Story of Confiscation on neighbor's word.

[HiBC]

I do not know if this belongs here or in Legal.I picked one!

The story connected to the link condenses to:

Two neighbors were not on the best of terms due to neighbor "A" objecting to neighbor "B" parking commercial equipt in the residential cul de sac.
Neighbor "A" was able to get a a ruling that it was unlawful for neighbor "B" to park his equiptment there.

Neighbor "B" violated the ruling.He parked the equiptment anyway.There are issues about lawn chemical smells,etc.
Neighbor "A" calls in a complaint.

Neighbor "B" makes the claim neighbor "A" threatened him.(Neighbor "A" denies this is true)

On the word of neighbor "B",a court order is written by a judge,the police come and sieze 28 firearms,and neighbor "A" is prohibited from purchasing or possessing for a year.

I understand there are two sides to every story.It seems a wrong to me that via the unconfirmed testimony of one individual,a man could have his firearms seized.It also suggests a level of civility when involved in a neighborhood dispute.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...re-confiscated-and-he-still-cant-believe-why/
Here is the link

 

[Evan Thomas]

Moved to L&CR.

 

[rickyrick]

People always find a way to get even.

You usually have to ignor neighbors

You never know what is in people's minds or what they are capable of.

It's easy to get guns confiscated.. Easier than getting your neighbor to quit parking his dump truck on the street....

You may not like the neighbors broken down kiddie pool and beer cans in his yard... You just have to look the other way.

Annoying neighbor disputes turn ugly.

The person willing to lie will most likely win

Some people forget that humans are animals, we've voluntarily adopted a society to maintain order. Not everyone thinks the same. Some are gonna do as they wish and the more it annoys you, the more fuel you add. Push someone they push back.

When dealing with others, don't start a battle that you can't afford to loose, or if you have something that you don't want to loose.
In reality you're dealing with a biological being, the outcome cannot be predicted, no matter how right you are.

If you wanna start a legal battle over a dump truck, be prepared to loose something you don't want to. Some people will do anything to "win"

 

[psalm7]

I had a neighbor video tape me shooting last week , I had a despute 25 years ago with her Brother . Me and him came to a agreement years ago but she cant let it go . Her footage will come to nothing so I am ignoring it . But it shows she wants to stirr up old trouble .

As to the OP , I guess if there is resonable suspicion then guilty or not life can become uncomfortable .

 

[teeroux]

It seems a wrong to me that via the unconfirmed testimony of one individual,a man could have his firearms seized.It also suggests a level of civility when involved in a neighborhood dispute.

I know in my state you can make an claim to a judge for just about anything civil and say there were threats or other harm to receive a temporary restraining order, TRO. Yes the police can confiscate weapons as a condition of the TRO. Its a civil court issue when you are served the TRO you and the plaintiff are given a court date. The plaintiff has to show cause and evidence for the TRO to remain in effect or become permanent as well as bring up what ever other civil issue they claim. You will have the chance to say and show why it should not remain in effect and make you case in what ever other civil claims against you. I suggest hiring a lawyer in these cases.

 

[stephen426]

Is there an appeals process? What happens to the confiscated weapons? Are they returned after the year? I find it hard to believe that there is NO DUE PROCESS in this whole thing. The biggest problem is that we do NOT know whether or not a threat was actually made.

I must admit I would be pretty annoyed if a business owner parked commercial vehicles on the street, especially if it emits strong chemical smells. I would just call the police every time I saw a commercial vehicle parked there and have them ticket him.

 

[geetarman]

I do not know it for fact, but I would bet there is a LOT more to this story than we have been told.

 

[rickyrick]

No due process is pretty common.

The slope we are on. People on this forum often view things from the second amendment perspective but in all aspects, rights are circumvented. We say we can own guns no matter what others think. But a gun owner thinks it ok to limit another's right to park on a street or his perceived right to park on the street.

 

[Strafer Gott]

This probably should have been a zoning issue. If you smell chemicals, air quality should be notified. Taking matters into your own hands is often ill-conceived.

 

[Dreaming100Straight]

It is hard tnoot o believe that a lot has been left out. It is possible that guns are seized without notice and a prior right to be heard, but then I suspect the owner is given an opportunity to appear in court and contest the seizure.

 

[ATN082268]

Although there are a number of issues, did the man admit to the police he had 28 firearms before they confiscated them? He could have just as easily said, what firearms?

 

[Evan Thomas]

Although there are a number of issues, did the man admit to the police he had 28 firearms before they confiscated them? He could have just as easily said, what firearms?

And if the neighbor had already told them he had firearms, they might have arrested him for lying to the police... which is a crime in itself. Not the best plan.

 

[rickyrick]

The story as told, gives me the impression that one of the parties involved is more honest than the other.

 

[Frank Ettin]

In my experience The Blaze is not a particularly reliable or impartial source, and there is probably relevant information missing. And as far as the question of due process goes, the article is pretty vague about the actual process that was followed to get the initial protective order.

For example, it's not clear whether Bailey got himself a lawyer and made the most of available opportunities to challenge the application for a protective order. Due process requires that he be able to contest his neighbor's claims, but it doesn't guarantee that he will be successful at doing so.

 

[teeroux]

^^ This. We also don't know if any evidence would have been presented as well to have the protective order issued. One slip of the mouth about getting a gun during an argument with a neighbor recorded on cell phone would get you into a lot of trouble.

 

[thallub]

Blaze is not a good source of information. Blaze will take liberty with the facts and omit facts when it suits their fancy.

"Disabled Navy Vet Left Devastated" is a tear jerker headline designed to infuriate gunowners.

i found two other articles about this alledged incident, both referenced the Blaze article.

 

[ATN082268]

And if the neighbor had already told them he had firearms, they might have arrested him for lying to the police... which is a crime in itself. Not the best plan.

A troublesome neighbor can tell police anything they want to but their word is not automatically more valid than their neighbor's. Even if the police decide to arrest someone based on the word of a neighbor despite past, recent troubles with the other neighbor and ransack a person's house looking for guns, they still have to find them

 

[Evan Thomas]

Even if the police decide to arrest someone based on the word of a neighbor despite past, recent troubles with the other neighbor and ransack a person's house looking for guns, they still have to find them

If the police have a valid court order requiring someone to give up their guns, that person is breaking the law if they fail to do so. I get that this is an emotional issue for us, but it's an irresponsible fantasy to think that "hiding the guns," lying to the police, and such, are a good idea in the real world. (Hint: at TFL, we don't advocate breaking the law.)

 

[rickyrick]

The thing about neighbors is; you leave them alone, they leave you alone.

If it doesn't cross your property line, live and let live.

Some people appoint themselves the cul de sac commander, it usually ends up bad when they mess with the wrong person.

I've know of, and read many more stories about bad things happening to people who try to poke their noses into others goings on.

You have to think about what your pet peeve is worth...
If it's worth a neighbor making a false claim against you and now you loose your guns... Go ahead, sue over the dump truck.
Now he has to fight a legal battle and pay for it.

I'm not taking any sides... I just know how people work... You don't push buttons on a person, the result may be unexpected.... You may loose a lot more than you're fighting for. A lot of people fight dirty

 

[Skans]

If I chose and paid to live in a neighborhood that doesn't permit parking commercial vehicles on the street or in driveways, I'm going to make a stink about it. Not to the neighbor (I don't confront neighbors about anything), just to code enforcement. No, I'm not going to worry about police confiscating anything from me. My house, and its value, is worth a lot more to me than any fears I might have about losing a gun.

On the gun confiscation issue - yes, someone might be able to get a temporary restraining order against you on a false accusation. But at some point (if you decide to pursue it and not ignore it) you will get your day in court, and it will be the accuser's burden to prove what he claimed. If you do nothing, then I suppose the confiscation and restraining order will stand.