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.
It isn't a question of how much or how messed up they would get, although .42 oz of grass should get them higher than they want in one sitting unless it is real crap. The question comes down to this: our culture has problems with people in posession of controlled substances and firearms at the same time. Heck, we don't even like drunks running around with a loaded gun.
If you think the law is in error, change the law, or defy it at your own risk.
The issue here isn't really a Second amendment issue, it is a firearms/drug posession issue. If the drug had been LSD or ecstacy, would you still feel the same?
BDB says: "Just waiting for the usual WOD cheerleeders to show up and say 'good riddance'"
You called? Yeah, you can count me among "the usual suspects", but in this case I say this government gun-grab is not only wrong, but pure unadulterated bull excrement and it makes me madder than hell. The government had better damn well wise up before they find Henry Bowman stalking this land.
How can I rationalize these two opinions? Simple, I don't throw away my car when it malfunctions. I fix the car and keep on going. The following are some of the constraints I would place on the WOD to keep it consistent with how I read the Constitution.
I don't see any constitutional problem with the feds using the ICC clause to bar interstate transportation (or the threat of same) of illegal drugs. Nor even the state taking an even more restrictive enforcement approach regarding possession, sales and use.
And I don't see a problem with the feds or the state depriving a drug trafficker from the fruits of his crimes by using forfeiture, but ONLY when a.) the seizures do not amount to a "bill of attainder" (i.e., only after conviction and hearing) and b.)the property seized can be reasonably determined to be the proceeds of crime.
I would make the use of any military asset WITHIN our borders strictly illegal in the WOD. I would jail officers and agents for some of their wilder excesses and discipline smaller offenses accordingly.
If these things were SOP, we wouldn't be reading about the outrage of the gun seizure in the above article.
Regards,
Boot Hill
So, "not tipping off their search" is more important than respecting civil liberties?? The presumption is "innocent until PROVEN guilty". The police "raid, raid, raid" mentality is one of the biggest travesties foisted on us by the "war on some drugs"--the biggest is "civil forfeiture". It is NOT sufficient to perform such activities based on informant statements alone---more probable cause should be needed.
The fact that all the laws involved are very clearly unconstitutional, of course, cuts no ice with a "lifetime NRA member". That's the reason so many of us regard the NRA as a guncontrol lobby.
When your masters make tobacco illegal, you'll post the same sentiment with slightly different wording, won't you? Polish their shoes while you're down there groveling.
“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 only gets 7 joints to the ounce? That’s some big doobies.
I thought most people were aware that it is illegal to possess both illegal substances and firearms at the same time.
That's a common misconception. The Constitution gives the Supremes no such power. That power was invented by a Supreme Court justice in his opinion contained in the ruling on Marbury v Madison.
Support for the Constitution also requires me to support the constitutional process for its interpretation.
Respect for the Constitution should require you to read it for yourself instead of taking the word of government employed lawers on what it says. The document is written in plain English and needs no "interpretation" unless one doesn't understand English. There is no "constitutional process for its interpretation".
Right on the money. The forteiture laws have done more to corrupt honest law enforcement than anything except possibly prohibition in the 1920's. Those laws clearly violate the 5th amendment's taking clause, yet the courts let the outrage continue and gladly take their share of the booty. It's hard to imagine a more perfect recipe for LE corruption and abuse of power.
I have never used illegal drugs and have little sympathy for those who are caught doing so, but the WOD as it is conducted has been, and continues to be, the worst thing that has ever happened to the right we all have to honest law enforcement. But because of the acceptance of a police state mentality by the majority, including some of the posters on this thread, nothing can or will be done to stop it. Perhaps when enough of these holier than thou police state enthusiasts lose their own property over some trumped up charge by a greedy LE department that attitude may change.
Having said all that, I believe these people who lost their guns were incredibly stupid if they did possess any illegal substance as they have admitted. The appropriate action there would be a fine for a 1st time misdemeanor drug offense and return of all property to the rightful owners. But in reality I would bet they never see those guns again. They'rs just fortunate they didn't lose their vehicles and their home, must be that the LE agency there isn't quite as money hungry as they are in many jurisdictions.
Is there EVER going to be a final straw for your camels back?
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.