New Jersey Hunters banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Caretaker shoots assailants at NJ campground

Jump to Latest
21 - 40 of 52 Posts
#21 ·
Good for him. But I bet they will try to screw him because he was outside the cabin. According to law he should have retreated. They will ask him why he had the gun outside the cabin. Unfortunate, he did the right thing if he was attacked
 
#24 ·
Colt 45 I think during th investigation it was a good idea to take the .357
If he is cleared he should get it back. I would think that would be normal for a shooting investigation. I hope he does not get charged if that is the entire story.
 
#25 ·
Colt 45 I think during th investigation it was a good idea to take the .357
Click to expand...
i dont think its a good or right to disarm anyone that has not been found guilty of any foul play[down] god forbid those wack'oos come back for revange and now he is unarmed...no way in hell they needed that gun for an investigation... dont be silly whats the gun gonna tell them it was fired
 
#26 ·
He did what he had to do and he is still alive.[up]

If he had not fired any shots, he could be dead. When it comes to my well-being, screw the laws, I'm doing whatever I have to do to protect myself. I would never retreat from my property it home, beyond reason, to protect myself from someone who should not be there.

Hopefully level headed people are handling this and he gets his weapon back without seeing any legal action.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#28 ·
My proposed new law:

If a gun is taken as part of an investigation, you get a replacement, of equal or better calibre :D
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#29 ·
keep in mind, even after a Police involved shooting, the officers gun is taken away during the investigation
Click to expand...
But that is his duty weapon, something he uses as part of his job... and he is normally relieved of duty pending the results of the investigation. What if boils down to is an LEO has a very different set of rules that regulate his JOB than a citizen does his RIGHTS. There is a huge difference and you're comparing apples and oranges.
 
#30 ·
There is a huge difference.
Click to expand...
Take a deep breath, and go read my post again.. I said I agree that the gun shouldn't be taken away, and I was just pointing out that fact that a LEO's gun is ALSO taken away during an investigation.. That's all I was saying, nothing more, nothing less. People have this tendency to believe that LEO's are anti-gun, and don't believe in citizens rights when it comes to firearms. The large majority of the guys I work with are in favor of citizens rights pertaining to firearms. I think any law abiding person should be allowed to purchase, and carry.

and you're comparing apples and oranges.
Click to expand...
No I'm not. I was pointing out the fact that part of a shooting investigation, be it by a citizen, or LEO, involves the investigation of the firearm itself. Hence why the firearm is removed from the person, if they are a LEO or citizen.
 
#31 ·
even after a Police involved shooting, the officers gun is taken away during the investigation.
Click to expand...
and another one is IMMEDIATELY given to him to carry.

relieved of duty pending the results of the investigation.
Click to expand...
Placed on administrative leave. Allowed to come back whenever he/she's ready. Could be a day, could be a month, could go out on 'special disability'. It's up to the officer.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#32 ·
and another one is IMMEDIATELY given to him to carry.
Click to expand...
Of course. The point I am trying to make is, after a shooting, as part of the investigation, the firearm ITSELF must be looked at. Doesn't matter if it was a LEO that fired the weapon, or a citizen in his own home. The gun will be taken for the investigation.
 
#33 ·
Unless definitive foul play is suspected and so long as the weapon is lawfully and legally owned by the shooter or the shooters family, the weapon should remain in the owners possession pending a change iin the status of the investigation.

If the investigating party deems necessary a forensic testing if the weapon, at that time, and only at that time, they should produce a warrant to confiscate the weapon or have the owner produce the weapon for forensic testing.

If foul play IS suspected, I agree with the confiscation of the weapon based on a sufficient warrant being issued in close proximity to the incident to protect against modifications or alterations being able to be made to the weapon that would hinder or compromise the forensic testing results that could link that weapon to the crime.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#34 ·
People have this tendency to believe that LEO's are anti-gun, and don't believe in citizens rights when it comes to firearms. The large majority of the guys I work with are in favor of citizens rights pertaining to firearms.
Click to expand...
I have never met or known an LEO to be anti-gun, but quite the opposite. If anyone here knows an LEO that is anti-gun, then maybe the LEO is not as informed as he/she thinks they are when it comes to gun rights/laws.
 
#35 ·
If they pull a round out of someone wouldn't make sense to have the gun for a ballistic comparison [confusedagain]
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#36 ·
Additionally, if the incident is of obvious criminal nature, i.e., a man possessing a weapon engages someone or something, unlawfully, with said weapon, that weapon should be confiscated during the initial investigation. If a "bad guy" commits a bad act with a weapon, take it, he shouldn't have it anyway.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#37 ·
Take a deep breath, and go read my post again..
Click to expand...
I did... I dont just spout off without reading things. You may agree with him keeping the gun... but thats not what im pointing out... Im pointing out the fact it shouldnt be taken and the comparison between LEO and private citizen is completely invalid. A police firearm is an issue weapon that is part of their job... and the LEO doesnt even own it in most cases. What you're saying is that taking someones gun when its not even their property makes it ok to take mine or yours... and thats insane. So yes, you are comparing apples to oranges. But quite frankly, you set the tone of your post when you called us all civilians... we are citizens (you included). The only noncivilians in our country are soldiers and calling us anything but citizens plays into the police state that says its ok to take a private citizens gun with no due cause. So you take a deep breath and realize your constitutional rights are being violated everyday in this state ...and you just tried to make a case that says its ok.
 
#38 ·
Wow.. you are really going off the deep end here.. When I say civilian , it indicates a non LEO. All Im saying is, the reason the gun was taken away is for the investigation. Im not saying its right, or wrong, I just pointed out the reason it was taken. You obviously just want to argue, and frankly I have better things to do.

.and you just tried to make a case that says its ok.
Click to expand...
I did??? I never said it was ok.. DEEP BREATH bro..
 
#39 ·
Believe me... I dont want to argue... its a shame we are even having this conversation. And I havent gone off the deep end... my eyes are just open.
 
#40 ·
its a shame we are even having this conversation
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more. If you knew me, you'd know how passionate I am about gun rights and firearms. A lot of the time, people see cops as an enemy of gun rights. Believe me, thats not the case with me. I have been into shooting/collecting firearms long before I was a cop.
 
21 - 40 of 52 Posts
About this Discussion
51 Replies
27 Participants
Last post:
bigfish525
New Jersey Hunters
posts
3M
members
61K
Since
2005
A forum community dedicated to New Jersey’s hunters and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, gear, troubleshooting, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Hunting Discussions Member Classifieds Fishing Field Testing and Evaluation NJ Firearms ID Card & Gun Permits