for the right of every American to live however they wish as long as it does not interfere with the rights of others. I am for defending and protecting the Constitution from those who would rewrite it "for our own good".

I think you know what I would suggest you do with your "it's none of your business" opinion, and where you should place it.

 

If the requirements were truly burdensome then I could agree with you but simply obtaining a permit for a handgun? Obtaining a permit is not a burdensome requirement.

By analogy I obtained a CCW in Washington and all it required was going to the local Sheriffs office, filling out a form, being fingerprinted, paying a small fee, and four (business) days later they called me and I went in and picked up that permit. I've since moved to Arizona and while concealed carry doesn't require a license you can still obtain one. All I need to do is file out a form, get fingerprinted, and send in a copy of my WA CCW with $60 and they'll mail me my Arizona CCW.

These are not burdensome requirements. I'm not sure of what's required in Buffalo to obtain a permit for a handgun but it's not going to be any harder than obtaining a CCW in WA or AZ.

 

"What is typical of you dweebs is that you want to decide for everyone else what they should think, and what they should do. Your post is an excellent example of that. "

Exactly, the one true statement. Just because you don't like a gun law and STATE regulation in another state, you want to take a free people of another state and deny them through the election process guranteed them by the constitution and the tenth amendment, their God given right to choose to be govenered in the way they see fit.

How many people from New York have partitioned for help from you ? How many of them have threatened to succeed from the union because their rights have been infringed ? Maybe, having a well regulated Malitia, because cops do live in and around the community themselves, picking up unattended guns left lying around for up to 2 weeks is what they prefer.

Why don't you practice what you preach, parade down to the streets of Buffalo, and sit in front of their police station, armed to the hilt and demonstrate for them on behalf of these poor unfortunate people and see if they appreciate your support see if, when you get arrested for illegal demonstration in violation of their gun laws if they cheer you or the local police they have empowered to protect themselves from guys like you. Bring a jacket with you, it's pretty f'n cold up there.

Don't be a hypocrite, go there. The last thing a NY er wants after the central govt. telling them what to do, is a nincompoop from another state telling them what to do and how to think.
That's you.

 

I'm not denying anyone anything, they're free to elect anyone they want of course. You already tried to suggest they voted directly for the measure and had to retreat on that one, now this.

Just because someone is elected doesn't mean they won't betray or lie to the people who did elect them. Our government now has that at it's highest level. Did someone elect you as the Guardian of New York or something?

While I appreciate your attempts to promote people to choose loss of their Constitutional rights, the will of the people has been quite obvious, particularly during the passage of the SAFE act.

Other than that I'll do what I want, and say what I want, and I really don't give a damn what you think. I'm sure people not falling in line with the protectionist culture and not wanting to worship a police state really gives you a headache but you'll just have to deal with it I guess.

I'm promoting people living how they want, you're the one championing a police state. Projection. That's you.

 

Uh, inheritance does not automagically make the law null and void. If one is a convicted felon it is already illegal for them to own a firearm and thus would not be allowed to take possession of the firearm by any competent probate judge or lawyer responsible for executing the will.

 

"I'm not denying anyone anything, they're free to elect anyone they want of course. You already tried to suggest they voted directly for the measure and had to retreat on that one, now this."

Show me the quote instead of "suggesting" anything to make your self not look like you are on the wrong side of this debate. Elected officials make laws and regulations. In most states that I am aware of, there is a referendum process if the citizens feel the law should be changed and the immediate election process is too far away or not appropriate to the situation. Check all your statements. You want to make outlandish, anti state's right suggestions, that's your problem and your right to be equally wrong. Just own up to it when you do. Now you call a local police force a "police state". You obviously don't know how competent law enforcement works in a big city where decades ago, training was instituted for all cities comencerate with FBI protocols. City police don't do things on the spur of the moment . They do what the mayor, city manager or town council wants or supports. These are elected officials and city police don't work in a vaccume. You obviously don't have a clue how law inforcement in general works in response to the electorate. They work at the request of the citizens of the city or they don't work at all. If they make a mistake in what they feel the citizens want, things change very quickly. Chief's lose their jobs and majors resign and officers get suspended.

You need to go to your local town law enforcement and see if they have a citizen ride program. A few do to educate people how they enforce laws. You could just talk with your town police chief. But no, it would not fit your narrative that anyone in uniform except the ill fitting one you get from your surplus store, knows what they are doing.

 

The point is that I don't need to be permitted for a natural right to self defense. The only permit I should have to worry about is whether I permit an intruder to leave my property alive.

 

Yes the cities of America do exactly what their residents want. Sure they do, which is why those cities get slapped down because their citizens take them to court. DC, Chicago, the list goes on.

Bureaucrats and elected officials operate on their own agendas. You don't have to look any further than the current POTUS to see how that worked out.

Stop the ridiculous assertions that we elect a bunch of people and they go about with our best interests at heart. They don't and haven't for a long time. Running for office is now about personal benefit, not civic responsibility.

Stop acting like these police officers are doing a service. First of all, 15 days after someone's death is a ridiculous time period. Secondly, it's not like some video game where someone dies and they burst like a cartoon piñata and guns are littered in a 5 mile radius. These guns are locked up in the same homes, surrounded by the same people, for the last 20+ years. There is no immediate need to save the family members from all these guns that might escape from the safe they're in.

Additionally they're not even following the law when they do it, often showing up prior to the 15 days, and then taking ALL the firearms, not just the handguns which are the only ones authorized to be taken.

In short, give me a break from the "halos over their head" version of how they operate, and lets stick to reality.

 

That is your opinion based solely on facts you are familiar with in your own experience. As such you will be made aware of facts that are outside of your pool of information.

http://newyorkcityguns.com/getting-a-nyc-handgun-permit/

Do explain how the above does not qualify as burdensome to the average individual who wishes to exercise their constitutional rights. Explain how none of this could legally be construed as harassment, or an attempt at discouraging others from exercising their rights.

 

Then you are saying that the only reason the predominantly black populations of locations like the city of Ferguson in Missouri are regularly assaulted and harassed by police officers, is because they wish to be subject to such?

 

You do not need a lawyer, you file a writ to recover property.
Also, a trust is a great way to make sure The right people get your guns after you die, lots of people get trusts to own class lll equipment , a trust covers regular firearms too.

 

Let me ask a question. Have the above requirements been challenged and adjudicated by a court of law? If so, and they're still in place, then the courts did not consider the requirements burdensome or in violation of the 2nd Amendment. You might but if the courts didn't we need to remember that only the court's opinion matters.

 

Because the courts have never gotten something wrong, ever.

 

Insist they end the drug war before going after guns.

- - - Updated - - -

I advocate for ending the drug war first, before any more delegation of police power to our elected representatives.

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe you are being, too "patriotic". Why not make like the wealthiest and simply move to where the laws are more to your liking?

 

Man, you are completly opposite what you propose to accept. You are opposed to a free people choosing to live a way that varies from your ideals. That is call fascism, not democracy and free will. I accept the nation of laws which give me freedom from oppression and you see all laws as oppression. You talk like a fool who really doesn't get that regulation and good governance by elected officials is the cornerstone of freedom.

The exception is typical. Govt. is good, if it's your govt. I am a much better advocate for personal freedom and states rights in this debate that has gone on way too long.with a you, a Neanderthal. Have a good day.....

 

The drug war is tied to illegal gun trade. Drugs are routinely traded by criminals accross stare lines to gain access to guns because they, criminals, can't buy them themselves. It is causing drug use in epidemic proportions among white middle class people's who are buying guns as straw buyers and trading them for drugs. Straw buying of guns is the biggest conduit for the drug trade. The gun makers know it. They are happy to support what is going on. It's just a business decision to them. . As long as the gun makers can keep the conversation on foolish irrelavant details, they can continue to make guns for kids, criminals and lunatics.

And some like you continue to rail against the police while vowing to stop drug trafficking. Yah, who is going to do it ? Dah .