Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
If You Think They Won’t Seize Your Guns…
Unbelievable. Stephen Nichols, an 84-year-old Korean War veteran who served on the Tisbury, MA, police force for 60 years has had his firearms seized. Here’s what happened:
He was eating breakfast in the local diner, Linda Jean’s, when he commented to a friend that the school resource officer was often seen leaving school in the mornings. When he’d investigated it, he found out that the resource officer at Tisbury school was leaving — after children were present — to get himself a coffee at the Xtra Mart nearby.
Nichols pointed out that anything could happen while the school security guard was gone. He said that somebody could come in and shoot up the school while the guard was gone. Nichols described the situation as the school guard ‘leaving his post.’
And that’s it, folks. A dangerous, violent threat.
A waitress overheard the conversation and called the Tisbury Police Department, and the Police chief and another officer arrived and told Mr. Nichols to get into their police car; they took him to his home where they confiscated his guns. They have taken away his gun license, which he’s had since 1958. He’s been fired from his job as a crossing guard. Nichols was told that he could have been charged with a felony for what he said, but that he wouldn’t be.
After confiscating his guns, they didn’t give him a receipt for them, although Nichols’ son-in-law, who owns a gun shop, has been told he can take possession of the guns and sell them. Mr. Nichols has 11 grandchildren and 11 great-grandchildren. He was quoted as saying, “I would never, ever, ever, harm a child.”
I hope he gets a very, very good lawyer. Beto O’Rourke should be proud.
Published in Guns
@susanquinn Ricochet has a great group (of course) for those wanting to ask questions and offer tips on guns .
Outstanding comment. I don’t know what else to say.
I made my AR-15 a few years ago. A couple of experts were just starting their business; I wasn’t the first customer but there couldn’t have been many before me. I sat in their basement for several nights while they explained every little screw and spring. I selected every part from a range of options. I probably chose too heavy a barrel; they warned me I’d pay for the extra accuracy with the extra weight. I did all the work under their supervision.
Black Betty has Aero Precision receivers, a Spikes Tactical 1:7 barrel, an excellent two stage trigger from Troy, a Trijicon ACOG and angled iron sights. I went for the high-end last-forever bolt carrier; that was expensive and probably overkill for a civilian. I’ve had her apart a few times since to add some nifty accessories, like “Molon Labe” engraved takedown pins and a hard-to-find flush-fitting QD socket on the back of the receiver. And I can’t see how anybody can do without a Battery Assist Device. Install one and you’ll never go back.
I’m planning another AR-15. This one will be as light as I can make it and keep the price reasonable (I’ll forego the carbon fiber barrel.) This won’t be a “black rifle” – I’ll pick tan parts and call her Brown Betty. Someday I’ll tell you about another rifle of mine, called Leadbelly.
Remember:
This is the point politicians miss when they say they expect Americans to obey the law because it is the law. Americans obey the law because Americans generally consider the laws to be just. But as politicians push laws that Americans see as unjust, Americans will less and less reflexively obey the law because it is the law. Part of the decline in respect for the law today is that politicians are passing and advocating increasingly unjust laws.
Indeed. They will bring down our obeying the law by trampling on our rights. At some point, enough is enough.
This is a perfect example of what I was talking about. Now I could talk about my Aero upper that matches well with the PSA lower and Atlas cover. Then we could discuss triggers, stocks, barrels, etc. His isn’t some dime a dozen, mass reproduced rifle but one he built himself, customized to the nth degree, unique, and possibly one of a kind. He is attached to it. We are all proud of our final product and can’t see an uncaring government destroying it. Build one and you will be your own gunsmith, stocked in springs, firing pins, etc, replacing parts as needed. That same lower receiver can be used to build a pistol or rifle, in any number of calibers. Gun owners love their ARs for reasons the grabbers don’t know or care about. It is exactly the gun the founders would want themselves…and that we would refuse to give up. Any government that would want to ban one is a government that places itself above your freedom.
I agreed with Mendel’s comment, but I’ll admit that your statement could be true too. There’s really no way for outsiders to know which one is closer to the truth.
I’ve been thinking about your comment here@weeping, and @skyler‘s, too. The issue about the possibility of the family and neighbors intervening by using law enforcement illegitimately is not okay. Mr. Nichols said he didn’t take the guns out of the house, and so we don’t even know if he handled or used them. The situation certainly raises a number of questions.
What did Nichols say in the diner?
Any cop knowingly playing along with a scenario like that has no business behind a badge. If he’s dangerous, institutionalize him. If not, persuade him to hand them over. If neither of those, game over.
Small world. I once knew a man from Nantucket …
Here’s the best description I’ve found. I haven’t found an exact quote (I must admit that I haven’t spent a ton of time searching.)
I agree.
“Somebody could shoot up the school” or “I could shoot up the school”? One is simply a hypothetical; the other, arguably, a threat. The actual words used matter.
I agree, but all I can tell you is what the article says. I know nothing more than that.
You have more faith in our police and citizenry than I have experienced.
My State of California just passed some sweeping red flag laws.
Guess I will have to buy my first gun and learn how to use it.
And in other MV news, someone else is a “danger to himself.”
https://www.mvtimes.com/2019/10/18/fire-lieutenant-faces-felony-weapons-charges/
That article was absent a lot of explanation, wasn’t it?
It’s a classic of the genre. There’s transparency only if you know the right people to ask to find out the real story. I probably don’t on this one. With significant tax liens he may well have been in a desperate place. Nonetheless, I’ve sensed a change in attitude about guns on island. We are non residents but I’ve long had a MA carry permit issued by our up island town – there’s a lot of hunting and an active and fun rod and gun club an I didn’t get a blink when I applied. But I’m not sure it will be renewed when I have to re-up. There’s a new Chief there as well as in Tisbury and they might not think “self defense” is an adequate justification to renew.
That’s exactly what I was thinking. At least with the Nichols case they gave a supposed summary of what he said that set everything in motion. This case? Not so much.
One could be reason to start an investigation. Neither is enough to end an investigation. Are offhand comments > 4th amendment?
Offhand comment or serious threat? I’d like to know exactly what was said before I even begin to make that call.
Anybody that purchase a gun needs to understand that they are going to be taken sooner or later. At that time you need to understand if you will comply or resist. If you decide to resist you need to be at peace with being divested of all your property, livelihood, life and be at peace with killing in your defense.
You should always be at peace with killing in your defense, no matter the preamble.
Yes, first thing I tell people before they buy their first gun.
As I said earlier, Dems won’t be confiscating guns. They will be confiscating people. That might work in anti-gun blue states, but it won’t work in pro-2nd red states. A government that will forcefully enter and confiscate a neighbor’s property, or worse, can threaten anyone.
But when the killing starts and the propaganda goes full speed they will take the guns and the citizens will cheer.
Here’s how it will work. First, they make a law that allows them to confiscate guns. Then, after a brief period to allow people to turn them in, they will pick out a few people that they know are hotheads and not very smart, and they will Ruby Ridge them. They will go to the door to confiscate their guns and do it in the most peaceful manner possible and one of those hotheads will shoot at the cops. They will then go in and execute every single person in that home as brutally and publicly as they can.
There will always be some that will never comply, but almost everyone will give up their guns rather than seeing their family killed.
Terrorism is horrible, not simply because people get killed. Terrorism is horrible because it works very effectively.
Pick a better state if you fear that where you live.