Cops seize legal guns, neighbors say it's "too many".

Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
117,576
UPDATE: Police Seize Over 300 Guns from Rockford IL Home

http://mystateline.com/fulltext-news?nxd_id=185655

(Rockford) -- More than 300 firearms were removed from this home on Auburn Street. It's a scene residents say they aren't accustomed too.

Coley Woods lives across the street from the home. He says, "I'm thinking it's an accident or something, but I look over and I see them with all them rifles."

"It's just un-real to see this many guns involved a regular residential neighborhood," says concerned resident McArthur Tennin.

Police were called to this home just after two this morning. They arrived after neighbors called about a burglary. When police got inside the home, they found empty shell casings and a variety of weapons, from shotguns to rifles.

Deputy Police Chief Greg Lindmark says, "some were loaded, some weren't some appear to be operable because they're old and then some to be fairly new."

Police say a 67 year-old man owns the home and the weapons. He is a legally registered gun owner.

"At the current time we're taking the firearms for safe keeping as evidence until we can further investigate this," says Deputy Chief Lindmark.

Neighbors say even though the weapons may be legal, they still pose a security threat to their neighborhood.

Woods' says, "Even if he's a registered gun owner or not, that just seems like its too many rifles."

Shortly after police arrived, the home was condemned and the guns were only part of it.

Deputy Chief Lindmark says, "When the police got to this residence they found a tremendous amount of garbage and different items stacked from the floor to the ceiling."

Police will run checks on all of the weapons to see if any were stolen or involved in any crimes.

As of late Wednesday afternoon, police haven't charged the homeowner. Police say he's out of town and they're still trying to get in contact with him. Police also haven't made any arrests in the burglary.
 
Deputy Police Chief Greg Lindmark says, "some were loaded, some weren't some appear to be operable because they're old and then some to be fairly new."

I know someone who has 13,527 Beanie Babies. That's way, way too many. Yet I don't see the cops seizing them...
 
"When the police got to this residence they found a tremendous amount of garbage and different items stacked from the floor to the ceiling."

That many guns and ammunition, most likely inproperly stored and taken care of, in the hands of hoarder....could actually pose a legitimate danger to the neighborhood. Just saying.

Jeez, I have no problem with somebody having as many guns as they friggin want. But take care of them. Have some accessible, have some stored....but guns and ammo laying around on piles and piles of trash? Am I the only person that sees a danger here.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee
 
"When the police got to this residence they found a tremendous amount of garbage and different items stacked from the floor to the ceiling."

That many guns and ammunition, most likely inproperly stored and taken care of, in the hands of hoarder....could actually pose a legitimate danger to the neighborhood. Just saying.

Jeez, I have no problem with somebody having as many guns as they friggin want. But take care of them. Have some accessible, have some stored....but guns and ammo laying around on piles and piles of trash? Am I the only person that sees a danger here.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

If this person is a "hoarder" I'll guarantee there were much more dangerous things stored in the home than firearms and ammo.

Gas, chemicals, paints and thinners; all a much bigger safety hazard than modern, centerfire ammo.

So what are you suggesting, that the cops keep his legally owned property until he cleans up?

Or just keep it permanently?
 
Last edited:
Slutter, I for one do not agree. Who is to define "too many"? Who defines how they must be stored? Are we now to have a litmus test for how many stacks one can have in our house?

The man had not committed a crime. The police had no right to confiscate his guns. None.

Now, we may disagree with how he stored them, and some may even not like that he had so many. But, like so many other things, those would fall into the category of NONE OF OUR BUSINESS.
 
If the owner had been at home, somebody probably would have been shot.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing, the homeowner stood a good chance of getting shot had he been unfortunate enough to be around when the enforcers showed up.
 
Are the police now in the business of making laws? How many is too many? 4? 12? 57? 122?
 
If this person is a "hoarder" I'll guarantee there were much more dangerous things stored in the home then firearms and ammo.

Gas, chemicals, paints and thinners; all a much bigger safety hazard than modern, centerfire ammo.

So what are you suggesting, that the cops keep his legally owned property until he cleans up?

There is only one question. Do the firearms, in their current condition, and in the homes current state, pose a legitimate risk to neighbors...or children (don't know if that is applicable). The presence of firearms alone is not enough. But if a legitimate risk is involved, and I do mean legitimate, then I have no problem with the police holding legally owned firearms.

The problem here is the word "legitimate". Such situations, even if they are legitimate, can open up the door to future abuse. I recognize that.

I am not making a judgement here. Most of the stuff you post is black and white. Gross violations of consitutional rights and liberties. I am just saying that this time, the situation seems a little bit more grey.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee
 
Slutter, I for one do not agree. Who is to define "too many"? Who defines how they must be stored? Are we now to have a litmus test for how many stacks one can have in our house?

The man had not committed a crime. The police had no right to confiscate his guns. None.

Now, we may disagree with how he stored them, and some may even not like that he had so many. But, like so many other things, those would fall into the category of NONE OF OUR BUSINESS.

Agreed, 10000%.:cool:
 
I would suggest the police help the man sell some of those fire arms so he can pay for a cleaning lady. 300 guns is worth a lot of money. The man probably has about $100,000 worth of merchandise there.
 
Slutter, I for one do not agree. Who is to define "too many"? Who defines how they must be stored? Are we now to have a litmus test for how many stacks one can have in our house?

The man had not committed a crime. The police had no right to confiscate his guns. None.

Now, we may disagree with how he stored them, and some may even not like that he had so many. But, like so many other things, those would fall into the category of NONE OF OUR BUSINESS.

Not only that, but they dragged them out of the house and threw them in a heap on the lawn and then into cop vans.

raw.jpg


raw.jpg


raw.jpg


If there were any high quality firearms in that heap, that treatment went a long way towards ruining them.
 
People who have a problem with "hoarders" are little more than gossipy small minded people who should tend to their own business. As for having a large number of firearms, a person can only use one or two at the most at a time. The rest of those firearms can sit there and be in storage in the home and not cause any problem on their own.

People need to mind their own business!
 
Back
Top