- California authorities found a man illegally owning 248 guns and 1 million rounds of ammo.
- The state attorney general said he also had 3,000 magazines and several grenades in his home.
- The guns included 11 machine guns, 133 handguns, and 60 assault rifles, authorities said.
The best part is, it sounds like they arrested him and seized his guns, all without a shot being fired.
I would love to know why this guy felt he needed so many guns and ammo, because obviously it wasn’t to protect himself from a hostile government.
Collector maybe? The article makes it sound like they may have been legally acquired prior to him being barred from owning them. That cache may have been worth hundreds of thousands of dollars from the machine guns alone.
I find it odd that no one has mentioned the possibility that he could have been a black market dealer. Suppressors, short barreled rifles, and fully automatic machine guns, are all purchasable in the US if you can file the right paperwork and be approved for those purchases by the BATF, under the National Firearms Act (NFA). This approval process includes the ATF having you on speed dial to show up and make sure you still safely possess said items, and aren’t flipping them on the street for a massive mark up.
While an NFA regulated suppressor might run you $1200 after taxes and fees, a suppressor on the streets without the paper trail might go for closer to 3-5k. Actual transferrable machine guns, due to their extreme rarity in the US, command prices from $10,000 to $60,000 dollars through existing legal channels, and again, could be sold at a massive markup without the baggage of a paper trail. Even firearms legal to own without NFA restrictions would command a sizable markup when sold off the books. And this is how gangs have armed themselves for decades, through dealers just like this.
Based on the picture, he was definitely a collector. There are multiple collector’s items in there. That said, he could be a black market dealer who also purchased collector’s items for himself when he came across them. Also, does California not have more restrictive laws regarding Suppressors, short barreled rifles, and fully automatic machine guns? I thought they had laws regulating magazines to 10 rounds?
Article confirms that machine guns are illegal in California. He had multiple World War 1 era machine guns and other pieces that could be in museums. This guy should have just moved to a neighboring state. He had the money.
This screams hardcore collector who was active from the 60s onwards, refused to turn his collection in and said ‘fuck it I’m all in on the felonies already’ and made some stuff himself on the low down. The machineguns may be a mix of NFA and illegal, idk but 80%s and/or parts kits speak to his technical ability
The Lewis and Lahti is what sways me from illegal dealer to gun nut, no criminal gives a shit about those kind of weapons
There is also an MG 18, the ZB you mentioned may be a Bren gun, and there is a Japanese type 97 machine gun.
Hope that the actual relics with history get kept and put into a museum or something, the WW1 pieces especially, instead of a metal crusher
Yeah, I’d say those are good observations. Curious to see if we ever hear more about the case.
Yes, California state laws are more restrictive than the federal baseline, and on that note I would counter that risking a pile of decade long felony convictions seems a bit risky for a “collector”. If dude knows how to acquire all of this restricted hardware without leaving an obvious paper trail, I would imagine he knows the massive consequences of his actions. Possession of even one unregistered NFA item is a 10 year felony. No one takes that risk because “I just think they’re neat!”
I feel like we have more and more Marge’s every year in the US gun market.
A collector generally only collects guns, not ammo. You don’t need a million rounds for guns that are too valuable to actually use.
Collectors generally also like shooting not as valuable guns?
You don’t need to hoard millions of ammo to go shooting. Most people don’t.
You don’t need a million rounds for guns that aren’t too valuable to actually use either. No average person needs a million rounds for any reason.
If he didn’t have those guns, the king of England could walk right in here and start pushing you around.
D’you want that? Huh? Do ya?
And if he wants to be ready for the British army, he’s gonna need a million rounds.
No. It’s a joke from a classic Simpsons episode where Homer buys a gun
So?
It depends on whether you’re a collector or a Collector. Someone who collects them but takes them to gun shoots could easily go through tens or hundreds of thousands of rounds due to how fast some of those guns fire. Millions of rounds seems a bit high, but if he was regularly buying surplus ammo out of habit it seems like you could hit that much without meaning to.
However, if he was a captial-C Collector, then yeah, millions of rounds is nuts.
deleted by creator
Speaking as a very very casual gun enthusiast myself - - I think it’s a tricky subject. Guns & ammo are great, a million rounds certainly seems excessive, and idk it’s possible this guy was a black market arms dealer for very very bad people.
When you have guns, you wonder how you’d react to a knock on the door & an attempted gun confiscation. I don’t see many scenarios playing out where violence is called for; they are not (directly) threatening my life, but rather confiscating tool(s) that can be used for hunting, recreation, and yes preserving my life in self-defense. Very not cool. But it’s still technically not a physical threat to me. If I were to pop off some guns in defiance of a gun collection attempt, that would lend credence to the idea that I’m an “unstable person” that “shouldn’t be allowed” to own firearms. Also, my fight isn’t with the guy doing the confiscating. He’s a member of my community, he’s just some guy doing what he’s told, maybe he’s got a wife & kids. What is to be gained from shooting him in the face? Does that not make me a monster? Maybe this guy thinks similarly, he was confronted without a shot being fired.
No, from one red-blooded American to another, the no-conflict response is wisest & best. Tell them a warrant is needed, when they can’t find what they’re looking for, give them the ol’ classic “lost the guns in a terrible boating accident” line. They will be forced to accept it & move the fuck on. When tyranny reigns, defiance is duty, avoidance/lies/concealment are justified.
My line of thought is this: you can have twenty safes full of badass guns & ammunition in your basement. But that doesn’t matter if you’ve got a gun to your head on your front porch. What is practical? What is reasonable? What is necessary? Just a handful of nice guns made ready & accessible, a daily carry you’re familiar with, a solid 12-ga, a .223 hunting rifle, and a few thousand rounds of ammo for each caliber you own.
My gut tells me this guy wasn’t a prepper, if his ungodly massive stores of firearms & munitions were so easily found & rounded up. At least not a good one. My gut tells me this guy was involved in the illegal arms trade, he had a setup in his home that no-gooders could visit & “shop” for what they needed.
Ah yes, lie to the cops.
Or they’ll actually investigate and found out that you planned out that scenario, and even talked about it on social media.
Ah yes. Lie to the cops. Fucking duh. Idk what deep-dive internet policework your local cops do, but it just doesn’t happen all that often in my opinion. I’ll roll those dice. I only mention it to give others the idea; we the people need to stand in solidarity or our rights will systematically, legally, be taken away.
If concealment is done properly, there is no physical proof. People literally get away with murder in this manner. Law enforcement doing a sketchy arms confiscation will not aggressively search for…something of low value or concern that they will never, ever fucking find. Common sense. They will be forced to move on. You apparently are not able to understand that. But they will.
Authority isn’t synonymous with right. The law was rounding up the Jews in Germany. The law was rounding up the runaway blacks in America. At best law is merely a guide for people who are incapable of thinking for themselves, at worst it is a cash/resources/power grab, law does not determine right or wrong. A disarmed population of generally law-abiding citizens is not in the best interest of the private citizens, and I would go so far as to argue the United States.
But not by voting, by breaking the law. In other words, the position you hold isn’t popular enough that you can get there legitimately, you can only get there by breaking the law.
This is a gross oversimplification…laws can be passed just to grab money, power, resources. Or just on a whim. 2 examples come to mind: the Boston Tea Party & the United States Library of Congress making cell phone unlocking illegal. The Americans weren’t begging for a tea tax (and they sure as hell didn’t vote to bring about change). And idk if you’re aware of this obscure little blip in history: James Hadley Billington, Librarian of Congress in 2012, decided to make cell phone unlocking illegal. I was fresh out of college…and an 83 year old man unilaterally passed a law telling me what I can & cannot do with my smartphone. Nobody asked for this, to borrow your terminology, it was unpopular. There were petitions I signed. Do you have any idea how infuriating that is?? The LoC JHB was so old, he’s dead now. Obama said the law couldn’t be repealed (???) 🙄 Eventually 2 years later it was, but it was a wild wtf type moment.
To be fair to Mr. JHB, you look at his record & it seems like he/his team accomplished a lot of good things during his service. He just really, really fucked up in 2012.
I don’t know how productive further discussions will be; we appear to take very different positions on law, authorities, government, right & wrong. ¯\(°_o)/¯ Have a good night
Yup. The guns aren’t there for when a cop is knocking on your door. The guns are there for when a cop is raping your wife.
And if people think that latter scenario unrealistic, just look at history. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and the reason we have a government-recognize right to guns is to prevent that absolute power from existing as a state of affairs.
It’s okay if the government has the majority of the power. It’s okay if the government has relative power. The guns are here to prevent the government from having absolute power. That’s the kind of scenario where the women are getting raped by the men in uniform, while the men who arent in uniform either watch helplessly or get tortured to death for trying to intervene.
Yes, a common scenario that everyone experiences at least once or twice, thereby justifying a huge armory of guns.
Better to look at statistics. How often has that scenario actually played out?
Perhaps the thing he was worried about wasn’t peacefully being arrested.
Perhaps the reason this got resolve peacefully is because any violence would have been felt heavily by both sides.