Military weapons seized

[PatriotnMore]

Just think, this is in the land of the free and home of the brave. I would like to fire the idiot LE official who said AR15's, Mini 14, and body armor cannot be owned after discharge from the service, and the reporter who did not bother to fact check before spewing more bad information.

In addition, if anyone should have been kicked out of the residence it should have been his two timing wife, and loser boyfriend. This guy gives us his all, and this is the best we can treat him? Shame on everyone involved.

[Cali-Shooter]

Was there an edit of the article? It says stolen military weapons now, and I don't remember that earlier. Perhaps that turns out to be true and the reporter just failed on weapons ID.

When I read it yesterday it said nothing about any of the weapons being stolen.

Yes, the article yesterday made no mention of "stolen" military weapons. Perhaps the idiot reporter is trying to cover her tracks in making it seem like the weapons the soldier in question had were not illegal to own because of his discharge (it could be a non-dishonorable one, in which case he could still own guns and armor), but make it seem like the weapons in question are illegal for him to possess because they are "stolen."

The comedic part about all this, is that that doesn't change what the weapons in question are: an AR-15 and a mini-14, which are not military to begin with, thus they can't be stolen from the military, because those are civilian weapons that any citizen can buy from most gun stores even here in the PRK, the army does NOT issue AR-15's or mini-14's, the army issues M-16's, the selective fire version. What a moronic fool of a reporter.

[Sniper3142]

More bad and incorrect reporting by the idiots in the media.

However, I do love most of the responses so far.

[Fiveohmike]

I just threw in my .02 cents into the comments... idiot reporter

[Cali-Shooter]

1. There is not enough karma in the world for the "wife" if you wanna call her that or the BF.

2. "Beatriz E. Valenzuela, Daily Press, Victorville, Calif." you are a disgrace to the literary/journalism field, you failed to do the one job you were supposed to do (state the facts - report the findings). The article is so vague that its barely news worthy. I'm sure the Sgt. wasn't very forthcoming with info as it is a pending investigation and they're probably unsure of their case.

3."o u t a n d wh e n t h ey" don't even know what to say about this other than stay in junior college another 8 years. I think you meant "out and when they" PROOF READ.

4. I think some calgunners should educate this idiot for lack of a better word BValenzuela@VVDailyPress.com (her email address is public domain, as its posted on her other articles which are gems by the way)

Thanks for the info. The following email has been sent to "educate" her:

Mrs. Valenzuela,

You are gravely mistaken in your article http://www.rr.com/news/topic/article...apons_seized/1 about the "Military Weapons Seizure."
The weapons mentioned in the article are NOT military weapons, they are typical civilian semi-automatic rifles that are legal to buy and own for all citizens, even here in California.
As you can see, you are bringing negative attention towards your newspaper agency, and you are making yourself and your company look like a bad joke.
If you aspire to be a professional journalist of any kind, then writing pieces of crap articles that throw out the facts like this are not a good start, quite honestly.
Do your research better next time, instead of playing into the hands of sensationalist media at the cost of integrity and pissing off the reader base by publishing stupidity on an epic scale.

Regards,

A California Citizen

[Untamed1972]

Depending on the configuration of both rifles if they were in fact "AWs", then perhaps if the guy had them registered on a MAWP, could what the officials have meant was that "now that he is out of the military his MAWP is no longer valid, making him now in posession of Un-RAWs."

Just a thought.

[Cali-Shooter]

A reply

Just got a email response from the journalist herself:

[famas619]

This stroy has more holes in it than a piece of swiss cheese. They would not have discharged him with a weapon missing from the armory. . . lol if only it was that easy. . . The sheriff is full of donuts it seems. . . .

[Fiveohmike]

Well if that email from Beatriz is correct, maybe he stole a bunch of magazines? Who knows, its still fishy.

[rromeo]

Even if he's being charged for stolen mags, the reporting is terrible. Magazines aren't weapons.

[TheSteelCollector]

shes acting like were supposed to know things that her half-assed article conveniently left out.


"They added he also had standard capacity magazines at the home. That was not first given to me, but they did say they were all obviously military grade."

nothing in her article lends anything to be obvious as it took an email to get even this info. second "military grade", could she be anymore vague.

[Matt C]

Just got a email response from the journalist herself:

What a retarded **tch.

[TheSteelCollector]

i really hope she doesn't write a follow up article as this one was tough enough for her.
post 13 about sums it up.

[OC-Indian]

Typical non-fact checked liberal blow hard article. Either the "official" is a moron or simply lying to CYA the arresting officers. As per typical CYA procedures, it will take a few months for the bogus charges to be dropped and a year or so for the firearms to be returned from the rightful owner. If I was Paul, I'd sue the Sheriffs department for false arrest, and Beatriz and the Daily Press for slander and defamation of character.

[BillCA]

The real questions that need to be answered are;
- What stolen US Gov't miilitary property is he accused of possessing?
- Exactly what weapons were seized? The AR-15 is not a government gun.
- The Mini-14 is a civilian semi-automatic rifle, never issued by the military.

Important facts for the reporter:
- In order to be discharged, soliders must return all issued firearms.
- Most soldiers at U.S. bases turn in their weapons to the armory upon arrival.
- Magazines that hold more than 10 rounds are not banned in California.
- Mere possession of 20, 30 round AR-15 & M-16 magazines is not illegal.
- Many "military grade" magazines for the AR/M-16 rifle are easily available to the public especially in other states.
- There is no prohibition on honorably discharged soliders from owning civilian weapons (like the Mini-14 or AR-15) after separation from the military.
- California law limits the features on an AR-15, but not all AR-15 rifles are illegal.

There are too many questions unanswered in this story. Hopefully the reporter will ask some new questions and write a clarifying article.