DOJ APPS agents seize 500+ guns from Clovis resident

[BAJ475]

500+ guns seized

Not really seeing the problem here. The guy was placed on a "mental hold" against his will by either police or medical professionals, therefore, he is a PROHIBITED" person, period. What's the beef?? You really want crazy people to have firearms???

NO! But a determination by police or doctors is not the same as a trial where your have to right to confront and cross-examine your accusers and produce your own evidence. Besides, I am totally opposed to the Govt. taking his property without paying for it, especially when there appears to be no evidence that he harmed or threatened anyone. Assuming for sake of argument that he is mentally ill to the point that it is unsafe for him to possess firearms (a point that I do not see has been proven), how does that justify the taking of his property with paying for it? While I do not want mentally ill people carrying firearms, how is punishing them by taking there property fair or just?

[leadchucker]

Returning to your statement, the entire point of being individually armed is that you can defend yourself. Every individual should be free to protect themselves. Why should a person, who isn't committing a crime, be denied the right to preserve their life?

Exactly. Unless this man has violated another individual's right, why are his being violated?

[Librarian]

NO! But a determination by police or doctors is not the same as a trial where your have to right to confront and cross-examine your accusers and produce your own evidence. Besides, I am totally opposed to the Govt. taking his property without paying for it, especially when there appears to be no evidence that he harmed or threatened anyone. Assuming for sake of argument that he is mentally ill to the point that it is unsafe for him to possess firearms (a point that I do not see has been proven), how does that justify the taking of his property with paying for it? While I do not want mentally ill people carrying firearms, how is punishing them by taking there property fair or just?

Your argument is with the Legislature.

RickD247 posted the relevant part of WIC 8103.

Most folks who get that 5-year or lifetime ban are clearly informed of that, and of what they must do. (It seems occasionally such clear notification is missed or misunderstood, but that is another reason to have a lawyer.)

Failure to do what is allowed/required is, by law, a crime. No compensation is required for seizing things that are illegal for that person to have.

Since the story so far is missing a number of Significant Events, how all this applies to the person in the news report I cannot say.

[Shoot-it]

if a judge ordered him to sell them it seems he had some sort of due process concerning his mental state

if he went in for evaluation 3 times in one month, maybe we need to find out a little bit more about what that is all about

guy could be going through a really bad period, hard to say

I know Albert I went wild hog hunting with him once.He is a really nice guy he talked about his family and about his gun collection I knew it was vast.He could afford them and had his ffl so he collected them.I do not know how he got the mental hold but I knew about it months ago.
I asked him if he was ever on calguns and he said he is so he might be a member.

[bjungx007]

Can I has one?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[stix213]

This gives me a headache


The above mentioned headache by no means indicates any mental illness or tumors that may or may not cause violence by me now or in the future..The pain from said headache is completely manageable and in no way will cause me to become infuriated or lash out at any person.I hereby declare that if above mentioned headache persists for more than 48 hours that I will seek medical attention

Your disclaimer says to me your trip to the hospital is going to be.... involuntary.

[ke6guj]

hmm, article I read on my phone said that the firearms were locked in a safe and that he voluntarily sought treatment. two sides to every story with truth usually in the middle somewhere...

[nedro]

I don't know maybe im in the minority here but this guy was on a 5150 3 times in less than a year. Had more than 6 months to transfer these guns out of his name. As an FFL he knew he was prohibited. And if the press release was accurate these guns were not really secured that well.

I'm not seeing a problem here. He had to know this was coming at some point. He should have transferred the guns that he could to his son and sold off the rest, but than again we're talking about a guy who was put on three 5150 holds in less than a year so maybe he couldn't comprehend the situation. Which would be all the more reason for him to be prohibited.

The real question here is, What was his Calguns username?

That would be two of us. If he's to far gone to see that he had time to sell them, go through whatever he's dealing with, then start reacquiring them, He's too far gone to be left alone with that arsenal.

[nedro]

hmm, article I read on my phone said that the firearms were locked in a safe and that he voluntarily sought treatment. two sides to every story with truth usually in the middle somewhere...

Guess what? They weren't locked to him. Kind of the point, isn't it?

[easyPZ]

That's racist

Showing off the evil blacks for the press conference.

The classic rifles are hidden away

I noticed that too. All the "assault" rifles to the front. All the sporters in the back.

[FresnoRob]

More of his side of the story:

http://abc30.com/news/clovis-man-claims-doj-wrongfully-seized-541-guns-from-his-home/1092399/

[ke6guj]

More of his side of the story:
http://abc30.com/news/clovis-man-cla...-home/1092399/

that was the article I saw when I was browsing on my phone,
thanks for posting the link.

[ke6guj]

Agents say Sheakalee was once a federal arms dealer, but he lost his license last year. And this year, he lost his right to own any firearms after he was institutionalized three times in June. "Obviously when a person is admitted into a hospital for a mental health hold it's because he's believed to be a danger to himself or to the public," Haroldsen said.
...
In this case, they say Sheakalee still had about 150 registered in his name five months after he was ordered to give them up.

If accurate - and might be, since it seems he did start getting rid of some - the application of existing law really isn't that controversial (the existence of the WIC 5150 law might be).

as of today, ATF EZ-check still shows him having a valid FFL.

[JDay]

as of today, ATF EZ-check still shows him having a valid FFL.

In that case I'd have to say the DOJ is full of you know what.

[RickD427]

In that case I'd have to say the DOJ is full of you know what.

JDay,

Please keep in mind that the 5150 based firearms prohibition is under California state law only.

FFL's are issued under provisions of federal law. A 5150 commitment does not produce a firearms disability under federal law.