SSCC #49–Lakewood Police

When they found Rice wasn’t home, they asked an obliging employee of the complex to open up the apartment without her consent. Once inside, they raided the gun rack, making off with 13 firearms worth around $15,000. The only problem: They had no apparent reason to.

This woman had broken no laws.  The weapons were legally owned.  The police confiscated them without warrant.  Then when she requested they be returned, they demanded there be a court order.  May Mrs. Rice’s attorney  send the city of Lakewood into receivership.

This isn’t the first time that police have gone shopping for new firearms using someone’s personal property as the store.

State Sponsored Criminal Count: 49

Because really being a cop just allows you to shop through other peoples property.  The law is just for everyone else to follow.

H/t Dave Hardy

Bookmark the permalink.

About TMM

TMM is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms. Many know his private name and information however due to the current political climate, many are distancing themselves due to the abandonment of Due Process.

3 Responses to SSCC #49–Lakewood Police

  1. Sinking Bugger says:

    this is a story about an escaped mental patient more than anything. heres the police report prior to them taking the guns.
    would like us to check to see if francesca rice in apt #709
    is there. female is entered missing involuntary out of the
    va hospital and they have a signed certificate from a
    doctor stating she is a danger to herself or others and can
    be taken back to the va hospital against her will due to
    her mental and emotional status. 

    • Actual link to legal documents please indicating involuntary commitment.  I’d further like to point out they were looking for her and did NOT have an order to seize her weapons.

    • Further, I would like to add that behavior like this often acts to the detriment of those that need help.  Many doctors will issue statements like that just because they dislike private firearms ownership.

      For example there has been a push to use PTSD and an exclusionary measure to prevent firearms ownership.  If you have to surrender your firearms, why would you seek treatment.  Bottom line is, if you’re safe enough to be out among the general public, you should be allowed to have a firearm, past history or not.  If you’re too dangerous to have a gun, you’re too dangerous to be in society.

      I find it quite telling you didn’t actually link to the filed report, but instead gave us hand written account without proper punctuation or grammar.