Sean Caranna courtesy floridacarry.org

“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. Now they’re asking him for a court order and they’re shifting the burden of proof on him to prove that he’s not mentally ill.” – Sean Caranna in Second Amendment group sues Chief Chitwood, Daytona over seized guns [at news-journalonline.com]

Recommended For You

28 Responses to Quote of the Day: We Don’t Need No Steenkin’ Warrant Edition

  1. If I’m not mistaken, it’s Florida Carry that is doing the suing. If you are a Floridian, please consider becoming a member (I’m sending in my membership next week when I get paid).

  2. From the article:

    Bontempo came back with a letter from a doctor who diagnosed him with post traumatic stress disorder, alcoholism and systematic personality disorder.

    All other considerations aside, can anyone explain to me what is meant by “systematic personality disorder”? Because doing a web search on the term just seems to loop back around to this one incident.

    • They probably meant pervasive personality disorder, a catch-all applied to a constellation of developmental disorders.

      In this context, likely “not fitting in.”

      • Yeah. This is exactly the problem with the vague “mental health” requirement for background checks. What does it mean?

        “Personality disorders” are particularly problematic, ranging from someone being vaguely awkward or weird to very scary stuff. “Anti-social personality disorder” used to be called sociopathy, more or less. “Narcissistic personality disorder” is similarly hugely disruptive, compared to someone who, for example, tends to rant at people who own cats.

        It’s made worse because terms used clinically like “anti-social” have a causal, colloquial meaning. “He’s anti-social.” Oh, so he has a disorder and may start killing people? They mean very different things. Colloquially, some guy is just a grump. Clinically, he doesn’t think of or respond to other people as humans – no empathy or sympatico. Very different.

        Worse, the traits we see aren’t very selective. So, spree shooters are overwhelmingly white males of a certain age with adjustment problems and medicated. Yet, that’s a lousy selector. The fraction of white males, age, etc. who actually do evil things with guns is vanishingly small.

        So yeah, background checks including “mental health” designed by people who want to cap the capacity of “magazine clips”, and think a barrel shroud is the folding thing that goes up, who chant “confiscate, confiscate, confiscate” when they think the mikes are off.

        Pragmatically, I think the move is to push back and make them explain themselves. The bad ideas will collapse under their own weight.

    • Let me probably go against flow here and say this. TTAG needs to not be so overly bias and add this little factoids like this..

      “were taken for safekeeping the night 26-year-old Anthony Bontempo threatened to commit suicide.”

      This guy was not only diagnosed with multiple mental disorders but threaten to kill himself and the cops were called.

      If he had gone over the hill and went on some kind of rampage killing people with his guns, which in turn would have gun grabbers going nuts, TTAG would say we need better mental health check system and that this guy was just crazy.

      You can’t have it both ways. If you try the “gun grabbers” are going to exploit this bias and WIN.

      Some people should not have guns. I think this guy is probably someone that should not.

  3. yea, Florida Carry, you don’t care about public safety. please turn in all weapons at your closest sheriffs department.

  4. Just another example proving its not only the second that’s under attack. Politicians are not inherently anti-gun, they are flat out anti-freedom.

  5. 2A Debate is not about the rights of citizens. It’s about the executive branch being revenue generators for the judicial branch.

    When information makes it onto paper it triggers a set of actions. The concern for citizen….leads to temporary confiscation…results in citizen requiring proof of mental health…medical explanation a clerk cannot possibly understand…awaiting for authorization to release…higher authority decline unsure of legal liability…move to courts…cash flow commences.

    Once possession is achieved, paperwork firewall stalls property recovery. Nice tidy and complete. It’s the bauracrates

  6. So he’s released from the hospital before the 72 hours are up, by a doctor who determines that he’s not a threat to himself (he was never considered a threat to others), but the police chief determines all on his own that the vet isn’t of “sound mind.” And where did the chief get his medical / psych degree?

  7. I hate to say it, but I can certainly see the chief’s reticence to hand over this guys guns when he comes in with a letter from his doctor saying he’s an alcoholic with PTSD and some personality disorder I’ve never even heard of (and isn’t in the DSM-IV). However, under the law as I’ve read it, he’s legally entitled to have his weapons back, as questionable a decision as that may be. I think the problem here is the guy’s doctor, who seems to want to have his cake and eat it too. He signs the guy out as not being a danger to himself or others, but simultaneously diagnoses him with these serious mental illnesses. We should make it clear to doctors that, if you sign off that this guy is not a danger to himself or others, we’re going to hand him his guns back, period. If you think this individual can’t be trusted with guns, it must perforce mean you do, in fact, consider him a danger to himself or others.

      • I’d say “alcoholic” is by far the most worrying thing on the list. Of course, nobody seems to know what “systematic personality disorder” even means.

        • Nobody knows what the definition of “alcoholic” is, fer cryin’ out loud. One thing it is: a WEAPON used against those we differ from in choice of habits, or otherwise disagree with unpleasantly.

      • Threatening to kill himself does not help his case. Some that go that route, decide to take others with them.

        • AND SOME make claims of going to kill themselves with no intention of doing so at all. They do it for attention.

          Can you say slippery slope?

  8. I’ve only had good interaction with Daytona PD officers. I have, however, heard numerous times that the chief is an assclown, and has been at odds with the Volusia County Sheriff for some time (calling him a “moron”). The Daytona PD chief has been quoted on radio calling carriers “knuckleheads”, where Sheriff Johnson has been quoted, “In a perfect world, you wouldn’t need guns. This is not a perfect world.” Chitwood has some background of being the true moron.

  9. A losing fight. The rules are in the Florida Statutes and the Chief will hang his hat on that. He will get the guns back when he goes through rehab and gets signed off as cool to go.

    • The courts have already ruled that the Chief is required to give the guns back. This is not a question of rehab, but it is a question of the Chief ignore court orders.

      That’s why Florida Carry is suing.

  10. Gosh…this is a tough one. If this was your brother, would you take his guns and hang onto them for safe-keeping? I have a brother who has some depression and Bi-polar stuff going on and he self medicates as he has no insurance. He had his guns a few years ago before this stuff happened. These guns are in my safe now, not under his bed….

    I do understand the issue here as the Gov takes and takes and soon they will be seizing guns from people with Diabetes or High Blood Pressure. They would make it so very few could obtain and and hold onto to those guns. How long will it be before my Electronic Medical Record, WA State Drivers License info, and my Prescription service all combine records?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *