It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

DHS Raids Gun Collector- Confiscates Nearly 1500 guns- No Charges Filed

page: 4
26
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 01:20 AM
link   
Sounds like he needs to hire some armed guards 24/7 for self-defense!

Thomas Jefferson was right, the primary reason to retain the right to bear arms IS to defend yourself against tyranny in government.

He should have shot these terrorists back into the hole from whence they came. Hopefully next time he'll be more prepared to defend himself.




posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by lynxpilot
 


I know things have changed in the last 10 years or so but what happened to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearems aka ATF ? Why is this the jurisdiction of DHS ? maybe Im just old school so much has changed and I was not paying attention?.
Also when you go to Adams' website he still has guns for sale so they did not take all his guns.
Might be Mr. Adams' own unique version "Scare Marketing". Just a thought... is this story in the mainstream news? Dont get me wrong I am 100% pro 2nd Amendment, just questioning the whole tale.


I think Thomas Jefferson was either a psychic or a time traveller.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by lynxpilot
 

Ruin a man's livelihood. Steal/confiscate his life savings.

Over what? Buying, selling and storing legal products...

Sad day for the Divided States of America.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 05:27 AM
link   
I hope he names every single officer and officials involved in a massive lawsuit. He should sue them for the max amount allowed and then bring criminal charges and put everyone of them in prison.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 05:33 AM
link   
So he was selling firearms that had the serial numbers removed, making it illegal to sell them nd the authorities come and confiscate the illegal weapons and people are talking about tyrannical governments and "this is why we need guns"

Like....what?

What the guy was doing was illegal??


Are the pro-gun crowd so deluded that they defend even criminal action as long as it involves a gun owner?

Wow



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by stargatetravels
So he was selling firearms that had the serial numbers removed, making it illegal to sell them nd the authorities come and confiscate the illegal weapons and people are talking about tyrannical governments and "this is why we need guns"

Like....what?

What the guy was doing was illegal??


Are the pro-gun crowd so deluded that they defend even criminal action as long as it involves a gun owner?

Wow


Where did you see any evidence to support your claim . . . ?

Mind pointing me to this evidence? I would like to see it, as it is clear you haven't read through this thread or understand current laws in regard to "serial numbers".

Thanks . . . as I've been follwing this story closely, your "new evidence" should really help break this case open for the feds!!
edit on 2/24/13 by solomons path because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by solomons path
Not if they are antique or pre-68. Which as a major collector . . . he had a lot of.

We're not talking about antique guns here. The article clearly quotes investigators as saying the guns weren't properly marked. I'm pretty sure investigators know that antique guns won't have serial numbers.



Originally posted by solomons path
markings is not the same as "serial number"

Markings include the serial number. Hence why the article also quotes investigators as saying the absence of markings would make the guns untraceable. If I removed just the manufacturer info from my guns, would that make the gun untraceable? No. Removal of the serial number would, however.

What you're doing here is cherry-picking, and trying to spin the truth where no spin is needed.




Excuse me? Could you point out these 'quotes'? I believe the article states that the investigators 'alleged'. Far cry from a quote.

Also, we are indeed talking about antiques here. Check out his website. www.adamsguns.com... .
You'll see that most are antiques. And many being pre-1968, without serial numbers. Hence, no markings.

Who's picking the cherries?
edit on 24-2-2013 by 2ndthought because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by snarky412
I meant to ask the gun people here, what do they mean by the guns aren't 'marked'?
Just curious......

Most guns have serial numbers on them so that they can be traced. "Unmarked" would mean that the serial number is non-existent, i.e. removed. Therefore, making the gun untraceable..

Removing a serial number from a firearm is illegal in many places. As is possession and sale of a firearm that had the serial number removed, if I'm not mistaken.






Also a person must have a FFL in order to sell fire arms across state lines. Since this case comes from the feds, federal laws were broken.


Not quite true. I, without an FFL, could sell, or buy, across state lines, BUT, would have to complete the deal through an FFL holder. Example, buying or selling through the website, 'gunbroker.com'.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 11:34 AM
link   
The old guns never had serial numbers.

There's been hundreds of thousands of people building their own guns with "parts kits" and 80% machined receivers for decades.

Home made firearms don't need serial numbers.


Got a new Glock? Look at that little piece of metal on the lower plastic with the serial number. If that piece of metal falls off...."yer in violation of the law". How come they made it so dang cheap and didn't put the stupid number on the plastic itself?

So people could get busted by the G O V and Federal Revenue can be created.


AS for the guy getting his stuff back....even after he is found innocent he will NEVER get his stuff back. Congress re-wrote the Federal Asset Seizure laws making a massive beauracratic paper process to file to get it back. They'll always get to keep it on a "technicallity".

You have to be prepapred. I've got firearms burried across 3 States...hell I even forgot the mile marker where I stashed 4,000 rounds and 2 AK's....LOL!....they could seize the few I have planted in the house for them to take.

They're junkers.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Since no charges still have not been charged against this guy.........


They can't find anything wrong he did. They just stole his property....

Or else he would have been charged with SOMETHING.

Maybe the CIA needed a big stash of weapons for some Mexican operation again.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by ajay59

Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy
maybe he was selling to mexico
just cause he has no violations or record could mean he just hadnt been caught yet


Maybe the feds just do not want any competition in selling firearms to certain Mexicans. Maybe it is possible that he was upsetting the imbalance in Mexico that was created by Obama and Holder.


You won the jackpot me thinks. If you have too many weapons its bad news for the government cause, either

a)you sell them to gangs not affiliated with the government
b)you are part of a miltia and a future threat to them.

someone was so desperate to get him, they didn't even take the time to make a solid case against him.

although to be honest I think it is poor taste of him to hold on to so many weapons as a collector. robs the market for others to own weapons. call it envy or call it common sense, makes no difference to me.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by stargatetravels
So he was selling firearms that had the serial numbers removed, making it illegal to sell them nd the authorities come and confiscate the illegal weapons and people are talking about tyrannical governments and "this is why we need guns"

Like....what?

What the guy was doing was illegal??


Are the pro-gun crowd so deluded that they defend even criminal action as long as it involves a gun owner?

Wow


The article never specifically said that the S.N. were removed, but alleges that there were 'improper' markings.....
Supposedly been watched for years and yet, he has never had charges pressed against him nor jail time hence making it sound suspicious.

Remember, this started in Jan. and still, no evidence.........but they took his stuff any way.
Usually, you build the case first and then you arrest them if there is evidence, but not for this guy.

And as others pointed out, what is up with DHS being involved instead of the ATF.


[And just a side note, no I don't own a gun but I am for the rights of others and against BS raids by the gov....]




edit on 24-2-2013 by snarky412 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2ndthought

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by solomons path
Not if they are antique or pre-68. Which as a major collector . . . he had a lot of.

We're not talking about antique guns here. The article clearly quotes investigators as saying the guns weren't properly marked. I'm pretty sure investigators know that antique guns won't have serial numbers.



Originally posted by solomons path
markings is not the same as "serial number"

Markings include the serial number. Hence why the article also quotes investigators as saying the absence of markings would make the guns untraceable. If I removed just the manufacturer info from my guns, would that make the gun untraceable? No. Removal of the serial number would, however.

What you're doing here is cherry-picking, and trying to spin the truth where no spin is needed.




Excuse me? Could you point out these 'quotes'? I believe the article states that the investigators 'alleged'. Far cry from a quote.

Also, we are indeed talking about antiques here. Check out his website. www.adamsguns.com... .
You'll see that most are antiques. And many being pre-1968, without serial numbers. Hence, no markings.

Who's picking the cherries?
edit on 24-2-2013 by 2ndthought because: (no reason given)


POINT BEING... LOTS of Americans collect guns. Mr. Adams was not charged with any crime according to this story. Yes Law Enforcement and Mainstream News can word-twist stories to make a suspect seem shady..
But
Face It, we live in a greedy selfish world and people do shady things, even gun dealers and thank God we still have our LIBERTY and our justice system and if Adams is in the clear, he will get all his guns back.

: )



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 09:49 AM
link   
If he takes them to court and proves no laws were broken, the judge will give back his firearms. I do not think that is going to happen. The report said there was no markings on some of the guns and he was missing paperwork on imports. Well see if that accusation by the DHS is actually true when it goes to court. But being its DHS, they will probably find something no doubt. They probably took all of them in hopes the collection had one or two illegal guns from 1500's or some BS.
edit on 25-2-2013 by R3KR because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
26
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join