« Getting squishy.... | Main | Brian Terry Memorial Act »
D.C. holding onto serviceman's guns
The Washington Times has the story. While transporting his guns interstate (and thus likely within the protections of the Firearm Owners' Protection Act), he stopped at Walter Reed, inside DC. The story says he plead to a misdemeanor that was later dismissed, which sounds like pretrial diversion. But DC refuses to return his guns.
7 Comments | Leave a comment
Isn't it against Federal law for local authorities to seize federal weapons from Federal troops, particularly when said troops are in transit.
They're not Federal weapons, they're personally owned weapons the officer was lawfully transporting from one state where he could own them to another state where he could own them in the course of a military permanent change of station move after having been wounded in action.
The problem is that by stopping at Walter Reed for a doctor's appointment he lost the protection of FOPA - that was not an "incidental" stop like getting gas or a meal or even an overnight rest.
That being said, I do not see what legislation they are using to confiscate all his firearms. Having worked the original multiple felony charges down to one misdemeanor, they should be limited to the penalty(ies) permitted for that level of offense.
stay safe.
Playing devil’s advocate here for a moment, serviceman or not, he was transporting unregistered, and, therefore, weapons illegal to possess in DC.
Ummm. If he was on active-duty, and had an appointment at a Military Medical Treatment Facility, then it could be argued that he was ordered to appear, enroute on his permanent change of station (which necessarily means with his personal possessions, the military specifically discourages shipment of firearms in household goods). I think that might be a case where FOPA would still protect, or if not FOPA then something in Title X.
The problem is that by stopping at Walter Reed for a doctor's appointment he lost the protection of FOPA - that was not an "incidental" stop like getting gas or a meal or even an overnight rest.
I don't think that's correct: He was actually in transit when he was stopped, not at Walter Reed. FOPA wouldn't have protected him while he was at Walter Reed, because it wasn't incidental to the trip, but once he continued on his journey, he would be protected by it because he was once again actually traveling.
Total B.S., Dam this pisses me off. What happened the last time there was a story of...somebody...trying to confiscation arms?