DC locks up non-criminal for possessing empty shells

Kelson1066 · Oct 23, 2013

Wow...just...wow

Lock up a local sportsman from Georgetown over a non-issue and in other news Lil' RayRay from SE gets an illegal firearm commits a crime and walks away with a slap on the wrist. You have got to be F'N Kidding Me.

Mdeng · Oct 23, 2013

Weren't we recently told by one of our resident MPD officers that they would not arrest soley for ammo and components?

mpdc4511 said:
Ok ill just say this......we have NEVER been instructed to arrests tourist for this or citizens alike. In fact its the opposite we have been told to not arrest people for unregistered ammo ESPECIALLY non residents that have ammo but no gun.

As a reference point I am in a unit that comes across a lot of guns and tons of sources who give us info on illegal guns all the time.

The article is just trying to stir up emotions about the city's terrible gun laws. As a member of that department I can say I've only been told the opposite by my superiors and that's 5 years worth of dept knowledge.

Kman · Oct 23, 2013

Mdeng said:
Weren't we recently told by one of our resident MPD officers that they would not arrest soley for ammo and components?

Why yes, yes we were.

This is over the top stupid and oppressive, even for DC.

UNcommon Arms · Oct 23, 2013

Brychan said:
He sounds like a meance to soceity to me, the police chief not the defendent.

Just sold an AR to a DC police officer... he too said Lanier is the biggest DOPE he's ever met.

redeemed.man · Oct 23, 2013

Mdeng said:
Weren't we recently told by one of our resident MPD officers that they would not arrest soley for ammo and components?

Clearly the chief will do whatever she wants. Apparently she forgot where she came from. She is now elite in her mind and answers only to the politicians who have given her the high perch from which to look down on us commoners. Hopefully this case results in some common sense from the court system about how ridiculous DC laws are. I doubt it, but I can always hope.

SS396 · Oct 23, 2013

I'm sure this won't calm anyone's fears, but it appears from the article that this case involves alleged domestic violence claimed by his estranged wife. They mention in the article that the wife says he threatened her with a firearm. As is often the case, they don't provide any more detail on this guy's domestic behavior.

Having dealt with this in the past, I'm certain there is much more to this story that can't be released by police, or printed in the papers. Many departments now have rules that, in cases of domestic violence, firearms will be taken. This is only temporary and the owner is given information on how to reclaim them. It is also possible, and likely in my experience, that there could be an allegation that he is mentally unstable and therefore the firearms are under scrutiny. This may explain why they went to Virginia to view the firearms. Domestic violence has gotten to the point where the authorities will be crucified if they don't act and this man murders the woman. I believe the article said he was charged with an ammunition violation. This, I suspect, was done because they're looking for any opportunity to justify monitoring this individual for the safety of the woman.

Remember, this is a one sided news paper article that you're getting the information from. We typically don't fall hook, line, and sinker for what the media feeds us today; why do it with this article? Many did that with the Trevon Martin case, but many of us new better. The media only prints what the authorities can reveal. My point is, this may be more about domestic violence/mental evaluation than it is about gun grabbing.

Inigoes · Oct 23, 2013

SS396 said:
I'm sure this won't calm anyone's fears, but it appears from the article that this case involves alleged domestic violence claimed by his estranged wife. They mention in the article that the wife says he threatened her with a firearm. As is often the case, they don't provide any more detail on this guy's domestic behavior.

The article did say: a judge held the domestic violence as a false accusation.

The police know better, than the judge...

Seth · Oct 23, 2013

SS396 said:
I'm sure this won't calm anyone's fears, but it appears from the article that this case involves alleged domestic violence claimed by his estranged wife. They mention in the article that the wife says he threatened her with a firearm. As is often the case, they don't provide any more detail on this guy's domestic behavior.

Having dealt with this in the past, I'm certain there is much more to this story that can't be released by police, or printed in the papers. Many departments now have rules that, in cases of domestic violence, firearms will be taken. It is only temporary and the owner is given information on how to reclaim them. It is also possible, and likely in my experience, that there could be an allegation that he is mentally unstable and therefore the firearms are under scrutiny. Domestic violence has gotten to the point where the authorities will be crucified if they don't act and this man murders the woman. I believe the article said he was charged with an ammunition violation. This, I suspect, was done because they're looking for any opportunity to justify monitoring this individual for the safety of the woman.

Remember, this is a one sided news paper article that you're getting the information from. We typically don't fall hook, line, and sinker for what the media feeds us today; why do it with this article? Many did that with the Trevon Martin case, but many of us new better. The media only prints what the authorities can reveal. My point is, this may be more about domestic violence/mental evaluation than it is about gun grabbing.

I agree that we need more sources on this. This article does say that the judge threw the domestic abuse case out for not having merit. They also didn't confiscate his weapons. He is not being held till trial. And most importantly, his kids are still with him. If the domestic abuse allegations were true there is no way they would be allowed to stay in his house.

Inigoes · Oct 23, 2013

Seth said:
They also didn't confiscate his weapons. He is not being held till trial.

Not completely accurate.

The police confiscated a BP handgun (aka antique) that is completely legal in DC.

SS396 · Oct 23, 2013

Seth said:
I agree that we need more sources on this. This article does say that the judge threw the domestic abuse case out for not having merit. They also didn't confiscate his weapons. He is not being held till trial. And most importantly, his kids are still with him. If the domestic abuse allegations were true there is no way they would be allowed to stay in his house.

You make good points, unfortunately though the system doesn't always work that well. They may be trying to build the case against him before they can take the kids into custody. In regard to the confiscation of firemarms, I meant that as a general statement about the protocol in some areas due to the domestic violence concern. Obviously I'm doing a lot of speculating here, but I do have quite a bit of experience in this area. I've seen this before. My only point is for people not to rush to judgement when there is clearly more to the story.

SS396 · Oct 23, 2013

Inigoes said:
The article did say: a judge held the domestic violence as a false accusation.

The police know better, than the judge...

To clarify, the judge ruled that complaint lacked "merit". And it may well have. Part of the problem here is that we're all trying to speculate on what is really going on.....therein lies the problem, and my point.

For arguments sake, lacking merit doesn't necessarily mean the alleged act didn't occur. She may not have explained her case very well and therefor couldn't obtain the order. Also, the judge is human. The lacking of merit is somewhat subjective. This is why we have several levels of review. The police, particularly in cases of domestic violence, must act quickly based on what they know at the time. Later judicial review may determine that their actions were not necessary. This is normal and very common. Again, the police are acting on what they KNOW AT THE TIME. I also think, as a former SWAT officer, that the use of the tactacal team in this case is very telling. They don't use this resource lightly I can assure you. You do not have all of the information.

I think if you take a step back for a minute, many will agree that something more is going on with this man. This, in my opinion, is not just your everyday innocent gun owner/hunter who was picked out of millions for persecution. If, on the other hand it was, then I'd be the first to speak out against it.

Seth · Oct 23, 2013

SS396 said:
To clarify, the judge ruled that complaint lacked "merit". And it may well have. Part of the problem here is that we're all trying to speculate on what is really going on.....therein lies the problem, and my point.

For arguments sake, lacking merit doesn't necessarily mean the alleged act didn't occur. She may not have explained her case very well and therefor couldn't obtain the order. Also, the judge is human. The lacking of merit is somewhat subjective. This is why we have several levels of review. The police, particularly in cases of domestic violence, must act quickly based on what they know at the time. Later judicial review may determine that their actions were not necessary. This is normal and very common. Again, the police are acting on what they KNOW AT THE TIME. I also think, as a former SWAT officer, that the use of the tactacal team in this case is very telling. They don't use this resource lightly I can assure you. You do not have all of the information.

I think if you take a step back for a minute, many will agree that something more is going on with this man. This, in my opinion, is not just your everyday innocent gun owner/hunter who was picked out of millions for persecution. If, on the other hand it was, then I'd be the first to speak out against it.

It wouldn't be the first tactical team sent to a non-violent offender.

Edit: congrats on turning 50

SS396 · Oct 23, 2013

Seth said:
It wouldn't be the first tactical team sent to a non-violent offender.

Edit: congrats on turning 50

Was it the correct use of the tactical team? I have no way of knowing. A person's past history of violence would certainly come into play, but it is not a requirement for utilizing the team. His rhetoric, specific threats, and ability to carry them out (based possibly on information from other people familiar with him.) etc. could be enough.

I'm way out in speculation land, but my common sense tells me I'm on the right track.

Ungermc · Oct 23, 2013

DC has crackheads running the city!

StantonCree · Oct 23, 2013

There is more to this then the article is leading on and also full tact gear is ********. Just because a guy is in plain clothes with a tac vest on is not full TAC gear.

SS396 · Oct 23, 2013

Ungermc said:
DC has crackheads running the city!

Well I can't argue with you on that. They reelected Marion Barry back in the day.

SS396 · Oct 23, 2013

mpdc4511 said:
There is more to this then the article is leading on and also full tact gear is ********. Just because a guy is in plain clothes with a tac vest on is not full TAC gear.

Very good point. It may not have even been their SWAT team. I stand corrected.

Second Amendment · Oct 23, 2013

WTF?

The police banged on the front door of Mr. Witaschek’s Georgetown home at 8:20 p.m. on July 7, 2012, to execute a search warrant for “firearms and ammunition … gun cleaning equipment, holsters, bullet holders and ammunition receipts.”

Vince55 · Oct 23, 2013

UNcommon Arms said:
Just sold an AR to a DC police officer... he too said Lanier is the biggest DOPE he's ever met.

Fits right in with the ass#### we have for a governor.

StantonCree · Oct 23, 2013

Mdeng said:
Weren't we recently told by one of our resident MPD officers that they would not arrest soley for ammo and components?

Yes and I stand by my comment. In fact I'll even go as far to say that chances are the wife mentioned gun and she had a TPO (probably at the time of the SW) so Gun recovery unit probably obtained a search warrant. Also they did find a BP revolver so there is a crap ton in this case that we don't know. They could have utilized the charge temprorarly while the DV related stuff is investigated. If you have a TPO aganist you, you can not possess firearms. Now yes I understand the fact that it's "technically" not a firearm and that will obviously come to light at some point but there is way more to this then we know.

SS396 said:
Very good point. It may not have even been their SWAT team. I stand corrected.

Also to add to this GRU isn't dressed in full out tactictal gear they dress the exact same way I dress at work. Regular street clothes and a vest that says police that holds their radio, badge, notebook, pens, and spare cuffs. This is far from TAC gear. You want to see tac gear look at our SWAT (ERT) team or our CDU (riot) units, oh and maybe our K9 is considered TAC because they wear dark blue BDU's and have drop leg holsters. Otherwise the entry teams are generally street cops in plain clothes (not under cover).

DC locks up non-criminal for possessing empty shells

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Blah, blah, blah

Banned

Ultimate Member

Forum LEO whipping post

Head'n for the hills

Active Member

Head'n for the hills

Forum LEO whipping post

Forum LEO whipping post

Active Member

Forum LEO whipping post

Uses Gun-oil Aftershave

Watch your beer

Forum LEO whipping post

Forum LEO whipping post

Ultimate Member

Vince55

Watch your beer

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics