Cops stole my Dads gun

What Happened;

My dad had his shotgun at my sisters house. My sister got into a domestic dispute with her husband. Her husband was supposedly holding her hostage (not really) in her house and had a knife. He was arrested. The cops then take my Dads shotgun for whatever reason.

My dad tried to get the gun back by calling the police. The police said that the judge destroys the gun after the trial.

Is this normal? Or is there anyway to get it back? I'm confused about the situation.

The shotgun was nostalgic,because it was my grandfathers before he died.

And NO it isn't registered, it isn't required in Ohio

Ohio, USA gun laws below;

Possession No state permit or license is required to possess a handgun, rifle or shotgun.

No state permit or license is required to purchase a handgun, rifle, or shotgun.

crime.about.com...

Originally posted by RealSpoke
What Happened;

My dad had his shotgun at my sisters house. My sister got into a domestic dispute with her husband. Her husband was supposedly holding her hostage (not really) in her house and had a knife. He was arrested. The cops then take my Dads shotgun for whatever reason.

My dad tried to get the gun back by calling the police. The police said that the judge destroys the gun after the trial.

Is this normal? Or is there anyway to get it back? I'm confused about the situation.

edit on 17-5-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)

Never heard of this it doesn't sound correct unless it was used in a killing and is unregistered .

in any domestic dispute the cops will confiscate any weapons they see fit. especially a gun.
as for the judge destroying it,that is weird. does your dad have a licence for it?
if so,he may be able to try to sue the court for the value of the gun.
maybe he should call a lawyer.

Yes, its normal. If it was a registered firearm as in handgun...it could be petitioned back from the court. They would then decide if it could/should be returned to the legal registered owner.

Long guns and things like AK's are generally taken for the good and safety of the family/persons involved. Most are never returned but destroyed.

reply to post by mysterioustranger


So they can just destroy a gun that was sitting in the house because they saw it?

reply to post by RealSpoke


appears that way sorry! I knew that they would confiscate guns that are unregistered but destroying a shotgun sounds stupid. Thats why you never never ever call the cops for anything they steal your stuff and fine you

It depends on the state. If it is considered evidence its not likely you can get it back. Its a just shotgun .... the cost of fighting it legally far outweighs the cost of a new shotgun.

In 1998 I was pulled over and the Local PD searched my vehicle without a warrant or my consent after one officer said his drug dog "had a hit". They impounded my car and left me stranded and not even detained. It took me almost 2 years to recover 1 shotgun 3 rifles and they kept about 3000 rounds of ammo and all my SKS mags. I fought it without an attorney but it still cost me more than all the guns were worth. If I had to do it all over again I would have just bought replacements.

reply to post by RealSpoke


Yes. You see, it was used in a situation. Not saying it was afor sure-real-actual situation...(you said it was a mistaken hostage situation)...to keep that "if-y" situation from possibly happening again and making them come out (that takes them away form real crime-fighting)...theyll remove it/them for the good of all.

Right? Nope. Legal? Yep. In the guize of "public-safety". And the judges and courts usually side with the cops in not returning them. And IF they decide to return them...theyve often already been destroyed.

How do I know this personally? They have my confiscated Mossberg pump, and Ak.

PS. Did they give him a reciept for the confiscation? Gun serial # on it? If not...he cant prove they ever took it. Thats often how they handle that. PROVE they even HAVE or TOOK it without a legal property/receipt.

The first question is, Is the gun legally registered to your father using all the correct information??

As other's have stated, when dealing with a violent dispute the police do have authority to seize any weapon they deem dangerous regardless of ownership. I ASSume that this particular jurisdiction may frown heavily on the fact that your father allowed his gun to be "borrowed" by an individual to whom the firearm was NOT legally registered. If the guy has a previous record of felonies, it is highly unlikely (at least here) that your dad will ever get the gun back. If he didn't report it stolen and knowingly let a felon use his gun... that won't sit well with the court.

It is my opinion that lawmakers are currently looking for ways to rid everyone of their firearms. Any excuse is a good one I suppose. The key is not to make it easier for them to do that.

I feel like if it's your dad's gun, he should get it back. I hope he does, likely he will not.

Is he going to pursue this?

You realize if your father was responsible, he'd still have the gun, right?

Leaving guns at other people's houses is criminally stupid, and should be grounds for losing a FOID card.

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe


Hello friend. Youre correct. Im not sure about registering elsewhere, but you do not need to register long guns ie: rifles and shotguns. You are only required to be legal age and not convicted of any felonies. There is no background checks and the only "registery" is the one on your purchase reciept showing you purchased one.

You can pay at the register and walk right out of Kmarts with it. (or Walmarts or elsewhere-where-ever)

An acquaintance of mine in another state used a firearm in a clear self-defense case against an armed mugger.

Cops took his one and only gun. Said it was for the investigation.

Never got it back. No calls are ever returned. It's just gone. Poof.

He's broke but some friends scraped together enough for him to go pick up another.

He lives in a #ty neighborhood full of gang activity. It's only a matter of time before one of the robbers 35 "cousins" decides to come locking for revenge and the cops left him defenseless.

Around here the cases where guns have actually been returned involved really small-town forces where everyone knows everyone or really expensive drawn-out lawsuits against departments and cities.

Anything other than having your cop buddy hand it back to you or threatening the world with a lawsuit and you'll never see your property again.

Almost veryone has asked if the gun was registered. The OP said not only, no it wasn't, it isn't required.

Why in the world does everyone think guns have to be "registered"???? Is it some mass delusion caused by the media/TV/schools?

Some STATES require gun registration. Most do not. I live in Oklahoma. There is no registration, permit, etc needed to buy or own a firearm (there is to carry, but that's different) Now, I have kept most of my receipts to show proof of ownership. I think they are also listed under my personal property insurance. So I suppose I could "prove" I ownership.
.
Anyways, I get a little tired of this montra of, "is the gun registered, it's got to be registered". There is no national gun registration in the general sense of how most seem to use the term. (There are some restrictions on things like automatic weapons. You can own them, but you must pay $200 tax stamp, hold on to that paperwork, and in most places register it with local authorities). Those with gun dealer license have several regulations they must abide buy. But there is no "registration". The closest thing that is required legaly is a "transfer form" 4473, when a firearm is sold between a licensed dealer and an individual. Incidently, private sales between individuals are not tracked in this manner.

And I agree though, why did the father leave the gun somewhere besides his property. Not exactly smart. I understand it was with family, but still.

reply to post by mysterioustranger


I had to undergo a background check to buy a 12 gauge from
Wal-Mart several years back. www.freerepublic.com...

You are correct about the registering. I did forget that it is not a necessity for some firearms. However... some places may do it at the time of purchase and the buyer may not be aware of it.

unitedconservatives.blogspot.com...

Thank you for pointing out my mistake without being a jerk. I don't know why I forgot about that. It's been a pretty good while since I purchased any new firearms.

Perhaps the Dad felt the gun was safer stored in some other neighbourhood?Or perhaps hes was going to be away from home and felt it was safer there than in his empty home.
Who can say?
The point here people, is you dont even read the godamn OP before asking stupid baseless questions that the answers for are staring at you from the OP.....
The fact that Ohio does not register guns, as well as the proplr the gun was left with can be assumed to be responsible adults....and family,there is no harm or foul in the gun being at their house.
Whats the matter with you people?
You want the right to bear arms, and yet are horrified by the familiarity others show with them.....
If you are free to bear them, you are free to lend or give or sell or store or just about anything you can think of to do with them!
Lots of things can kill besides guns, and are carelessly left under the kitchen sink where toddlers may help themselves....but you dont hear a lot of complaining about dead kids from that......
perhaps a healthy dose of common sense is whaat America needs most.
The police very correctly removed the gun.In domestics its mandatory and should be so.
However they have no right to hold the weapon indefinately especially if it can be shown it is anothers property.
The cost of retrieving it may well be many fold the cost of replacement however......All these policies are designed to remove the guns from the hands of the people....added up they remove a fair total per year too..... Im sorry bout yer Grampas shotgun bud......

The police are lying to you. The gun is still your property and can be petitioned for return. I would suggest contacting your states DoJ. I had a similar incident and it took me 6 months of being run around by my local police department before I got in contact with someone at the DoJ that had my firearm returned to me.

reply to post by RealSpoke


it's called gun control

they took it and destroyed it
so now you and your folks are disarmed.

ohio huh?
why am i not surprised?

reply to post by RealSpoke


Unfortuntely, there are several federal and state laws that may apply to this situation.

If the firearm is used in some sort of criminal act, the firearm is subject to seizure by the police as evidence.

Next, is the Lautenberg Amendment or Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban.

Under this statute, domestic violence offenders are federally prohibited to own or possess any firearm. If the police respond to a domestic abuse type situation, any firearms seen in the house are subject to seizure and safekeeping because the person in possession of the firearm, if convicted, may become a domestic violence offender.

If the accused person is later found guilty, the firearm will be destroyed by the police. If the accused person takes a plea deal where they are not necessarily found guilty, the judge can make it a stipulation of the deal to relinquish the firearm and have it destroyed. If the accused person is found not guilty outright, as long as the accused person passes another background check, the firearm should be released back to it's rightful owner.

And NO it isn't registered, it isn't required in Ohio

This is also a big problem in this situation. Without registration, it is very hard to prove who actually owns the firearm. Unless some sort of receipt or documentation is produced, it is almost impossible to prove ownership and ownership would automatically be attributed to whomever is found in possession of said unregistered firearm.

This Ohio Law may also apply in this case depending on the facts. In this law, it is unlawful to recklessly lend a firearm to a prohibited person. Meaning if your father recklessly loaned the firearm to a prohibited person he may be in violation of the state law. This may be a little far fetched and would depend on what the court's definition of reckless may be when pertaining to lending a firearm.

Whenever someone is willingly allowing their firearm to be taken out of their custody, it is a risky situation because of these transfer laws. If the person you are lending your firearm to is federally prohibited, you may be in violation of the law.

reply to post by mysterioustranger

You are only required to be legal age and not convicted of any felonies.

The prohibitions on owning or possession of any firearms is a little more strict than just felonies.

Federal law actually prohibits anyone who is under indictment or convicted of any crime which carries more than one year's imprisonment. Even if they do not serve that time in jail, simply one's conviction of said crime federally prohibits them.

ATF Source

'Not out of the ordinary.

Much worse happens. I used to counsel convicted small-time drug dealers in Austin. Frequently, they claimed that they had more grass and cash than the arresting officers reported to the court.

The young guys were smart enough to keep their mouths shut in court for a sensible reason, The lessor amount of either cash or dope would work in their favor if anything. Second, who could they report their theft to?

I've just described the perfect crime.