October 1, 1999, Hartford Courant. Thought everyone would like this. (the below is not a direct quote, just a summary)

Connecticut has passed a law that allows confiscation of firearms if police believe someone will commit a crime. This could be based on the the testimony of two people. The police can get a search and seizure warrant. The guns have to be returned in 14 days if a prosecuter cannot prove that the individual in question is a threat or has abused animals.

In the first case of this new law, the Hartford Courant started an article with Police found the assault rifle with a clip full of 30 bullets under the bed..and more than enough ammo for a fiery last stand was scattered around the house 50 weapons were confiscated in a raid in a usually quiet cul-de-sac FYI, Farmington, CT is an upper middle-class to very affluent area, mostly the latter. Walczyk described himself as a lifetime NRA member, father of 4, who owns over 50 firearms, all legally registered. He claims the police have lied about him to a judge. The paper reported that he had 2 other run-ins with the law- 10 years ago when he shot a cat, and another time when someone followed him home after a highway confrontation, and Walczyk brandished a firearm. The cat resulted in a fine and no charges were filed in the other one. In another instance he had an armed confrontation with the developer, but Walczyk claims he called the police first to notify them of the dispute.

The dispute arose between Walczyk and a local land developer, when the land developer allegedly trespassed on his property repeatedly while clearing land for a new development. A statement regarding a bloodbath Walczyk says was taken out of context, and the developer went to the police. The police also confiscated Walczyks fathers guns from across the street, even though his father was not involved in the dispute.

The Hartford Courant published a list of 12 of the 50 guns confiscated. The Courant listed mostly assault rifles, along with the amount of ammunition discovered. Walczyk maintains that he keeped firearms for hunting and protections and has never threatened anyone.

Privacy advocates fear that in the event of a warrant for firearm confiscation without a chargable crime, a search could be made in the rest of the house without reason.

-- Gordon Kaminski (Gorda@snet.net), October 01, 1999

Answers

If Y2K is not a 9 or 10, the only hope for freedom is a massive "Henry Bowman" type scenerio as outlined in the book "Unintended Consequences" by John Ross
. (For reviews, use search box at http://www.amazon.com)

-- A (A@AisA.com), October 01, 1999.

Otherwise, learn to say "Yassuh, massa, suh" with conviction, as you KNOW you will be niggers (regardless of race) on the government plantation.

-- A (A@AisA.com), October 01, 1999.

And somewhere in L.A. a school custodial worker was arrested after it was discovered he had a personal stash of "80 assault weapons" which if you look at the picture in the LA times consisted of 80 long guns, some of which appear to be quite ordinary rifles. Allegedly some of them were "fully automatic". I wont mention how much ammo the guy had, it's irrelevant.

Now if the TV news folks could just elaborate on exactly what this man's crime was I'd be just pleased as punch. Apparently this was left out of the story.

Guns have been criminalized, but we let teenage boys buy as many computers as they want. (especially gory shoot-em-up video games)

-- Otay (spanky@lilrsacles.com), October 02, 1999.

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."--1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 (C. J. Boyd, Ed., 1950).

-- x (x@x.mil), October 02, 1999.

Otay:

I heard that the individual whose guns were confiscated was being investigated for stealing work supplies from where he worked. Not 100% sure about this, but the gun find was unanticipated. He was suspected of being a thief. Please post any information you find about this, but from all I've seen so far, guns were not the reason his house was searched.

-- Ben Matlock (matlock@series.com), October 02, 1999.

Whether they were the object or not. He had a few buckets and brooms that MAY have belonged to the school system. Does this qualify for a $1,000,000. bail? Why have no weapons charges been placed? Why did they have to look in two locked safes? Probable cause means where you can possibly hide the object that are being sought. Do any of us keep buckets and brooms in a safe? I think not. This was persecution. If it happened once it WILL happen again more frequently. Here in central Md., as a deputy leaves a house after a call if he or she noticed any weapons, they broadcast back to the headquarters to place a note on this address because there are weapons in the house. Not only did he/she just tell every scanner carrying criminal where to go get a gun but we also just marked that address for later. I have heard them do this 1/2 a dozens times now in the past month or so. I spent 8 yrs as a Deputy Sheriff in S. Florida and we never did anything that stupid.

Signed, All of mine are somewhere safe except for one........

-- Greg (skipy@erols.com), October 02, 1999.

October 1, 1999

By JOHN McDONALD, TONY SAAVEDRA and MICHAEL CORONADO

The Orange County Register

SAN CLEMENTE  Authorities spent Thursday trying to determine whether any of the 80 assault-style rifles seized in one of Orange County's largest weapons busts are actually illegal. Investigators from the Orange County Sheriff's Department and the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms were testing the rifles to determine if they are operational, fully automatic or otherwise prohibited by law. The arsenal was seized from the West Marquita home of school groundskeeper Jerry D. Peacock, 43, the target of a theft investigation. Peacock's attorney in a previous civil suit said the rifles are part of a family collection. "His father started the gun collection a long time ago. I think it was when (Peacock) was a child," said attorney Michelle Reinglass. "He's not a Columbine kind of guy. He's not a guy who is out of control." Reinglass said the police raid smacked of retaliation by the Capistrano Unified School District, which lost a sexual-harassment case brought by Peacock and two other workers. The cost to the district was about $800,000, Reinglass said. "This is the absolute ultimate act of retaliation by an employer. His character has been massively maligned," she said. District officials, however, stressed that they called deputies only after receiving a tip from a neighbor that Peacock had district property. Among the district items found at his home were five pairs of safety boots, two ladders, four trash cans and assorted containers, officials said. Peacock remained in jail Thursday on suspicion of possessing stolen property with bail set at $1 million. "We don't consider the items (as) small-ticket at all," said district Superintendent James A. Fleming. "It's public property. The amount of it is less important than the fact it was there." Deputies found the guns, locked in two safes, while searching the home for district property. Also found were hand grenades, machine guns and at least 50,000 rounds of ammunition held in cookie tins and boxes, sheriff's officials said. "I am horrified we would have someone in the employment of the district, on school grounds, with this kind of firepower in his home," Fleming said. He said the district would move to fire Peacock, who has been on disability leave for several months. In September 1997, Peacock and two co-workers were awarded $215,000 in their harassment suit, which alleged they suffered retaliation after reporting that a supervisor committed a lewd act. A judge later ordered the district to pay more than $560,000 in legal fees for the groundskeepers. Reinglass said that during the trial, the district tried to introduce Peacock's gun collection as evidence. "They were trying to show he was a gun-slinging guy. The judge wouldn't allow it," she said. District officials alerted deputies to Peacock's collection, prompting authorities to arrive with a SWAT team Wednesday, district spokeswoman Julie Jennings said. The district, during settlement negotiations, also tried to coax Peacock to resign. The reason, said Fleming, was that Peacock was routinely out on disability. District officials described him as an "average, satisfactory worker," who was often absent. The landscape gardener worked in teams of four, mowing, trimming and maintaining grounds at the school district's 41 elementary, middle and high schools.

-- Billy-Boy (Rakkasn@Yahoo.com), October 02, 1999.

Exactly the point I'm always making to my friends and family. We don't even OWN a gun, but don't take away from right to bear arms if I so choose. If our lawmakers say we don't need assault weapons and that's what we'd be fighting against if some looney decided tomorrow he wanted to be king...then wouldn't the patriots against the gov't. military be unbalanced. IOW wouldn't it rather be like having tomahawks on one side and rifles on the other? In order to carry out the SPIRIT of that constitutional right..shouldn't both sides be allowed to have assault weapons?

beej

-- beej (beej@ppbbs.com), October 02, 1999.

beej,

amen.

-- sarah (qubr@aol.com), October 03, 1999.