The following is from the Concord Police Department:
Officers were conducting foot patrols in the area of Pine St. and Clayton Rd. (this weekend) when they contacted a subject that was on searchable Post Release Community Supervision.
A records check revealed the subject was a previously convicted felon and had an outstanding felony warrant for narcotics and firearms offenses.
The subject was arrested for the outstanding warrant and narcotics was located on his person.
Further investigation was conducted and during a search of the subject’s residence ammunition and a short barreled un-serialized assault rifle was located.
The subject was ultimately arrested and booked for assorted narcotic and firearms related charges and the felony warrant.
Claycord Note: Police did not release the suspect’s name.
31 comments
This is the type of weapon being carried around by criminals. Why do some people want to remove our rights? If they really wanted to “get rid of guns”, they would outlaw manufacturing just as they outlaw manufacturing of drugs. All the gun grabbing grand standing it to dis-arm normal people. Ask yourself why democrats want normal people without the means to defend themselves against this.
Dems/liberals don’t want to disarm people. Almost all of us simply want some regulation and all people like you hear is Tucker and Sean yelling in your ears that we’re stripping you of all of your rights.
@Jessica – to legally purchase a firearm in California: mandatory federal background check, picture ID, current address verification, and a passing grade on a firearms safety examination. Please let us know what other rights protected by our Constitution (protected, NOT granted) to which a comparable amount of restrictions apply.
And Democrats get pissy about voter ID. Ever wonder why it’s OK for you and your ilk to make it so hard for so-called oppressed people to exercise their right to keep and bear arms, but making sure a person is who they say they are is voter suppression?
That criminal’s gun did not have a serial number. No amount of legislation will have any effect on guns without serial numbers. You can legislate away all legal gun ownership, and criminals like this will still have them and kill people. Maybe they’ll eventually kill someone you care about. I hope not.
The idea that this guy or others of his type would follow any “regulation” is laughable. The only laws that have any effect on criminal behavior are those that provide for harsh penalties for actual criminal behavior. Fighting crime by punishing the law-abiding doesn’t work, and never has.
Lets see, convicted felon, outstanding felony warrant for narcotics and firearms offenses, with narcotics on his person.
.
Why not turn him over to FEDs for firearm violations, at least that way he’d actually do some time ?
.
We already know what soft on crime CoCo county would likely do.
Must be so frustrating for front line Police officers in this county when criminals are so quickly back out on our streets.
Ultimately we have to rely on ourselves for safety. This is not a slam towards law enforcement who are handcuffed by liberal philosophies of District Attorneys and Judges. Until the soft merry-go-round transforms back to conservative values we will all suffer. All law enforcement deserve society’s best rewards for sacrificing themselves to protect our society. Big Thank YOU!
.
California’s strict gun control laws are working great! (Sarcasm intended).
.
This case stands as evidence that felons/criminals can and will obtain a firearm regardless what legislation is passed in Sacramento.
.
Criminals, by definition, don’t comply with laws!
.
Gun control advocates and activists are clueless dolts.
.
I’ll bet he was back at his apartment within two hours of his arrest.
Waiting for the scumbag perp to be locked away in solitary confinement for 1 1/2 years and get an unjust trial. Oh wait, sorry…that’s reserved for the law abiding citizens.
And no name or pic of the face of the perp?
Good job LE! … yeah Cali’s gun laws work great – you think perps adhere to them Newsom? Becton – stop the revolving door!
These pictures always seem like a desperate attempt to create a narrative. 1 gun and 4 different types of ammo? 2 cell phones…so what? And a bag of untrimmed weed…so what? There’s pot shops next to grade schools now.
And what exactly does it mean that they “contacted a subject that was on searchable Post Release Community Supervision”? And when they say he had “narcotics on his person” I am assuming they are referring to weed. If it was something heavier, I am sure they would have included it in the picture.
Why was the subject’s name not released? Lack of transparency is always a red flag.
That’s what they are attempting to do. Too bad the narrative they create is the need for scumbag local politicians to leave our rights alone and restore the rule of law. Losers who wanted to defund the police, lost their argument. We won, now we move forward. Restore 2A and fund police. Real simple solutions for the simple minded in the back who haven’t been affected by the crime wave yet. Definitely some un-trimmed bammer weed and ammo from the 60s..Lots of people carry a work phone. Silly propaganda getting no respect these days
YoYo-Odds are guy was out on the street cause he agreed to terms of release which included a search clause, search clause most likely included residence as well.Once he was id’d and it was found he had a felony warrant he was toast and the narcotic/s added to it. .Unfortunately unless we get the entire arrest report we never get the full story. I’d like to know who it is and what narcotic/s were found on him.
Don’t see anything desperate about the photo of the illegal firearm that even a non-felon can’t possess in CA.
I do agree with the irrelevant images of weed found on arrestees, seems to be a thing with some in law enforcement to appeal to the anti weed contingent or their own personal issue with it. It’s pointless, may as well add pics of bottles of alcohol 😉
Not propaganda, is merely an evidentiary photo of what Police seized.
Copy of photo along with Police documentation is forwarded to District Attorneys office for their review.
Police agency retains custody of what was seized, chain of custody until trial.
.
Illegal for convicted Felon to have firearms or ammunition.
.
Now we wait to see what amount of “equity” DA applies to get them back on our streets quickly.
For a criminal in CA to do serious time, need to kill a few people.
.
Where’s the gun enhancements 10 years for having gun, 20 years for discharging firearm in commission of a crime . . . . . but, this is California where criminals are ‘special’ and need to be out on OUR streets.
For more criminal activity vote for DEMs.
.
If there is no threat of incarceration,
there is no deterrence to criminal behavior
Of course its propaganda. Why else include a picture of two cell phones? A district attorney isn’t going to press charges based on having two cell phones. No defense attorney would allow the jury to see such a picture. So who’s the picture for?
This time will leave out “evidentiary” and try again.
.
Photo shows DA what Police took and are holding in evidence.
As to phones, may have voice or text messages possibly indicating criminal activity.
If it came to trial jury would need to see photo as physical evidence would be presented in court.
It’s for public consumption, to elicit emotions. To propagate a reaction. It is exactly propaganda. Nothing more, nothing less.
Two cell phones, couple ounces of crap marijuana is not illegal. If this individual was on “post release community supervision”, who was supervising? If marijuana is legal now why is it called “narcotics”? Who is running this asylum? Anyone?
A lot of narcotics are legal.
Oh ok I get it, let’s start calling weed stores narcotic stores now. Maybe the same with liquor stores.. lol
Cannabis has never been considered a narcotic. Sure lots of narcotics are legal with a perception. What’s your point?
Mine is that they are using the word narcotic for a bag of backyard ragweed and it’s propaganda. Do you have one? Because your statement is 100% meaningless.
Wow Sam, panties in a bunch? And where can I get a “perception” for narcotics? Got a source for me?
I guess my comment was too complex for you. My response was narrowly tailored to your question “If marijuana is legal now why is it called “narcotics”?” Categorizing a substance as a narcotic, accurately or not, has nothing to do with it’s legality, but rather it’s physiological effect on a user. So your question is non-sensical.
It’s still not accurate to call marijuana a narcotic. And yes my panties are in a bunch, not that it’s any of your business. But doing the spelling nazi thing is beneath you. Not impressed
I didn’t know if it was a spelling mistake or if you were going all Aldous Huxley on us.
They had to show a picture of something. He’s listed as a subject, without a name or a description. That suggests they’d likely get in trouble for showing his mugshot. This was the default photo.
Where are the Checks and Balances?
Who is there to take up with the side of the LAW since there’s A ROGUE district attorney who is blatantly in violation of upholding the law!
Perhaps the Sheriff should be on the side of Public Safety and NOT RELEASE these threats to society.
Once again, How is it that the final say is left up to one individual……this doesn’t seem right at all!
That is an AR pistol. Totally legal here if it has a maglock. Without one, then it becomes an assault weapon. The one in the photo seems to have a standard mag release.
Good thing he didn’t have a brace on it. That would make it a killing machine.
I may be wrong, but I don’t think what’s pictured is a short-barreled “assault rifle”. It is a pistol.
So the gun may not be illegal and the weed may not be illegal (and is likely the “narcotic” in question). No name or sensible story given. Kind of makes you wonder what he was arrested for in the first place.
I’ve possessed firearms and I’ve possessed weed but it doesn’t mean the two things are connected.
Yes it does appear to be an AR pistol, so yes it would be legal, except it’s unserialized, so illegal. I can’t really tell if it has a mag lock.
In any case a felon can’t be in possession of any firearm or ammo!
As for the phones they may show he was actually selling weed which would be a no no, but again the press release doesn’t seem to include all the pertinent details of the case. But if we had the entire report with all the details we probably wouldn’t have as much fun arguing about it😉
Ah, guys, if you ever catch a case and find yourself in Court . . . .
DO NOT REPRESENT YOURSELF.
Comments are closed.