JAMES SMITH, SR. v. PITTSBURG, CA


NCA comment: Here we have manifestation of the new trend in America of reporting a neighbor, co-worker, or family member to the authorities for activities the observer feels are anti-social, or not in the best interests of the "accused." There is NO difference between this mentality than that of the people who reported to the Nazi authorities the family that was harboring Anne Frank. We, as a nation, have sunk to an all time LOW in our embracing of the behaviors of socialism.

Case summary: Late in 2001, Mr. Smith was informed by his employer that he was being laid off. In the frustration of the moment, having endured various derogatory comments about his situation, he made the comment many of us might have at least thought,
"Why don't I just go home, put a gun to my head, and pull the trigger?"

After Mr. Smith made his statement, someone promptly reported him to Dorothea Carlin, the administrator where he was employed. Ms. Carlin, who was not a percipient witness to what Mr. Smith did or said, reported to Walnut Creek PD, who handcuffed Mr. Smith and had him detained for psychiatric observation. One of his fire-arms was confiscated at the time. After 3 hours of examination, he was released, there being no basis for detainment.

The authorities refused to return his firearm. They said it was dangerous to him and to society (we are presuming the firearm, a very valuable one at that, was undependable and had urges to sneak off and shoot people when it was not in Mr. Smith's possession).

The authorities tried to placate Mr. Smith by offering to put the firearm in the custody of his parents, on a 2 year probation. He refused the conditions. Peter Mancus describes the proceedings as follows:

"[The] Judge offered to return gun on one condition--promise judge he would not commit suicide with it. Man said, "No! Unconstitutional prior restraint! No compromise!"
[The] City attorney proposed alternative pragmatic solution: agree that PD would return Colt Commander to the man's parents, who would agree in writing to keep it for 2 years, not let him have it for 2 years, and sign a statement to that effect and release city/PD from liability. [The] Man and his parents said, "No! Unconsitiutional prior restraint!" [The] Judge said, "Get a lawyer."

" He got me."

Enter one of the most dynamic pro-Second Amendment, pro- Constitutional lawyers in the country, a voice much akin to that of Patrick Henry, Peter Mancus.


It is with the written permission and encouragement of Mr. Smith and Peter Mancus that the NCA has the honor of posting select documents of the proceedings that begin July 10, 2002.

The statement of James Smith Sr.
in the matter of the
UNCONSTITUTIONAL confiscation
of his handgun. The
reaction of a true patriot -
a message to all patriots!!

ROUND BY ROUND, BLOW BY BLOW Description, beginning with ROUND ONE:


A number of people have inquired about contributing to the support of Mr. Smith's case. Peter Mancus has said that he would gladly receive any contributions on Mr. Smith's behalf at his address, which you can find at the top of the Opposition Brief. Our deepest thanks to all of those of you who have considered such a gracious act.




For more such trends of government encouraging people to turn other people in, read about the FBI attempt to get Arizonans to report Consitutionalists as "terrorists".



To return to our home page, click: