Mr. Razzano is a community activist and, as a member of the Minutemen, has an interest in stopping illegal immigration. As such, he works within the system, including making his views known to his congressional representative. Over the course of several years, he developed a working relationship with Carolyn McCarthy’s former Chief of Staff—to the point where this individual had even visited Razzano at his home. When he learned the chief of staff had been replaced, Razzano asked to speak with the new one, but never had his call returned.
On a subsequent trip to her office, Razzano was informed he was not one of McCarthy’s constituents due to redistricting, and his representative was Peter King. He then went to the Board of Elections and obtained a certified copy stating he was in her district.
When he went back to McCarthy’s office with his “proof of constituency,” a detective approached him, told him to leave and to stop “annoying” Rep. McCarthy because he was not a constituent. The detective escorted Razzano down the elevator—at the bottom, when the doors opened, Rep. McCarthy was there. She ignored Razanno when he tried to speak to her and the detective escorted him out the building.
The very next day, Razanno got a call from his mother who lives a few doors down—the police were at her house demanding his guns or they would arrest him. He was told there was a 911 call about him, and he needed to surrender his firearms for a 90-day “cooling off period.” In other words, they would take the guns or they would take him. It was portrayed to him by the confiscating officer as “not a big deal.”
The police took all of his legally registered guns—nine rifles and 15 handguns, and they also seized his fiancée’s handgun. This despite no statutory authority to do this-- It’s important here to note that this was not a domestic or any other kind of violence incident. Razzano didn’t even get a receipt for the seized property until a week later—after he requested one.
A little over a month after the seizures, he received notice from Chief Anthony Rocco that his pistol license had been revoked. This has been done with no adjudication under “authority” of the chief, who indicated he believed Razzano to be “obsessed with the day laborer situation” and offered his unqualified opinion that Razzano’s actions had raised “concerns” over his “suitability” to have a license.
The letter made no mention of the 911 call, and in fact, a judge had to order McCarthy’s office to identify the employee who had called 911—after McCarthy had denied any involvement.
To sum it up, for exercising his First Amendment right to petition his representative, Razzano had the cops called on him by Congressman McCarthy’s office, which denied doing so until ordered by a magistrate to produce the name of the staffer who did this. Using the call as their reason to intervene, police made a decision to “temporarily” confiscate Mr. Razzano’s firearms. They subsequently revoked his pistol license, effectively barring return of his property. They have also retained custody of his long arms, and there is no provision to return them. And at no time has Mr. Razzano been charged with any crime, nor has he been adjudicated unsuitable or examined by any professional who has rendered that determination.
Razzano has filed a lawsuit in United States District Court, Eastern District of New York to recover his property and seek compensatory damages. That’s where the case stands as of today.
I have seen other documents, including the Razzano’s complaint, his certificate of registration from the Elections Board, the license revocation letter from Chief Rocco, and other legal particulars related to the case. While I would like to post them, as I said when I first brought this story onto WarOnGuns, I don’t want to do anything that his lawyer thinks inadvisable or that will hurt Mr. Razzano’s case. If I can get an OK to do that I will—otherwise, all information will be cleared before I discuss it here. Further information will be forthcoming as they happen with those conditions in mind.
Gabriel Razzano adds:
The only point I think might be added was the week before the incident I was in her office and they told me I "was in the wrong district" and they were "going to straighten it out." I left the phone numbers I could be reached at. They never called, and one week later I went back. Just thought the fact that Mc Carthy's office knew there was an election fraud happening, yet did nothing, till they called the police, to report me, not the election fraud!Further Reading:
Another Look at Freeport Gun Seizure
Don't Mess With the Tyrant
24 comments:
Words fail.
III
What does anyone expect from some whack job as McCarthy who is on a mission to bring her dead husband back to life through unConstitutional gun laws.
The real joke here is the guy that killed her husband was some alien that shouldn't have been or allowed to be in this country. Yet, she's going to allow laws to be broken to cover for more illegal aliens to be in this country.
This woman is one of the largest Whack jobs in the house of reps today.
The NRA wants to cut deals directly with her too!
No necessarily. If the court decides to punish McCarthy and the cops for their actions this might be a big win for the RKBA side.
Personally I think the gross violation of procedure and rights will be a clear signal if this being a fucking farce.
And what happens when the cops try to restrict our licenses because we're obsessed with the "gun issue"?
This is how they intend to cow us down, this is what they want. Knock off and/or disarm the prominent/leaders/vocal among us and most of the rest will head for the barn.They KNOW we'll sit still for it because they KNOW we're peaceable and we'll use the law ways to seek redress. Meanwhile, their lawless, hideous,facist, scumbag, I'm the authoritah BS will run amok, and we'll get not a damn thing done or resolved. They're not going to give us justice, they're going to stomp us with their boot on the face like this until they stop hearing people complain. WE ARE LIVING IN A FACIST STATE.
We are not constituents, we are annoyances.
I would not ask McCarthy for a glass of water were we both in Hell.
The nail that sticks up gets hammered.
From what I've seen -- and continue to see -- few pols are much better. And the increasingly militarized police don't often question orders, priding themselves as they do in carrying out the "mission." Witness the SWAT team getting commendations even though they kicked in the wrong door and traded shots with a person accused of NOTHING.
The Chief and the mayor say "Good job." Congress says "Good job."
The lines have never been clearer.
In Soviet Amerika, the McKey cat and mouses YOU; reading stories like this just makes me want to sharpen my buck knife for a good scalping, "Legends of the Fall" style.
I believe we need to rethink the serfs' "Rules of Submission" before ANYone surrenders his firearm(s). When is submission proper and when is physical resistance warranted?
Those are questions that need answers - definite, cut-and-dry answers. None of us want this Civil Cold War to grow blazing hot, but it is looking more and more likely that we will have no
choice but to take aim and fire, at this rate.
-Brak757-
Keep up the great work, David.
McCarthy and the police officers involved should be charged with Conspiracy Against Rights (Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241) and Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law (Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242).
Until scum like those involved are held responsible (preferably by being thrown in Federal prison), we will continue to be treated as serfs.
I wholeheartedly agree with Mr.Weebles, above.
Is it possible to use this as a springboard to make registration unconstitutional?
Another reason why unconstitutional "gun" laws should be wiped out (i.e. all of them flushed).
No more NFA '34, GCA '68, etc...
Let Liberty RING.
If Gabriel Razzano calls the police and reports his property stolen, will they remove it from storage and return it to him?
No?
Has he been convicted of a crime by a jury?
I guess there is no equal protection under the law in New York.
This is the most important aspect of this whole debacle; the anti-gun folks should take note. Forcible disarmament benefits the state.
If you think they'll limit property seizure only to guns, then you're sadly mistaken. Yes, I'm talking to the disarmer types, hoping that they may also occasionally stop by and read.
When someone breaks the law, you call the cops.
When cops break the law, you call the FBI.
When the FBI breaks the law, you call the Justice Dept.
When the justice dept breaks the law, you call congress.
When congress breaks the law, you call on "We the People."
Hey Kevin,this is what we're talking about. Do you see?
The list gets longer,and the "prags" still feign no interest or belief.
Wait till it's one of them....
As some have said here,as well as other places. It's only a matter of time until the wrong person has his/her Rights trampled,illegally,and DOES NOT COMPLY.
It's quite obvious the "law" doesn't apply equally to the "law abiding!"
CIII
The case of Mr Razzano makes my blood boil.
All I can say is ...
III
See also Connecticut, a state in which I will not even set foot while that law stands. Pity, too...I'm a sailor and I really wanted to see Mystic Seaport.
oldsmoblogger -- "Words fail."
That is the really scary part, if you think about it.
When reason does not avail, all bets are off.
None of this is going anywhere good, fact.
I wasn't aware that Mr. Razzano was presented with a warrant. At least the article doesn't mention it. This is a requirement in Connecticut, however dubious the definition of "independent investigation".
What is similar between Connecticut and Lawnguylend is the self-affirming relationship of the disarmament laws and processes:
1. Either turn over your guns, or you're arrested;
a. If you don't turn them over, you'll be arrested and they'll be seized anyway
2. If you turn them over, that means you are the subject of a seizure order;
b. A subject of a seizure order cannot purchase new guns, and permits may be rejected or denied, on account of the fact that you are the subject of a seizure order
This meshes with my thoughts on "extreme gun activism". Everyone is shootin' and hollerin' over Mike's honesty, but it takes hours of digging through statutes and case law to find the ultimate end of "gun law" enforcement.
It is in the best interest of the disarmers to silence debate by characterizing it as too controversial to discuss. I've watched this happen for many years, as new 'Gotcha!' statutes are passed. What do you figure would happen to Razzano if he resisted a false arrest? We all know exactly at which point the state employs violence, yet this blog is one of the few that ever acknowledges the line of demarcation.
I think chief Rocco needs a dose of assassination!
Anonynmous coward--ordinarily I delete posts like yours as soon as they appear--in this case, it's obviously been several hours since this has been up.
I'm not going to subject WoG regulars to prior moderation because of idiots like you--probably an agent provocateur at that--since no one else around here talks like that.
What I am going to do is see if I can find anything about you from my visit logs. I'm also going to leave your post up. I'm not going to report you to the authorities, but if any are visiting this site--and they do, all the time, they just might decide to investigate and find out who you are. Your problem, not mine.
Again, long time WoG visitors know that I keep a loose hand on the rein as far as comments are conmcerned--you don't need to register, you can be anonymous, you can disagree--but if a comment is off-topic, if I deem it obscene, if it's spam, if it's only purpose is to insult another guest, or if it calls for harming any specific individual, it is not welcome here. And neither is the punk who wrote it.
I wish that there were a group that could monitor these types of actions and law suits, and when the authorities lose immediately pursue punitive damage suit against the authorities. If they could be made to monetarily pay for their aggressive egos, maybe they'd think twice about abusing us gun owners.
This is a good example of why we must all start adhering to the 'Waco Rules of Engagement' when dealing with unsolicited attentions from jbt's.
Here in Nassau County if you exercise your First Amedment Rights The NCPD will violate your Second Amendment Rights. Chief Anthony Rocco sent a letter like Mr. Razzano's to someone I know beacuse someone he was close to excericed the the first amendment against the NCPD and that was what Mr. Rocco said! **Point of information according to sources Chief Rocco is eager to revoke anyone anytime for anything. Well we can who the next NCPD Commissioner will be. The NCPD is going to hold many revocation hearings in 2008-2009 and have lawsuits too.
Oh I am not the 8/06/2008 annonymous I believe in Litagation! That is our Constitutional right too. I think people who hold licenses or not should speak up and out. I thank our local NRA and yes, our local ACLU for their support, the ACLU is for everyone, while we may not always agree with them on issues, they agree with us on our Constitutional rights.
The NRA will help folks find a lawyer who handles these matters. Our US Supreme court 5/4 supports the 2nd amendment Good luck Mr. Razzano and all who have been violated by the NCPD
Post a Comment