California Gun Control Fail: 1000+ Guns Seized in Raid on Bel Air Home

This photo from video provided by KCBS/KCAL-TV shows investigators from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the police inspecting a large cache of weapons seized at a home in the affluent Holmby Hills area of Los Angeles Wednesday, May 8, 2019. Authorities seized more than a thousand guns from the home after getting an anonymous tip regarding illegal firearms sales in a posh area near the Playboy Mansion and served a search warrant around 4 a.m. Wednesday at the property on the border of the Bel Air and Holmby Hills neighborhoods. (KCBS/KCAL-TV via AP)

California is America’s gun control nirvana. It’s what all of the other anti-gun wannabe states aspire to be.

The state gets a big A rating from Gabby Giffords’ civilian disarmament operation. Whether it’s red flag laws, magazine capacity limits, microstamping mandates, “safe storage” requirements or a ban on scary black rifles, the Golden State’s got it all goin’ on.

And yet . . .

A man was arrested after more than 1,000 guns were recovered from a Bel-Air home Wednesday during an investigation into the illegal selling and manufacturing of weapons, officials said.

Girard Saenz, 57, of Los Angeles, was arrested on suspicion of distributing, transporting, importing, selling, or lending an assault weapon, the Los Angeles Police Department said.

This photo from video provided by KCBS/KCAL-TV shows investigators from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the police inspecting a large cache of weapons seized at a home in the affluent Holmby Hills area of Los Angeles Wednesday, May 8, 2019. Authorities seized more than a thousand guns from the home after getting an anonymous tip regarding illegal firearms sales in a posh area near the Playboy Mansion and served a search warrant around 4 a.m. Wednesday at the property on the border of the Bel Air and Holmby Hills neighborhoods. (KCBS/KCAL-TV via AP)

LAPD and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives officials were conducting a joint investigation when a search warrant was served at the home on the 100 block of North Beverly Glen Boulevard at about 4 a.m., police said.

Aerial video from Sky5 showed federal agents and police examining thousands of guns laid out in a courtyard area of the home. The property is in an upscale area of multimillion-dollar homes.

It’s almost as if criminals don’t abide by gun control laws, no matter how strict they are. If we were more cynical, we might conclude that restrictions enacted by hoplophobic politicians are really only there to discourage law-abiding citizens from owning firearms and exercising their right to armed self-defense.

From the AP:

More than 1,000 rifles and handguns and thousands of rounds of ammunition were seized Wednesday at a mansion in a posh area of town not far from the Playboy Mansion.

Acting on a tip regarding illegal firearms sales, police and federal agents served a search warrant at around 4 a.m. at the property, a home valued at millions of dollars on the border of the Bel Air and Holmby Hills neighborhoods, authorities said.

Photos and video from the scene showed stacks of rifles, handguns and shotguns laid out in the driveway. Others showed a floor stacked with boxes of ammunition.

Although many appeared to be modern, some were 50 years old or more and a few may have been collectibles dating back to the Civil War, KABC-TV reported.

“I had never seen so many weapons in my career of 31 years,” police Lt. Chris Ramirez said. “That’s such a big arsenal in a residence like this, in this type of neighborhood. It’s astounding.”

One man was arrested at the scene on suspicion of violating a state law that outlaws the manufacture, possession or sale of assault weapons and high-caliber rifles. His name wasn’t immediately released.

Investigators didn’t immediately release other details, such as whether the guns were part of a private collection or to whom some may have been sold.

But the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said there was no danger to the public.

In a statement, the ATF said authorities received an anonymous tip about a person “conducting illegal firearms transaction outside the scope of the federal firearm license” that the person possessed.

It’s a good thing we’re not that cynical.


  1. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    And you just know that they’ll all be well taken care of until after the legal proceedings are finished.

    And _none_ of them will fall into any cops’ pockets or trunks.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      The last time the LAPD seized a large collection from a collector (and retired cop), the City balked at returning ANY of hem after charges were dropped. The City used every means at its disposal to block the return of the firearms. Although it returned a few, the majority were destroyed when the City Attorney, who had promised during negotiations that nothing would happen to them, obtained a destruction order from a judge without telling him the circumstances. Suit still pending.

      This seems similar. After January 1, 2018, AR rifles in certain configurations were defined as “assault weapons” that cannot be transferred by any means except out of state. Rifles in other specific configurations are not “assault weapons” and not subject to the transfer ban. This case may be as simple as that–which means that the State has to prove that the (apparently one) rifle sold was actually an “assault weapon” at the tine of transfer, and did not become so because of buyer changes to the rifle. Why that violation would allow them to seize the entire collection I do not know–California law has recently changed so that the DA now has the burden of proving that EACH ITEM sought to be permanently seized was either an illegal firearm or the product of illegal activity.

      1. avatar Christopher Ray says:

        I think the LA city officials need to start going to prison if they do not want to return the property they stole.

        We seriously need to start demanding it.

  2. avatar mark says:

    Lol at the old fuck at the end talking about the children. Really dude? So people can’t have guns in their house because of children playing near by? Fuck off.

    1. avatar Stan says:

      Because its okay to let an obvious criminal have all those guns to sell to other criminals where children play. No, you fuck off.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Yes… that’s called “freedom”. If someone is too dangerous to have guns, charge them with a crime and put them in jail. Otherwise, fuck off.

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Because its okay to let an obvious criminal have all those guns to sell to other criminals where children play. ”

        It is ok to let a law abiding citizen to have all those guns to legally sell to other law abiding citizens where children play.

      3. avatar Mark says:

        You are an imbecile. That old man’s comment would have been the same if it was a lawful gun owner who had a thousand gun collection. They put they quote in their for the gun control agenda. Stop being retarded.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Stan is a leftist troll, not a re……wait just a second.

        2. avatar Knute(ken) says:

          JWM: Now don’t you be suggesting that leftists are retarded. I have retarded acquaintances that will get offended, being lumped in with such scum. Real retards are a LOT smarter than the leftist progtards. At least THEY know(and accept) what all they don’t know.
          It’s one thing to just be ignorant, like a retard. It’s quite another to be even more ignorant than them and yet still feel the need to take your ignorance out on the rest of the world. That’s not retarded, that’s criminally insane. And it seems like nothing will help those afflicted, short of a beheading.

        3. avatar Rad Man says:

          Can’t say retarded anymore. I believe the new PC term is “Mentally Gay”.

        4. avatar Eric says:

          They’re not retarded, they’re ‘down with the syndrome’

      4. avatar Knute(ken) says:

        Yeah. A federal firearms licensee has guns, according to the patchwork of hundreds of statutes. Obviously, a criminal. Who else would take so much care to obey the statutes?
        Obviously a criminal, but only to hoplophobic BAMN fascists. But its nice to know. STAN= Antifa fascist. I’ll make a note of that (guess it’s time for you to choose a new sock puppet…).

      5. avatar Eli2016 says:

        “Lol at the old fuck at the end talking about the children. Really dude? So people can’t have guns in their house because of children playing near by? Fuck off.”

        He was an old Jew. Probably an Obamaite. People like that are so caught up with the holocaust they can’t think straight sometimes.

      6. avatar Mike says:

        An obvious criminal? I’m sorry but did this person have his due process? So if you’ve ever had a speeding ticket you’re now an obvious criminal and should not be allowed to drive near where children play. You hardened criminal.

      7. avatar David says:

        Hey Stan. You may have missed it at your last Communist Party meeting. It is still a burden of proof, trial country. ALLEGED criminal. Just because the Jackboots come knocking doesn’t prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The reason people are fighting for the 2nd amendment is so people like YOU can’t take over.

      8. avatar Josh says:

        Did you fail to see that he has a ffl and the atf themself said that there was no danger to the public wake its his rite dodnt like it move to a gun free country america is guns,guts and glory

      9. avatar Maxerism505 says:

        LoL I’ve been through those neighborhoods plenty of times. There are no children playing in the streets near this dude’s house. Once again we have another paranoid cali donkey making shit up. Some one has to actually pick up the weapon, load a magazine, ect. ect. The guns dont do that by themselves….idiot.

      10. avatar MadMagyar says:

        “obvious criminal”? Well, Stan, I’m so glad you’ve solved our country’s legal fiscal problems by reducing due process by 11 jurors, a judge, and both prosecuting and defense attorneys to your single, uninformed (and OBVIOUSLY idiotic) opinion.

      11. avatar Ryan says:

        He’s probably not a criminal if he passed the background check the fingerprint check ran in the national database and the interview with the atf. Probably sold someone a gun. If he in fact has a ffl he has a firearms business legally and more times than not your house is place of bissiness. They will make a big deal and do somthing like this if papers from a transaction are missing and somthing bad happened with the gun someone he pissed off etc etc

    2. avatar Jbw says:

      Well just like in the Dem paradise of Illinois, the guns go on killing sprees all by themselves that’s why it’s called gun violence, not gang violence. The bearded wierdo “knows” that evil guns will kill everything near where they are stored

  3. avatar Craig says:

    “the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said there was no danger to the public.”

    So, they admit that the whole “Gun Control” this is entirely about control of the population.

    1. avatar Ing says:

      Exactly what I was going to say.

      If there’s no danger to the public, then WHY are they arresting this guy and confiscating several thousand inert objects?

  4. avatar conrad says:

    Hope the Snitch feels better.
    BATFE moved in and reported “there was no danger to the public”.

  5. avatar NORDNEG says:

    I don’t think I’d want to be the tipster,,, someone with all that weaponry won’t quit looking for the rat,,,
    I’m a little bit jealous, wish I had a fraction of that stash…

  6. avatar Stan says:

    And more than a 1000 rounds of ammunition!?!?!?!? Holy Shit!!!

    1. avatar Steven King says:

      I call that a weekend at the range…

      1. avatar Ian in Transit says:

        With a wife and three kids still at home I call that not enough for one afternoon.

      2. avatar LazrBeam says:

        Yeah, that’s what I was thinkin’. The guy’s a lightweight.

    2. avatar Squiggy81 says:

      She said that like it was a lot. I’d be in full panic mode if I got anywhere close to that number. 1000 rds is just a fun weekend.

    3. avatar enuf says:

      Yup, in mixed calibers. Set up the youngsters with their .22’s, a mess of targets and a couple of bricks of ammo and there’s a thousand right there.

      Then there’s .223’s, the .38’s, the .380’s, the 9mm’s, the .45ACP’s, the .30-06, the 12ga’s wanna’ play some too.

      And that’s just my boomsticks. Add a few friends and their boomstick collections and you’ve a bunch more calibers and a 1000 rounds was gone before lunch!

    4. avatar pwrserge says:

      Lol… I probably have 1000 rounds of ammunition riding around in my jeep just in case I run out while out at a competition.

      1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

        Yup. I’ve got a couple of bricks under the seat of my truck so I can’t run out while at the range.

    5. avatar Phil Wilson says:

      Only seems like a lot to someone who doesn’t shoot regularly. Might seem like a bunch to someone who only buys 20 rounds a year for deer season.

    6. avatar Keith Dorset says:

      One round per gun? Good luck Rambo.

    7. avatar Lars says:

      You should have a thousand rounds for every firearm you possess. Who doesn’t blow through a few hundred rounds from each firearm everytime they go to the range? Ammo isn’t cheap so buy in bulk or reload like crazy, otherwise you will be stuck at home rather than out having fun on the range. Maybe we should arrest all these crazy fisherman with all those lures the possess.

  7. avatar User1 says:

    Not the first time this happened. Won’t be the last because the money is good.

  8. avatar daveinwyo says:

    WOW! Want that!
    BTW; BATFE should be named Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms And Gunpowder.
    BATFAG. Makes more sense and looks better in print.

    1. avatar Ransom says:

      Thank you Dave.

    2. avatar Salty Bear says:

      I have a vague memory of a TTAG writer calling the BATFE “the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Really Big Fires.”

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “I have a vague memory of a TTAG writer calling the BATFE “the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Really Big Fires.””

        That was a “thing” for awhile, but someone updated it to BATFEE (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Fireamrs and Everything Else).

  9. avatar Political gristle says:

    (California) keep banning/restricting classes of firearms, you will see more stories like this ………..trumped up poop-butt gun lawl violations.

  10. avatar possum, destroyer of arachnids says:

    illegal selling and manufacturing of a non illegal item, okay and I had always assumed this country was run on capitalism, gunms

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      That’s what the statute prohibits, but there is no contention that this guy was manufacturing anything, only that he sold an illegal “assault weapon.” There is no evidence in the article that the sale was otherwise illegal, only some indication that his license was not the right one, e.g. a C&R and not an FFL 03, or some such.

      1. avatar Five says:

        Hard to tell from the photos (didn’t bother with the video), but there appear to be some nice pieces in there.

        Sounds more like a process crime, wrong paperwork, than a hardened criminal suppling the underworld. It’s a shame a lot of those will likely end up destroyed even if the charges are dropped. Even worse if anything stick, then the whole collection will be destroyed.

  11. avatar Damnright says:

    I think they belong to Pelosi and Schumer. Hahaha

  12. avatar enuf says:

    If he was selling to criminals I’d be concerned and want him punished. By that I mean actual criminals. The sort that say “THIS IS A STICKUP!”, rob people and hurt people. With so many rifles in that picture, I have a hard time believing all those long guns were being sold to bad guys. Criminals like guns they can hide in their pants.

    Many of those handguns look too big for that either. There are some single action sixshooters and maybe some along the line of a Ruger Redhawk. Hard to tell exactly, but criminals like semi-autos.

    In a country with all its marbles guns and ammo taken from bad guys would go up for auction to honest citizens. Or maybe allotted to high school marksmanship programs.

    All that stuff will be either destroyed or stolen for the PD or by the PD.

    Heck of a shame.

  13. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    Let’s see…

    )1 Lots of gun laws; lots of guns.

    2) Nobody knew they were there til somebody got a tip.

    3) Copper on the spot says the public was never in danger …from the 1,000 guns …in an “arsenal.”

    So, gun laws don’t stop criminals or get rid of guns; without use and intent guns just sit there; and controlled by the right people the public is in no danger, even from 1,000 guns. In an arsenal.

    That seems like the trifect of arguments to just stop trying to disarm citizens, or remove guns from the world.

    Depending on the facts on the ground, it gets more interesting.

    — If the designated scary gun-guy turns out to be a legit bad dude, he’s a poster-thug for why peaceful people need to arm. He’s the arsenal for his crew, n for all “law enforcement” does, we’re otherwise at their mercy.

    — If DSGG is a besotted collector with a strange itch – Hey, it’s CA. They don’t judge there (except when they do.) – what’s L E doing messing with a harmless to date fetish? Could be anybody’s kink tbey go after next.

    If only there were a membership organization for gun owners, with an established PR organization to run with this…

  14. avatar GlockMeAmadeus says:

    Colt Pythons, Troopers, old Smiths, bolt guns, shotguns, alot of valuable iron there, mostly old stuff. Dont see how he was “manufacturing” looks like just warehousing alot of guns.

    Whats the real crime here? They arent saying they were stolen. Commiefornia has to fall back on their “assault weapons ban” to justify the raid.

    Guess they will have to place a numerical cap on how many guns their slaves can have at one time to close the “large collection loophole.” More than 20 rds of unregistered ammo will be the new reason to kick doors.

    1. avatar Mike V says:

      With so many laws, everyone is a criminal, just waiting to trip up.

      No danger to the public? Naturally.

      Perhaps this is a bad dude and has it coming, we’ll see.

      1. avatar Sheepdog-PX says:

        Can’t be too bad of a guy and pass the background check for an FFL.

  15. avatar WI Patriot says:

    And into the grinder they will go, after they’re cherry picked through that is…

  16. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    I wonder…

    Having elected Pres Trump once, and looking like again, will the activist progressives be able to step back from electing their gun-policy opponents the same way?

    They can’t seem to help themselves. Sad.

    1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

      “They can’t seem to help themselves.”

      Arms in private hands makes it more difficult to achieve absolute power. They have to disarm us to reach their endgame, or at least to make it stick. But either way they won’t give up.

  17. avatar Marina Andrea says:

    “conducting illegal firearms transaction outside the scope of the federal firearm license” that the person possessed.

    Strange, I couldn’t find any Girard Damien Saenz on the official ATF list of FFLs. Any idea what that means?

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      I am guessing he was a C&R licensee but not an FFL.

  18. avatar SurfGW says:

    This hyper criminal is suspected of trafficking weapons / modifying weapons to full auto / and making untraceable ghost guns.
    Good thing a snitch ratted out this criminal and good job to the PD. The linked story makes it sound like he was a collector, but the other crimes he was accused of are very serious.

    1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

      I can’t vouch one way or the other for this guy, he might have been stealing full auto AKs from gangs, filing off serial numbers on Glocks, and buying RPGs on the dark web. But he could also be selling two or three personally owned guns on GunBroker, owns a legally purchased bump stock, bought an 80% gun online and didn’t register a serial, still has some formerly California compliant bullet button rifles, let a friend borrow an AR… Of course innocent until proven guilty, but even so separating the cold hearted criminal from the nice guy ensnared by technicalities is more difficult, especially when the laws are inherently unjust and the intent is to lump all gun owners together as criminals.

      1. avatar Salty Bear says:

        “stealing full auto AKs from gangs, filing off serial numbers on Glocks, and buying RPGs on the dark web”

        Sounds like a hero in my book.

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      Prosecutors always charge everything they can think of so that they have something to negotiate away. Yes, the charges are serious, but the evidence, which is iffy at best right now, may not support them.

  19. avatar TheUnspoken says:

    We are assuming the perp was a bad guy trying to work outside the law, but from the guns I am seeing a pretty big collection, lots of revolvers, etc. As red flag laws, safe storage, assault weapon bans, universal background checks, bump stock bans, etc, the likelihood of an otherwise lawful owner or collector owning contraband or otherwise running afoul of the “rules” increases. Who knows, this guy might only be guilty of stocking up on 30rd pmags with the recent court back and forth, and someone reported him… Or he had the failure to register his assault weapon with the website issues. The media sensationalizes this but at this point many gun owners could get a 4am visit and have their collection displayed on the driveway and confiscated for both real and imagined infractions.

    As much as we hear “we will not comply,” if that is going to be the case then most gun owners will be technically outlaws.

    1. avatar GunnyGene says:

      We don’t have any of that nonsense in MS. If you buy from a dealer the only thing that applies is NICS. Buy/sell privately and the State/Feds don’t have clue, and don’t want one.

  20. avatar Shire-man says:

    Might have to move back to West Philly if this is what Bel Air has become. Somebody hail me a cab with dice in the mirror.

  21. avatar Some dude says:

    Nothing there would be illegal if the 2nd Amendment wasn’t seriously infringed…

  22. avatar MCSearay says:

    The owner is absent, and the long term mistress of Gordon Getty. The Getty, Brown, Newsome families have deep ties to one another.

  23. avatar GaPHarmD says:

    Just a question but don’t we have a right to face our accusers? And if so the. How does that work with an anonymous tipster?


  24. avatar Jon in CO says:

    Are they going to sell those back to the community? I’d love that 500 mag I saw in the second picture. Secondary market, police seizure, super cheap.

    1. avatar Five says:

      California and LA, so officially, they’ll all be destroyed. Unofficially, I’m sure they’ll be some unsanctioned picking through . . .

  25. avatar Rocketman says:

    Confucius said that “the beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right name”. Why can’t people understand that people who have a lot of guns have an “armory”. Where guns are made is an “arsenal”.

  26. avatar former water walker says:

    Finally something approaching an “arsenal”…not 3 22’s and a shotgun. This whole episode stinks😩

  27. avatar AnthonyC says:

    I read that this suspect is a licensed FFL dealer, however he is suspected of selling firearms outside of the purview of his FFL license…in other words, suspected of illegally selling firearms without going through the required paperwork and background checks. It could be. Also, what was seized does not appear to be an arsenal, but a variety of firearms that a dealer or private citizen might choose to collect. There is no law, including in California, that restricts any lawful citizen or gun dealer to a specific amount of firearms and ammunition. IF he is a lawfully registered FFL licensed dealer, I would expect to see this much inventory. The problem that he may have, however, is that California keeps restricting more and more types of guns or accessories. Things that may have been OK last year are now prohibited items. The more items he has that are now deemed “illegal” in California, but might be OK in Arizona or Nevada, the more difficulty he would have in recouping his financial losses. Perhaps he was looking to unload now-prohibited firearms, and may have been selling to convicted felons and street gangs. IF so, throw the book at him for that, but DO NOT make up scary sounding fake news excuses to justify the idea that lawful citizens and FFL dealers may only have a finite number of firearms and boxes of ammunition for those firearms at any given time. In fact, true journalists should go the extra mile and explain that simply owning 100 or 1000 or 100,000 firearms in a personal collection for sale or personal use is in fact a guaranteed right according to our 2nd Amendment. People in Chicago, California, New Jersey, and New York may not be aware of that.

    1. avatar SurfGW says:

      Only some drive by comments mentioned the number of guns. What he is charged with is:
      1) trafficking / selling to individuals who cannot legally own or without proper background checks
      2) illegally converting weapons. Could be as simple as removing bullet buttons.
      3) manufacturing ghost guns which included any 80% lower if you don’t register it.
      The first 2 are easy to prove or disprove with documentation. The third item depends on when he manufactured the lower, but he will be assumed to be guilty because it is impossible to prove he made the lower before the ban.
      Therefore, he is most probably a felon in at least one charge x number of counts.
      He will spend many years in jail for his mistakes.

      1. avatar John in AK says:


        Back up.

        He is not ‘charged’ with anything. He was arrested ‘on suspicion’ of certain process crimes.

        As yet, there is no presentation of proof provided in any article that Government actually has probable cause to believe that he has done ANYTHING illegal; There is only an accusation that he MAY have sold a prohibited item (in CALIFORNIA) to someone who could not receive it legally. Other articles claim that he was ‘manufacturing’ firearms–which could simply be that he completed an 80% lower–and that he had ‘manufacturing equipment and tools.’

        What did he have, a loading press, some files, and a lathe? A ball-pein hammer?

        So far, we ONLY know that this man had a lot of guns. . . guns that appear to be factory-made, relatively innocuous (high-end revolvers, wooden-stocked long guns, a few MSRs, a couple of semi-auto long-barreled Thompson ‘carbines’).

        That, and Government received an ‘anonymous tip’–nothing about them actually developing a CASE, just that they were able to convince a judge to issue a search warrant (served at 4:00 AM, as usual. . .). Without actual probable cause that a crime has been or is being committed, a judge CANNOT legally issue a warrant on an ‘anonymous tip.’ This one may very well have done so.

        Where’s the beef?

        With all sincerity, PLEASE don’t say things such as ‘probably a felon’ simply on the say-so of a Government agency with a vested interest in furthering an agenda until that agency presents proof.

        Government lies when it suits it.

  28. avatar Roy Dickinson says:

    Guilty of a crime, maybe. Confiscate someones years of collecting because of a tip or complaint (I smell a vindictive X wife). He is guilty until proven not guilty of a crime.

  29. avatar Rimfire says:

    It’s bad enough that this bs goes on for no apparent reason (for the children??) but what nobody has mentioned is the lack of care or respect the 50 took with these! Stacking up collectible firearms like firewood instead of handling with the care they deserve! That chaps my azz even worse! You don’t need a degree in criminal behavior to understand that destroying the appearance of some fine walnut and blued guns should be a chargeable offense! *Why doesn’t the “save my name” feature ever work?

  30. avatar Ken says:

    I’m confused. When and where did the notion of a “high caliber” firearm emerge? What does that even mean?

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I once flew an airplane with 2 .50 cals in the nose up to around 35,000 feet. That’s pretty high caliber, isn’t it?

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “When and where did the notion of a “high caliber” firearm emerge? What does that even mean?”

      Any responsible gun owner/afficianado should know: “high caliber firearms” are those that go BOOM, really, really loud. As opposed to low caliber firearms that go regular Boom.

    3. avatar Ticktalk says:

      .50 bmg and up is illegal in ca. Cartridge, barrels, receivers, I think even talking about it will get you a visit… .50 euro is ok though.

  31. avatar James says:

    Hang on, a criminal got caught and you’re claiming that laws don’t do anything to stop criminals? Can you clarify for me here, please? I feel like I’m missing something.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Preface; when I was a kid, a “criminal” was someone who had done something which injured another person in some way, which completely precluded “possession” of something, anything, making any manner of modification to something which you owned, shall I go on? Now, precisely what “criminal” was caught, and what crime had he committed? If we pass a law tomorrow making it a felony to live at your address, are you good with spending the rest of your life in prison for being a “criminal”?

    2. avatar John in AK says:

      What you are ‘missing’ is making the assumption that a ‘criminal was caught.’

      What convinces you that there was a ‘criminal’? Is it because Government says that there is? Do you implicitly believe everything that Government tells you, because it would NEVER lie to you to further its agenda?

      Even if whoever this was ‘committed’ a California process crime, something that would not be illegal in a more just jurisdiction, is he actually a ‘criminal’ in your eyes? Does violating an unjust, unConstitutional law make one a ‘criminal’?

      Rosa Parks was a ‘criminal’ when she sat at the front of the bus, you know.

    3. avatar Ozzallos says:

      The rules and regulations didnt stop this man from amassing hundreds of fire arms. You could say the law failed several hundred times before finally getting lucky. So… good job?

  32. avatar Timothy V Noecker says:

    That Raid Find Has Got To Be a Mexican Drug Lord Gun “Safe” House – Who Tha F Needs 1,000 Guns In 1 Home?

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Clearly a collector, very possibly a very rich collector. My dream is that it’s someone minding his own business and waiting for govt assholes to make such *clearly* unconstitutional charges so that he can take them to SCOTUS. Every law quoted so far is a clear violation of “shall not be infringed”. I’m waiting for an address to contribute to.

      1. avatar JCrew says:

        I just posted the same thing. Like a traffic stop and a list if BS that *might* stick. Illegal mfg? That would be an AR 80% he didnt register to the overlord’s pleasing. High caliber? Yeah, the one he probably own before the 50bmg ban. Selling? Probably that 50rd of 9mm to a buddy that is required to go through an FFL now. A ton of vintage rifles that can be delivered to our doorsteps under C&R license? ATF, especially CA ATF is not on our side! Collect a sh* load of guns and they will find a way…

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Who Tha F Needs 1,000 Guns In 1 Home?”

      Anybody who can legally afford to have them.

    3. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      As many times as I have read the second Amendment and the Federalist papers, I do not recall “need” or ” limited amount of firearms in possession” mentioned. If he had any freeze dried foods or m r e’s in the house then he would be one of those ” crazy survivalist types” and would really be demonized.

    4. avatar Someone says:

      “Who Tha F Needs 1,000 Guns In 1 Home?”
      I do! What’s wrong with that? How many houses do I need to buy?

    5. avatar jwtaylor says:

      You forgot the sarcasm tag.

      I’ll go through that much every year, and then some.

    6. avatar fotl says:

      Who needs that many socks in their sock drawer? You only have two feet.

  33. avatar Jackrabbit1957 says:

    I just want to know what the hell is a high caliber rifle? Is it a rifle thats stoned on pot? If so that explains its desire to go on a killing rampage.

  34. avatar Not an anarchist says:

    Criminals don’t abide by laws, therefore laws are ineffective and should be abolished.

    What a stupid argument. It’s the kind of thing I would expect to hear from a high school anarchist.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      It’s a bit more complicated than that. For example, murder is illegal. Murderers broke the law anyway. But the law is punishing the killing of a person. There is a direct victim of the crime.

      But then look at the most ridiculous gun laws, like the guns-free-school-act. It makes it illegal to bring guns anywhere on or near a school. Why? Is there something magically horrible about guns being on school grounds? If a dad picks up his kid with a concealed firearm, is there a victim? No. The law, and those like it, are in response to people committing other crimes- school shootings being the main one.

      Now think about that: it’s a law that is ostensibly geared against school shooters. So someone who is already committed to killing a bunch of kids. That person is not stopped by the laws against murder but somehow a law against carrying a tool used in murder will do something? Of course not. It may, however, prevent law-abiding people from doing things. But that’s all. And since those things are not harmful in and of themselves (unlike laws against homicide), that’s where it makes no sense. And this is true of almost every gun control law. And it’s why they keep passing more of them- because, of course, they don’t work.

      1. avatar Not an anarchist says:

        It’s also a law against negligent discharge and other types of accidents, against misidentifying the good guys and bad guys when the SHTF.

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “So someone who is already committed to killing a bunch of kids. That person is not stopped by the laws against murder…”

        Indeed. The Colombine shooters broke about 15 felony laws. Not one of those laws prevented anything. But I bet that to this day, Colorado is all about gun free zones.

  35. avatar Hannibal says:

    Alright, THIS time, I’m willing to consider it an ‘arsenal.’

  36. avatar JCrew says:

    Curious, a wealthy gun collector? If a gun nut had money…then we wait until there are enough egregious law that sticks. You know, that forum guy that said his 50 bmg fell off the boat and he lent the neutered AR to a buddy? I guess we’ll take ATF for their words until they infringe on something else right?

  37. avatar CatButt says:

    In a few days after the “official” tally of the arms has been completed the newly readjusted “official” tally will have the public to believe that there were only 880 arms of differing configuration found on site and that the unofficial made in haste estimate of over 1000 arms was released by an unnamed person whom didn’t have the authority to speak on such manners and will be dealt with in house by the DA later this week.

  38. avatar Sprocket says:

    Being a former Californian, I suspect after several years and a huge lawyer bill this guy will walk. Law enforcement and DAs in California seem to launch cases like this based on a rather tortured reading of the law, dreams of professional advancement, and wishful thinking.

    BTW – If you’re a gun owner in California and thinking of leaving; do it. You’ll look back and kick yourself in the ass for not doing it ten years earlier.

    1. avatar todd says:

      As long as your a gun lover the lights always on in AZ for you. Others need not apply!

      1. avatar MadMagyar says:

        Which is where this guy SHOULD have had all his “collectibles” stashed, at the very least, if not the whole amount. If anybody could have afforded to store them in a gun-friendly state, you would think this guy could.

  39. avatar Simple man says:

    All I can say is Dang! That is where all of the revolvers have gone! And 1,000 rounds of ammo…Oh my! The fault in all of this is Commiefornia attached WAY too many verbs to what can be done with a firearm. What is the problem? Why not just keep it simple by saying Thou shall not kill? I guess the you have to keep the lawyers employed.

  40. avatar EWTHeckman says:

    Now that is a proper “arsenal on the bed” shot! No gun grabber should ever get the willies over 3 pistols and 2 long guns again.

    BTW, some people have commented on there being “1,000 rounds of ammo.” The article actually says “thousands of rounds” of ammo. Given the size of that collection I would have thought “tens of thousands” would have been more appropriate, but it seems that it wasn’t as low as some seem to think.

  41. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    You can’t have guns in california. But you can have sex toys and wear them in public. That’s legal. But guns are not. Also smoking pot in public is preferred over carrying a gun in public. Concealed or not.

  42. avatar Reason says:

    “Dealer” Looks more like he is mainly a “Buyer” not a seller

  43. avatar todd says:

    What’s that premise our legal systems built upon? Oh yes, “innocent until proven guilty”. I’ll tell you what, the scariest image I saw was the close up shot from the helicopter of the Benjamin Sheridan blue streak air rifle, now in the hands of a well trained 13 year old that could do some serious damage to some windows.

  44. avatar stan says:

    I see that most believe that this was BS in full bloom. a warrant based on an “anonymous tip”? Any judge that would sign that warrant should be dis-barred. I also noticed that they said it was illegal to sell or even possess “high-caliber” rifles? I presume this is a test for the U.S. Supreme Court.

  45. avatar MadMagyar says:

    CPC 30600(a) is about _transfers_ of .50 BMG rifles, not about mere POSSESSION (not for sale), so if the “tip” came from an idiot who witnessed the transfer, then s/he’s going to have to show up in court for testimony. Aside from that, this is a prime example of why any man or woman should challenge the jurisdiction on the grounds that the code STARTS OFF with the words “Any person who, within this state,”. If there’s a reason for arguing that one is a MAN, and not a statutory “person”, this is a big one. And if anybody ever researched what “within this state” really means – LEGALLY – then they’d realize that the MAN could not possible be considered to have been “within” the state. The geographic area called California is NOT the same as the LEGAL jurisdiction called the “State of California”. See Jacqui Figg’s discovery and her explanation on YouTube when she was researching the “driver’s licensing” issue. If this guy knew enough about his real legal status, instead of the usual dumbed-down public’s type of ignorance, he could’ve challenged the jurisdiction at his first appearance. As it is he’ll probably be “represented” by a state-approved officer of the court and member of the California Bar who will make sure he’s “processed” without ever being made aware of their unLAWful interference with his Rights to property.

  46. avatar JimmyinTEXAS says:

    “The truth about guns”: The owner reportedly only bought two or three guns, put them in the closet and went on a three-month vacation. Upon his return, he found his liquor cabinet and humidor empty and these thousand plus guns in various states of undress and the smell of gun lubricant was strong. He called the police to try to get the riot that ensued under control.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email