Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumNo charges filed on this "joker" yet. Should his guns be returned?
He was exercising his Constitutional Rights (1A) with his T Shirt which reads
GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, I DO"
Authorities have taken a man into custody who referred to himself as a joker and threatened to shoot people at his former workplace in Prince Georges County, investigators said Friday.
The investigators said that the man, identified in a warrant as Neil E. Prescott of Crofton, called Pitney Bowes this week and threatened to carry out a shooting there.
I am a joker. Im going to load my guns and blow everybody up, the man said over the phone to a man at Pitney Bowes, according to a warrant. He later called back and acknowledged that it was not smart to be making such threats over the phone, investigators said.
?uuid=MELSBtgSEeGR4e7WQ29tEw
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/crime-scene/post/maryland-police-may-have-thwarted-shooting/2012/07/27/gJQAC6AuDX_blog.html
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)Federal law; Gun Control Act of 1968.
TPaine7
(4,286 posts)Shame on you, spoiling things like that. Introducing facts and reality to an anti-gun thread just spoils things.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)I posted a legitimate question. I am not anti-gun and you know that. My only objection is to carrying guns in public, particularly concealed guns. I am curious as to who might support returning these weapons to the man if and when he is released without any felony charges.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)due process, but I'm guessing he won't be walking out with anything. If you support a right, like due process, you have to be consistent without exception. That doesn't mean you support him walking with the guns, It simply means you support a principal much larger than him. Otherwise, you would be giving up freedom for security to. Ben Franklin and all of that.
But I don't see it happening.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)and the DA decides there isn't a case worth pursuing, based on a phone call and a T shirt, it would be an infringement of his rights to hold on to his arsenal? We "have to be consistent without exception" even when he is obviously someone that nobody would want as a neighbor. Or am I being prejudicial? Of course I am. Shame on me, but sometimes I just can't help it.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)Falwell said porn is bad because it degrades sex and women
Flint said first amendment
I don't like either one, agreed with them both. Their arguments were not mutually exclusive
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)This dude not so much. It will be interesting to see if he is charged with anything. Feds could bust him for terrorist threats, which would probably be the best solution.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)"He has not yet been charged."
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)I could be mistaken about that. Please let me know if you learn otherwise.
Even if he makes bail, I don't believe the state has any obligation to return his property promptly.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)X_Digger
(18,585 posts)So yes, charges have been filed.
*sigh*
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)*sigh*
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)You don't take a person into custody on a search warrant.
"suspect arrested" -- what, you expect us to say he should have a gun in jail?!?
Swing and a miss.. again.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Do you understand so little about the justice system or didn't you bother to read past your own imagination? He is being held for a psychological evaluation. No charges yet.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)The officer (or more usually the SA) has to articulate probable cause, based on an affidavit, in front of a judge.
Derp.
If he is held via TRO (or that state's equivalent) and involuntarily committed for a period of more than 72 hours, that would *also* disqualify him.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Here, maybe this will help you understand
http://www.washingtonpost.com/r/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/07/27/Local/Graphics/search%20warrant.pdf
So far, no charges, just LE doing it's job. We'll see if they hold him for more than 72 hours.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)so they won't be going anywhere anytime soon. Don't you need a permit in Maryland?
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)Property can be seized, but to arrest a person, an arrest warrant has to be issued.
I honestly wonder how you think the justice system works.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Jenoch
(7,720 posts)an arrest warrant, not a search warrant.
I wonder if Maryland has a law in which a court can say if someone is deemed a danger to themselves or others they can keep the firearms until he is deemed to not be a danger to himself or others?
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)He is being held for a psych evaluation, which could well deem him sane. The DA may consider the evidence too flimsy for a prosecution and never charge him. Should his arsenal be returned to him in such a case?
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Innocent until proven guilty.
No mental health issue, no crime, no problem.
(Highly unlikely they will determine he has not mental health issues)
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)The phone calls?
The T shirt?
The arsenal?
The combination of any two of the above?
Would he have been arrested without at least two, especially the third?
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)You know, the actual crime, as alleged.
The 'arsenal'? ffffffffpt that ain't shit.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)He's been in custody the whole time.
"Neil Prescott, 28, has been hospitalized, receiving treatment and undergoing evaluations for possible mental health problems, since police took him into custody last week. "
That is involuntary evaluation. It's specified in state and federal statutes for permanent disqualification for firearms possession.
You know, like everyone told you on day 1 you posted this story.
He wasn't going to get his guns back yesterday, and he's not going to get them back tomorrow, charges or no (and everyone pretty much everyone predicted so.).
krispos42
(49,445 posts)slackmaster
(60,567 posts)...For my stepson. The man is HUGE!
krispos42
(49,445 posts)slackmaster
(60,567 posts)Missycim
(950 posts)I think he passed away not too long ago
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)Older than I thought.
Missycim
(950 posts)Sorry if I was mistaken.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)krispos42
(49,445 posts)I'm powerless.
Clames
(2,038 posts)It'll go well with that whine.
Kaleva
(36,384 posts)From the article:
"Authorities have taken a man into custody who referred to himself as a joker and threatened to shoot people at his former workplace in Prince Georges County, investigators said Friday."
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Hospital psych units are not jails. Try to take the question seriously please.
Kaleva
(36,384 posts)"No charges filed on this "joker" yet. Should his guns be returned?"
Few, if any, here would suggest that the man's guns be returned to him while he is in the psych unit.
Furthermore, the police are under no obligation to immediately return seized property upon request of the property owner. While the rules vary greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, one usually has to file a motion in court first in order to start the procedure to reclaim seized property. A judge could very well rule not to return the guns to the man if there are charges pending.
If the man is determined not to be a threat to himself or to others and the PA decides there isn't enough evidence to charge him with a crime, then he'll have the right to get his guns back in time.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I mean fucking really. How many times does it have to be explained.
I can't find a state that doesn't have a provision like this:
(2)(a) A person, whether an adult or juvenile, is guilty of the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the second degree, if the person does not qualify under subsection (1) of this section for the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree and the person owns, has in his or her possession, or has in his or her control any firearm:
(ii) After having previously been involuntarily committed for mental health treatment under RCW 71.05.240, 71.05.320, 71.34.740, 71.34.750, chapter 10.77 RCW, or equivalent statutes of another jurisdiction, unless his or her right to possess a firearm has been restored as provided in RCW 9.41.047;
Felony conviction not required. They stuck him in a mental health facility for more than a week, that's a state and federal disqualifier. He will be entered into NICS, and state patrol databases. If he's found with a firearm, he goes to jail.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Great system that let this freak acquire such an arsenal before realizing he was nuts. Oh right, they didn't figure it out till he forced them to.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)for him to possess any firearms at all.
That's how rights work in this country. You have them until you demonstrate you shouldn't via due process.
In the interim, people can be hurt, yes, but it took a long time before another nation surpassed our expansive set of rights for the individual. It's still a pretty good system, even if it could use a little updating.
petronius
(26,608 posts)then his private property should be returned and there would be no further justification to interfere with his rights, liberties, or privacy...
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Now, assuming that is what happens, would you hesitate moving in next door to him, based on what you now know?
petronius
(26,608 posts)But I doubt I'd go out of my way to socialize or associate with anyone who found that t-shirt funny; there's a good chance our personalities wouldn't mesh...
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)petronius
(26,608 posts)to a mindset that would allow major decisions to be influenced by something like your hypothetical...
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)I could not imagine wanting to live next to someone who is obsessed with guns, wears a T shirt bearing such a slogan and thinks it's OK to make death threats. The fact that he might skate because a DA may not feel he has enough to secure a conviction an thus further his career, has no bearing on my desire to have such neighbors. I understand there are people of his ilk all over this country and I find reassurance in my decision to not have to deal with them as neighbors a long time ago.
petronius
(26,608 posts)a DA. If you think there's enough information here to guide a life-decision that's great; personally I wouldn't base anything important on such nebulous worries...