What are the circumstances, in Indiana, that would surround the ability of Law Enforcement to legally confiscate all of the firearms someone owns/ possesses? A list perhaps? Or can one thing cause it? Say......being judged, in court, of insanity? Are there others? How many? Been wondering this for a while.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
total firearms confiscation????
- Thread starter rbsangler
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Kirk Freeman
Grandmaster
1. Protective Order.
2. Search Warrant.
3. Conditions of Bond.
4. Conditions of House Arrest.
5. Conditions of Probation.
6. Being found to be a Dangerous Person.
7. Being a doper.
8. Renouncing your citizenship.
Is this what you are looking for or did you not want it so specific?
2. Search Warrant.
3. Conditions of Bond.
4. Conditions of House Arrest.
5. Conditions of Probation.
6. Being found to be a Dangerous Person.
7. Being a doper.
8. Renouncing your citizenship.
Is this what you are looking for or did you not want it so specific?
Awesome and easily understood. Outstanding job!!!!!!! Well, it all seems common sense. And along the lines of the 'questionnaire" when purchasing a firearm. THANKS!!!!!
I have seen a story out of California where it is claiming that the law allows someone's guns to be taken away.....just by someone they know SAYING that they are dangerous.....on that person's word only. Seems fishy.....but, California and all.
I have seen a story out of California where it is claiming that the law allows someone's guns to be taken away.....just by someone they know SAYING that they are dangerous.....on that person's word only. Seems fishy.....but, California and all.
Kirk Freeman
Grandmaster
Well, not exactly, but there is some overlap with the 4473.
Ah, I see. Ok, that was passed in California after the Isla Vista, California (near UCSB) murders (3 of which were murdered with a knife) in September of this year. It will be effective there in 2016.
Indiana has a Dangerous Person Proceeding which is similar (but not the same) found at Indiana Code 35-47-14-1, et seq.
Indiana Code 35-47-14
I'm certainly no lawyer, but I would think that searching for and seizing property without due process would be unconstitutional. I wouldn't think that the weight of one person's opinion would satisfy the requirements laid out in the law.
I doubt the cops would be willing to risk it and would confiscate just to be on the safe side. Then, when the owner freaks out at the confiscation, they have their justification.
Maybe if one can't control one's impulses and emotions, one shouldn't consider owning a firearm in the first place.
Same could be said for marriage and road rage (i.e., don't get married, shouldn't drive a car).
I'm not a lawyer, but have been thru a nasty divorce, so I have seen some of the things that can happen. The quickest and easiest way to to mess you up, is a cheating wife that is trying to "save face" by making you look bad.
It's no secret that judges hand out protective orders like candy to women getting a divorce. If that happens to you, it may have a box that can be checked as "Brady disqualified" or "not Brady disqualified". One way means that you can not possess a firearm, the other, doesn't.
Supposed that this protective order does not interfere with your possession of a firearm, that's good, right? Not really. If the person on the other end of that order is, or was at any time, your wife, it then makes you "not a proper person" in the eyes of the nics system, and you will get rejected on a nics check every time.
Now here is the messed up part, nowhere does it say that you can not possess, no law, no court order, nothing. In fact, while this is in effect, you can get a LTCH renewed in Indiana and the same day, get rejected trying to buy a .22.
It's no secret that judges hand out protective orders like candy to women getting a divorce. If that happens to you, it may have a box that can be checked as "Brady disqualified" or "not Brady disqualified". One way means that you can not possess a firearm, the other, doesn't.
Supposed that this protective order does not interfere with your possession of a firearm, that's good, right? Not really. If the person on the other end of that order is, or was at any time, your wife, it then makes you "not a proper person" in the eyes of the nics system, and you will get rejected on a nics check every time.
Now here is the messed up part, nowhere does it say that you can not possess, no law, no court order, nothing. In fact, while this is in effect, you can get a LTCH renewed in Indiana and the same day, get rejected trying to buy a .22.
