Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Owners may not get guns back (Guns Were Not Illegal, But Will Not Be Returned To Owners)
Herald-Palladium ^ | 15 Sept 2002 | JIM DALGLEISH

Posted on 09/16/2002 7:24:13 PM PDT by tarawa

Owners may not get guns back

By JIM DALGLEISH / H-P City Editor

SODUS - None of the 36 guns seized in February at a Sodus Township home were illegal, federal authorities say, but the owners still may not get them back.

Because police found less than a half-ounce of marijuana, the U.S. Attorney's Office has launched civil forfeiture proceedings to keep the guns and 28,359 rounds of ammunition, Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Delaney said from his Grand Rapids office. He said felony criminal charges could follow if prosecutors conclude the owners lied on gun registration forms when answering standard questions about possible drug use.

Tricia Carrie-LaVanway Bauer, who owns the guns with her father, David LaVanway, and her husband, Blaine, said the marijuana possession was a fluke, a one-time occurrence.

"Just one time, and they're going to take 36 guns away? C'mon ...," she said.

She said that the guns are worth between $25,000 and $30,000 and that authorities seized only 8,000 rounds with bullets. The rest were primers.

"Eight-thousand rounds isn't much when it's divided by (36) guns," she said.

All 36 guns were fully registered and were often used in gun safety training, LaVanway Bauer said. The Bauers say they are gun instructors, with certifications from the National Rifle Association and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.

LaVanway Bauer said the couple cannot teach gun safety without firearms.

Police found a small amount of marijuana in her purse when her car was stopped Feb. 26 at Hillandale and Watson roads in Sodus Township.

The then-Coloma schools substitute bus driver pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of having carried the drugs in a school zone. Coloma's bus garage is next to the high school. The drug charge cost her the job.

She said she had never failed a state-mandated bus driver drug test.

During the home raid, authorities seized 0.42 ounces of marijuana from David LaVanway's bedroom. The amount would make no more than three joints, she said.

She said her father had not used marijuana for years and had been given the drugs by a friend who occasionally stops by the house.

She said her father was not a drug user when he registered six guns about seven years ago through the Berrien County Sheriff's Department.

The Bauers and LaVanway live in the house, which sits on 3.2 acres along Lett Road in a rural part of the township. LaVanway Bauer said her grandmother owns the house.

She said surrounding property owners for years have tried to buy the house so they could divide up the property, and her family's refusal to sell may have prompted neighbors to fabricate stories for police.

Neighbors first called the sheriff's department in March 2001 to report automatic gunfire, drug sales and militia activity, according to an affidavit by Special Agent James Walsh of the federal Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms.

Other people quoted in the report alleged they saw automatic weapons, a silencer - an illegal gun accessory - a large truck with marijuana and human-shaped targets.

But investigators found no evidence to support those claims, Delaney said.

LaVanway Bauer said there was no evidence because no such things were ever at the home.

Much of ATF agent Walsh's report is drawn from sheriff's Detective Lt. David Chandler's interviews with four people, identified in Walsh's report only as "concerned neighbor" or "confidential source."

LaVanway Bauer said the anonymity of the sources is irksome.

"I think they (the sources) should have to come out," she said. "They have destroyed our lives over a bunch of gossip."

She said county and federal authorities needed only to knock on their door to inspect their guns, house and land. Instead, they sought federal warrants and performed a full-fledged raid Feb. 26.

Blaine Bauer was arrested nearby as he was driving home in his tow truck. Police found a handgun behind his seat.

LaVanway Bauer said the gun was registered, legally carried and contained no rounds. Bauer used the gun for shooting behind the tow truck service's garage while waiting for calls.

Nonetheless, he pleaded no contest to a concealed weapons charge and was sentenced to one year's probation. The charge could be dismissed if he meets probation terms.

Assistant Berrien County Prosecutor Caryn Hebets said testimony showed the gun was accessible for Bauer from the driver's seat and that it was not properly cased. Hebets said Bauer told the court he had the gun in the truck for four or five days.

For trucks, state law says a gun must be in a locked case designed for guns, the ammunition must be kept separate, and the gun can only be carried directly to and from shooting ranges.

"You can't carry it around in your vehicle indefinitely," Hebets said.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; banglist; drugwar; forfeiture; guns; marijuana; rkba; searchseizure
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last
Comment #41 Removed by Moderator

To: Arkinsaw
Thanks to Clinton & Bush(es), the fourth amendment is dead.
42 posted on 09/16/2002 9:28:45 PM PDT by rightofrush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KingKongCobra
Hmm. I'm afraid the Constitution means whatever 9 old men think it means.

That is true. Still, citizens should have an informed opinion about USSC ruling and whether or not they are being true to the written Constitution.

I often disagree with them but if they decide it's OK to take these guns, then it's OK. That's the breaks.

Does asset forfeiture such as this violate any aspect of the Constitution, according to how you read and understand the Constitution?

43 posted on 09/16/2002 9:31:24 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie; JediGirl
ping
44 posted on 09/16/2002 9:36:47 PM PDT by The FRugitive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
I'm not a fan of asset forfeiture and hope that more conservatives can be placed on the court. Until they are, I'm stuck with it. I also oppose abortion - stuck with that too. School prayer, flag burning, stupid looking "minority" districts and 1000 other things (mostly related to the loss of the tenth amendment). I'd rather work within the system than leave my wife and kids alone because I went "nutty".
45 posted on 09/16/2002 9:40:07 PM PDT by KingKongCobra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: KingKongCobra
I take that as a "yes" that asset forfeiture such as this does violate the US Constitution, as you interpret it. Correct?
46 posted on 09/16/2002 9:47:58 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
No, you can take it as an "I'm not paid to interpret the Constitution and I therefore defer to those who are". My "opinion" in irrelevent.
47 posted on 09/16/2002 9:53:29 PM PDT by KingKongCobra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Always A Marine
This is armed robbery. That the criminals wear badges does not change a thing -- except that they will get away with the crime. Decent citizens should have no respect for them...

I do not advocate illegal drug use at all, but I agree and I don't think it is right to take all their firearms away over something like this.

Give them any reason at all and they will take your guns away in a heartbeat.

48 posted on 09/16/2002 10:16:18 PM PDT by 2nd_Amendment_Defender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: KingKongCobra
In post 36 you mentioned the Constitution and said that you often disagree with the USSC.

It is fair game to ask a poster for their opinion on an issue which they are discussing, be it abortion or the constitutionality of a law.

IMO.

49 posted on 09/16/2002 10:34:07 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
Yeah, you asked and I answered. Was it not clear? I'll expand on it. I think that the USSC makes many bad decisions. The Constitution gives them this power. Support for the Constitution also requires me to support the constitutional process for its interpretation. To think that I am not bound by these decisions and can do my own thing based on my own interpretation would actually make me an anarchist. I'm afraid that "I'm going to live my life based on my interpretation and everybody else can go to heck" is NOT supported by the constitution. It's the definition of anarchy. When I don't agree with a decision, I vote for people who have a chance to fix it. Note: That leaves out the Quixote warriors.
50 posted on 09/16/2002 10:47:23 PM PDT by KingKongCobra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: KingKongCobra
I agree that the 7 old men and 2 old women have the final say with regard to constitutional law. I said so in my first post to you.

I don't know why the heck you are bringing up "anarchy" and "Quixotic warriors".

What's that got to do with someone's opinion on whether the USSC is ruling according to the written Constitution?

51 posted on 09/16/2002 11:06:38 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: hoosierskypilot
"If convicted, they lose the guns. Period."

Then the guns should be sold by the owners and they keep the money - after all, the guns are their private property.
52 posted on 09/16/2002 11:11:15 PM PDT by Gigantor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
I bring up anarchy and Quixote to explain why I hold my positions. Thanks for the discussion, I'm off to bed.
53 posted on 09/16/2002 11:23:27 PM PDT by KingKongCobra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Gigantor
An excellent suggestion. Perfect solution for this case. If the guns could be proven to be ill-gotten from criminal activity, it might be different, but in this instance the owners should be compensated.
54 posted on 09/16/2002 11:25:30 PM PDT by KingKongCobra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Lowelljr
Do you think it cute the way you intentionally weave "....yall....ain't and "....cause...." into your posts. Cute but ineffective and demeaning toward those you may consider inferior intellectually. Consider this: You are what you write.
55 posted on 09/16/2002 11:32:43 PM PDT by Robert Drobot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: big ern
I think Ill get Unintended Consequences out again and read it. Great book!
56 posted on 09/16/2002 11:36:12 PM PDT by ezo4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mulder
How many people here have more than a 12 pack in there pantry or fridge. Or lets say a 5th of any type of alcohol. I dont advocate smoking pot or any other illegal drug.

But.... jeeez to sieze $20-30k of firearms for a substance that wouldn't even come close to intoxicating a person more than what most of us have legally.
57 posted on 09/16/2002 11:44:30 PM PDT by ezo4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: KingKongCobra
I bring up anarchy and Quixote to explain why I hold my postions.

I appreciate the explanation of why you hold your positions. I was interested in what one of those positions was.

Thanks for the discussion, I'm off to bed.

Good night.

58 posted on 09/16/2002 11:57:22 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Gigantor
"Then the guns should be sold by the owners and they keep the money - after all, the guns are their private property."

No argument here. But, in CA, for example, there was a case where the local policemen took the guns and sold them for personal profit.

I don't think guns should be targeted any more than kitchen knives and baseball bats. After all, these can be used for nefarious purposes, also.

59 posted on 09/17/2002 12:18:25 AM PDT by hoosierskypilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: KingKongCobra
Agreed. With all the pap about drugs and guns aimed at law abiding gun owners, they should either have fought the charges, or quit whining. If they are teaching gun safety, they should set a superior example, and have thought about how their actions (in a worst-case-scenario) would reflect on the entire gun owning community,.

I will not tolerate the presence of illegal drugs in my home or vehicle. My friends know this, and the rare few who might partake will not compromise me by having drugs in their posession when they come to visit.

Does go to show that the drug test doesn't seem to be working very well, though--at least in this instance.

60 posted on 09/17/2002 12:32:36 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson