Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« New Third Circuit case that might be headed for the Supremes | Main | After moving to Texas, Tesla announces new AR-15 »

LA destroys firearms collection, will wind up paying for it

Posted by David Hardy · 3 December 2020 11:56 AM

Opinion here. An example of what gun owners face in California. Huge gun collection seized, government concedes it had no reason to seize, owner fights for years to get it back, and government destroys collection anyway.

8 Comments | Leave a comment

Eldon W Dickens | December 3, 2020 1:41 PM | Reply

This also has happened with GCA '68, has it not?

tom | December 4, 2020 9:21 AM | Reply

"The LAPD voluntarily returned approximately eighty firearms, but kept the rest because, in its determination, plaintiff had not submitted sufficient proof that he owned them."

Seems to me that LAPD needs to prove plaintiff DOESN'T own the firearms.
Otherwise, government could seize ANY property a person possesses and keep it until they prove ownership.
Better start keeping all receipts, I guess.

Haz | December 4, 2020 9:40 AM | Reply

Exactly what Tom said above. I live in LA County, and the burden of proof falls upon the State (general term for government of any level) to prove guilt. If the defendant had possession of the property at the time of confiscation, then the State must assume by default that he/she is the owner of said property.

Eric | December 4, 2020 1:52 PM | Reply

Another good reason to greatly pare back or eliminate sovereign immunity.

Tim | December 6, 2020 7:02 AM | Reply

How many of these "destroyed" guns are actually in the private collections of LAPD officers?

Flight-ER-Doc | December 7, 2020 2:59 PM | Reply

And who believes that LAPD will pay anything like the true market value for these firearms?

Fyathyrio replied to comment from Flight-ER-Doc | December 7, 2020 5:39 PM | Reply

Well, the usual "buyback" payment is a sub $100 grocery gift card, so I guess he's got food for life coming?

KenM | December 10, 2020 3:21 PM | Reply

So I guess if LAPD were to confiscate a few thousand doses of meth from my house, they'd have to ask for proof that it was actually mine? Somehow I suspect that they were laughing their asses off when they came up with that "reason". I agree the "destroyed" guns will eventually reappear in some boss's collection.

Leave a comment