Originally Posted by CitaDeL
This has already been covered to some extent with the mention of 'qualified immunity'. Basically, if a public servant makes a mistake, they can say 'oops' and still keep their job. What is more likely to happen is that a settlement would be reached and the city would be required to provide training in what is and what isnt an assault weapon, which is the problem Arcata PD seems to have.
I have not noticed anything stated about the actual reason the rifle was seized. It seems to be implied, or understood, but where is the actual reason?