Second Amendment group sues Chief Chitwood, Daytona, over seized guns

[NRA Member]

Second Amendment group sues Chief Chitwood, Daytona, over seized guns



DAYTONA BEACH — A Second Amendment group is suing the city of Daytona Beach on behalf of a combat veteran whose firearms the group claims were seized illegally by police.

Sean Caranna, executive director of Florida Carry Inc., also said the U.S. Army veteran's Second Amendment rights had been violated and that police had no warrant when they entered the man's home and confiscated 16 firearms. The veteran, whom Caranna would not name, served three tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan.



http://www.news-journalonline.com/ar...er-seized-guns

[Champagne Lady]

Nothing pisses me off more than such disrespect for veterans. I hope he wins his suit.

[stainless]

I wonder if Chief Chitwood is part of the Joie Chitwood family? It is same area.

[Gun]

Interesting story.

Chitwood said Bontempo went to the Police Department after he was released from Halifax and asked for his guns. When asked to produce his mental health records, Chitwood said Bontempo came back with a letter from a doctor who diagnosed him with post traumatic stress disorder, alcoholism and systematic personality disorder.

"I said no way is he getting his guns back," Chitwood said. "I can't allow this guy to go ballistic on himself or other people. If that happens then everyone will ask why we gave him the guns back."

Wasn't Chris Kyle shot by a veteran with PTSD?

[streaker69]

I honestly cannot say that I disagree with the chief's position. He called a crisis hotline and said he wanted to shoot himself. He's been diagnosed with apparent mental issues. Would you want this guy to be your neighbor?

[bogey1]

Give them to a qualified relative.

[c45man]

I wonder if Chief Chitwood is part of the Joie Chitwood family? It is same area.

This chief chitwood is the son of the upper darby police dept chief

[TaePo]

I read the whole article so my opinion is based on that information only.

Whether I agree with current law or not, it would seem that the original confiscation may have been prudent on the two counts mentioned in the article. Safety of the person having a bad day, and the securing of weapons during the medical detention. Should other options have been available such as releasing to a friend? I would think so, but I am not familiar with Florida law. Also, when police arrived, he told them about all the weapons in the house and it sounds to me that he most likely gave permission for a search. Now, a good lawyer could argue that if he is not considered mentally competent at the time (danger to himself and others) then how can he give consent?

If evidence was produced showing him to be stable via a written doctor's report, then the weapons should be returned asap. One side claimed that he was cleared by a doctor and the police claim that he showed a paper listing his ailments (PTSD, alcoholism, and systematic personality disorder). I don't know who is telling the truth on this point but he apparently was released so I would imagine he used that report.

"I can understand seizing a gun if it's on the person, but going into the house and taking all the guns is against the law," Caranna said. "Now they're asking him (Bontempo) for a court order and they're shifting the burden of proof on him to prove that he's not mentally ill."

Chitwood disagreed, saying Florida Carry is not interested in the overall safety of the community.

"They really don't care about public safety," he said.

It is quite interesting to note that law enforcement (again) is using a plea for public safety to entice the giving up of individual rights.

Nice meaningless attack on Florida Carry, Mr. Chitwood. Can't you understand that Florida Carry is concerned for the bigger picture of individual liberty over governmental interference, which in the long run would be far more injurious to public / individual safety?

[PAMedic=F|A=]

1. He called for help.
2. It appeared from the police statement in the article he went willingly.
3. He was discharged from the hospital after being seen by a mental health professional as being not a threat to himself.


I would question the police securing the firearms for several reasons.

1. Well in the treatment facility he would have no access to them.
2. As a Paramedic I've never seen police secure weapons not involved in a crime - unless the patient was to injured ill to possess them (IE a car accident)

3. In PA holding onto those firearms after discharge for voluntary treatment would be illegal. I believe that is known as theft.

No matter how sane you are, always get treatment voluntarily, never let them 302 (involuntary mental health commitment).

[MikeinPhilly]

Man for a second there I thought this was going to be about that clown in Upper Darby.