Legalize Confiscation

Discussion in 'National Laws, Bills and Politics' started by johnski, May 11, 2016.

  1. johnski

    johnski Well-Known Member

    1,669
    35
    48

  2. CoffeeMate

    CoffeeMate Junior Butt Warmer

    46,427
    9
    0
    Looks as though simple firearm ownership is sufficient grounds for considering whether or not to issue a confiscation order. So is existence of a prior confiscation order.
     
  3. CoffeeMate

    CoffeeMate Junior Butt Warmer

    46,427
    9
    0
    So basically they knock on your door, throw a piece of paper at your feet, mutter "Served", then barge in and start swiping stuff.

    I wonder how long the Petitioner can delay the hearing?
     
  4. CoffeeMate

    CoffeeMate Junior Butt Warmer

    46,427
    9
    0
    It appears to also put a judge "on the spot" by requiring him/her to *explain* why they are denying the confiscation order.

    First of all, this thing isn't any sort of "protective order" at all. It's a special writ.

    Second, this thing requires the judge to explain the wrong thing.
     
  5. CoffeeMate

    CoffeeMate Junior Butt Warmer

    46,427
    9
    0
    It appears the petitioner (person trying to get the "protective order" issued) gets to decide who does the serving / confiscating too.
     
  6. CoffeeMate

    CoffeeMate Junior Butt Warmer

    46,427
    9
    0
    This must be the "due process" part... the person "being served" gets to submit a formal written request once per year asking for a hearing on it.

    Let's keep in mind that so far no conviction is required. Heck, I don't even think a trial or charges are needed.
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2016
  7. phaed

    phaed Active Member

    9,360
    2
    38
    i'm all for this, given one stipulation: the petitioner is the one who has to confiscate the weapons, on their own.