Is Montana Changing? (charge, state, police)

[Redraven]

Yes, I read recently where this is actually happening in some Eastern states!
A neighbor, an ex-spouse or ex-"significant other" or some complete stranger reports that you are acting flaky, or spend much of your time drunk or drugged to the gills, and under the "SAFE Act" that gives Law Enforcement the right to enter your home, pack up all your firearms and ammunition, confiscate them, and keep them for a certain period of time.
By the way, while they have them, they are under no obligation to protect or maintain them. They can store them locked in a damp room and let them rust.
It has already happened.

[Reziac]

Gov't has no real way to ID who owns what and confiscate it without 1) gun registration and other official paper trails, which is why this is such a no-go for the 2nd Amendment, and 2) house-to-house search, at which point it's time to refresh that tree of liberty.

California attempted a buyback after banning some particular class of 'assault rifles'. Compliance was estimated at a bit over 2%, and they wound up paying for a lot of wooden and nonfunctional guns. It made no impact whatsoever on gun-related crime, given that's almost entirely gangs with street-market weapons. Meanwhile, Chicago decided to delete its gangs database, because it was deemed too prejudicial against blacks and latinos (which comprise 80% to 90% of gang members).

California also decreed any magazine that holds ten or more rounds defines an 'assault rifle'. This magically transformed my little lever-action .22 varmint gun into an 'assault rifle' (cuz it holds 13 rounds) and me into a felon. My response to this was "***** you." I've since moved back to Montana, and I still own the gun.

If you don't think gov't WILL do house-to-house using registrations for confiscation, I give you the example of Denver, which about 10 years back used dog licenses and door-to-door to confiscate (and kill) 4000 pitbulls as newly-minted contraband.

[Redraven]

https://www.newyorkupstate.com/news/..._happened.html


Yes, it can and has happened!


More info:


https://www.nraila.org/articles/2017...n-confiscation

[NDak15]

Originally Posted by Redraven

https://www.newyorkupstate.com/news/..._happened.html


Yes, it can and has happened!


More info:


https://www.nraila.org/articles/2017...n-confiscation

The second link isn't working.

[Reziac]

Originally Posted by NDak15

The second link isn't working.

Working for me, but the salient part:

The passage of New York’s so-called SAFE Act (“Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act of 2013”) drastically changed the landscape for lawful gun owners in the Empire State. Besides new restrictions on commonly owned semi-automatic rifles the state calls “assault weapons,” bans on magazines, and limits on the number of rounds that could be loaded into a gun, the Act imposed a requirement that handgun license holders be “recertified” every five years, with all licensees completing the initial recertification by January 31, 2018. The recertification form requires that the licensee disclose his or her “name, date of birth, gender, race, residential address, social security number, [and] firearms possessed by such license holder,” along with the listed identifying details (make, model, caliber, and serial number). (“Firearm” under the applicable New York law means a handgun or other gun of a size which may be concealed upon the person.)

A failure to recertify operates as an automatic revocation of the license. Possession of a “firearm” without a valid license is a criminal offense, and the revocation makes the person ineligible to apply for or renew a license. Once a license is revoked, state law mandates that every gun owned or possessed by the licensee be “surrendered” to a law enforcement agency. A New York State Police field guide on the SAFE Act, prepared by attorneys for the Division of State Police, unequivocally instructs officers that when “a licensee becomes ineligible to hold a pistol permit, the Safe Act requires the person to surrender all firearms to police, including all rifles and shotguns for which no license or registration is required.” (Emphasis in the original.)

Should the person fail to comply by turning in every gun, the SAFE Act (codified as NY Penal Law § 400.00(11)(c)) not only authorizes but requires that police officers confiscate such property: the guns “shall be removed and declared a nuisance and any police officer or peace officer acting pursuant to his or her special duties is authorized to remove any and all such weapons.”

Once the gun is deemed a “nuisance,” the owner loses the ability to reclaim or legally transfer it. State law directs that nuisance guns be destroyed without the need for a court order or other judicial proceedings, and courts have confirmed that a person has no “legitimate possessory interest” in firearms for which he or she has no license.

The policy of recertification is clear: licensees who fail to comply – by inadvertently missing the deadline, for example – face having all guns, and not just the firearms covered by the license, permanently confiscated by law enforcement officers.

Note in particular: "destroyed without the need for a court order or other judicial proceedings" -- this is a taking without due process, in direct violation of the sadly-tattered 4th Amendment.

[aclappine]

It's not my intent to turn this discussion into a critique of New York state firearms laws, but even a glimpse will help you understand why many people seek to escape to the west. Those in charge In NY will admit to your face the laws are intentionally made burdensome to discourage people from buying firearms. In my New York City suburb, its a 6 to 12 month process to buy a pistol just for target shooting, and that's the only time you may legally possess the pistol outside your home - locked in the rear of your vehicle while traveling to and from the range. If you say you want the pistol for home defense, your application will be denied. And don't even think of trying to get a concealed carry permit in a county near NYC - its not happening. Whenever I visit my son who is a competition shooter in Wyoming, he invariably has to remind me while we are discussing firearms to lose the "slave mentality". There are probably a half million felons-in-hiding in NY, NJ and CT - decent hard working people who refused to comply with recently passed state laws requiring the registration of certain firearms and magazines, or to dispose of them out of state. Mere possession can be a felony.

My motive here is pretty selfish - I want to make the best investment possible in land. When I began thinking about buying a second home, I decided to look in the area I like best - Southeast Montana and Northeast Wyoming. My son in Wyoming keeps me updated on political developments there. But I had not kept up with politics in Montana - I assumed they were generally similar to Wyoming. That's why I was taken back by the former governors remarks and began wondering if things were changing. And if so, should I even look for land in Montana, or just stick to Wyoming. As I stated previously, the transformations of Colorado and Oregon over the past 5 to 10 years have been dramatic. But it probably could have been predicted by someone keeping up with the demographic and economic changes that were occurring in those states. That's what I was looking for here - for someone who has been watching what's been happening in Montana these past 5 to 10 years to tell me if it's the next Colorado or Oregon.

[slowlane3]

Originally Posted by Redraven

Yes, I read recently where this is actually happening in some Eastern states!
A neighbor, an ex-spouse or ex-"significant other" or some complete stranger reports that you are acting flaky, or spend much of your time drunk or drugged to the gills, and under the "SAFE Act" that gives Law Enforcement the right to enter your home, pack up all your firearms and ammunition, confiscate them, and keep them for a certain period of time.
By the way, while they have them, they are under no obligation to protect or maintain them. They can store them locked in a damp room and let them rust.
It has already happened.

Hold on there. Anyone who makes false accusations about an individual for the purpose of police confiscating their guns, is guilty of perjury. This cop, for example, was charged with 24 counts for such an offense. https://nypost.com/2018/03/27/cop-ac...search-warrant

[historyfan]

In Montana 58% of households have firearms (2001 behaviorial risk study). There is likely a different voter mindset when compared to those in a 10% gun ownership state like New York.

National average is 3 guns per person in gun-owning households. If that is true for Montana, then there are more guns than people in our state.


Here is link to chart comparing states.

Gun Ownership by State (washingtonpost.com)

[MTSilvertip]

Originally Posted by aclappine

It's not my intent to turn this discussion into a critique of New York state firearms laws, but even a glimpse will help you understand why many people seek to escape to the west. Those in charge In NY will admit to your face the laws are intentionally made burdensome to discourage people from buying firearms. In my New York City suburb, its a 6 to 12 month process to buy a pistol just for target shooting, and that's the only time you may legally possess the pistol outside your home - locked in the rear of your vehicle while traveling to and from the range. If you say you want the pistol for home defense, your application will be denied. And don't even think of trying to get a concealed carry permit in a county near NYC - its not happening. Whenever I visit my son who is a competition shooter in Wyoming, he invariably has to remind me while we are discussing firearms to lose the "slave mentality". There are probably a half million felons-in-hiding in NY, NJ and CT - decent hard working people who refused to comply with recently passed state laws requiring the registration of certain firearms and magazines, or to dispose of them out of state. Mere possession can be a felony.

My motive here is pretty selfish - I want to make the best investment possible in land. When I began thinking about buying a second home, I decided to look in the area I like best - Southeast Montana and Northeast Wyoming. My son in Wyoming keeps me updated on political developments there. But I had not kept up with politics in Montana - I assumed they were generally similar to Wyoming. That's why I was taken back by the former governors remarks and began wondering if things were changing. And if so, should I even look for land in Montana, or just stick to Wyoming. As I stated previously, the transformations of Colorado and Oregon over the past 5 to 10 years have been dramatic. But it probably could have been predicted by someone keeping up with the demographic and economic changes that were occurring in those states. That's what I was looking for here - for someone who has been watching what's been happening in Montana these past 5 to 10 years to tell me if it's the next Colorado or Oregon.

Bullock never mentioned guns until he decided he'd look good in a crown. He's just pandering to the far left so he's just like all the rest of the democrat herd that want the throne.

We have a great legislature right now. Very protective of our constitutional rights including the right to keep and bear arms. The people of Montana, with the exception of all Missoula and Bozeman around the campus, the rest of the state is pretty conservative. Even Helena, the bastion of union government employees, away from the gulch is much more conservative than it used to be.
Check out Gary Marbut and Doug Monforton. They are very proactive in working with the legislature protecting our gun rights. I went to high school with Doug, great guy for being a lawyer.

I wouldn't worry about losing our constitutional rights anytime soon. Even Butte that used to be completely in the grip of the union bosses has been turning more red since they lost the mine and have to work for a living now.

Since this is a second home you're looking at, at least for now, Northern Maine has a lot of good qualities too, and it's much closer to your job. May be worth a look. A close place to protect your guns until you retire. May be worth a look.

New Hampshire also has some very good laws protecting citizens rights. I understand your predicament, and Montana is a great place, it's just a long way from where you live.

[Reziac]

And the furor is starting to generate some contrarianism....