Highway Patrolman charged By Tax Board

[AyatollahGondola]

The tax man cometh. I have a hard time rooting for the tax man even when they are completely, inarguably in the right, and arresting and prosecuting really bad people.
Don't know what's behind this one yet, but this officer is still on my good list until proven otherwise. The Sac Bee though, is always suspect, and especially so when it comes to cops and guns. Here they got both, so I'm doubly suspect. AR-15 is legal with permit I thought?


He is scheduled for an arraignment Wednesday in Sacramento County Superior Court (http://topics.sacbee.com/Superior+Court/) on a weapons charge. FTB agents executed a search warrant on Jong's home in November and found him in possession of an AR-15 assault rifle, Barrett said.

http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/crime/archives/2010/01/chp-trooper-fro.html

[Kevin]

What the hell does a FTB tax accountant know about "assault weapons"? He's a CHP police officer, who cares what kind of guns he own as long as it's not stolen. I wish the CHP officer the best and he should be commended for his 28 years of service.

[AyatollahGondola]

What the hell does a FTB tax accountant know about "assault weapons"?
They probably know they are a historic tools of tax revolt:biggrin:

[PapaBear]

:tape::tape::tape::tape:

[HonkingAntelope]

The tax man cometh. I have a hard time rooting for the tax man even when they are completely, inarguably in the right, and arresting and prosecuting really bad people.
Don't know what's behind this one yet, but this officer is still on my good list until proven otherwise. The Sac Bee though, is always suspect, and especially so when it comes to cops and guns. Here they got both, so I'm doubly suspect. AR-15 is legal with permit I thought?


http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/crime/archives/2010/01/chp-trooper-fro.html

A CA-legal AR-15 with a fixed magazine, or with a detachable magazine and no other evil features, can be owned with just a plain old background check.

Maybe it's just the case of ignorant journalists using the fact that he owned an AR-15 to make the officer look more evil. If, on the other hand, he owned an illegal assault weapon or an illegal machinegun, he's in DEEEEP doo-doo unless he had department authorization for it.

[AyatollahGondola]

Maybe it's just the case of ignorant journalists using the fact that he owned an AR-15 to make the officer look more evil. .
Nothing like an opportunistic mug shot to start the ball rolling. I don't get that. when I approached the Sac sheriff about obtaining booking photos, they told me they don't allow it. Seems the Bee gets them though.

As an aside, just to inform everyone that the State tax board was pushing some legislation to limit the hourly fees that people in proceedings with them could get back if they prevailed. The amount caught my eye, because most tax specialists would charge double that or more, and there was nothing limiting the state in monetary terms. Doesn't apply to criminal, but then not much does in that sense

[HonkingAntelope]

Nothing like an opportunistic mug shot to start the ball rolling. I don't get that. when I approached the Sac sheriff about obtaining booking photos, they told me they don't allow it. Seems the Bee gets them though.

As an aside, just to inform everyone that the State tax board was pushing some legislation to limit the hourly fees that people in proceedings with them could get back if they prevailed. The amount caught my eye, because most tax specialists would charge double that or more, and there was nothing limiting the state in monetary terms. Doesn't apply to criminal, but then not much does in that sense

Just did a quick google search, and it turns out he is charged with possession of an illegal assault weapon, as well...

Here's the full press-release:

http://www.ftb.ca.gov/aboutFTB/press/2010/Release_01.shtml

[G-Man]

If, on the other hand, he owned an illegal assault weapon or an illegal machinegun, he's in DEEEEP doo-doo unless he had department authorization for it.

Unless he bought it and registered it before the stupid ban...:hitwall:

[PassinThru]

On another note.

IMHO charging an active or retired law enforcement member with the CA. Assault Weapon ban violation is unacceptable. We need to have the law amended to exempt LEOs to allow having access to weapons that are tools of our trade.

Please look at AB357 that would also ease the ability of LE to obtain a CCW permit.
http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115719

People offen too soon forget the LAPD Hollywood bank robbery where they had to borrow Assault rifles from a nearby gun store.

[Streetwatcher1993]

thats really just sad..personally i dislike the liberal comments by people who have never really known anything about law enforcemnt and suddenly by watching COPS or CHiPS theyre experts of law enforcement..Shame really. I wish nothing but the best for officer Jong and hope that he is cleared of all charges. :tape:

[bcjack]

On another note.

IMHO charging an active or retired law enforcement member with the CA. Assault Weapon ban violation is unacceptable. We need to have the law amended to exempt LEOs to allow having access to weapons that are tools of our trade.

Please look at AB357 that would also ease the ability of LE to obtain a CCW permit.
http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115719

People offen too soon forget the LAPD Hollywood bank robbery where they had to borrow Assault rifles from a nearby gun store.

If I remember correctly, I was NOT a nearby gun store. It was actually quite a distance away...

[G-Man]

If I remember correctly, I was NOT a nearby gun store. It was actually quite a distance away...

B&B Guns on Oxnard and Whitsett (-ish, it has since closed down). The shooting was on Laurel Canyon north of Victory... That's pretty nearby (about 5 minutes normal traffic) considering we are talking about gun stores in the San Fernando Valley.

[HonkingAntelope]

On another note.

IMHO charging an active or retired law enforcement member with the CA. Assault Weapon ban violation is unacceptable. We need to have the law amended to exempt LEOs to allow having access to weapons that are tools of our trade.

Please look at AB357 that would also ease the ability of LE to obtain a CCW permit.
http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115719

People offen too soon forget the LAPD Hollywood bank robbery where they had to borrow Assault rifles from a nearby gun store.

I don't see any issues with LEO's having access to the right tools while on duty. Every squad car I pass by has either a rifle or a shotgun in the weapons rack.

If the state has a problem with a regular citizen having a rifle that has both a detachable magazine and a pistol grip or adjustable stock, I don't see any good reasons why off-duty LEO's shouldn't be force to abide by the same laws. There are already enough people out there who got into the profession just to be above the law, without the state further encouraging that mindset and sending mixed messages to the public.

If you want to keep an AR-15 style rifle at home, use either a bullet-button magazine lock or get one with a U-15 stock like mine.

[AyatollahGondola]

I don't see any issues with LEO's having access to the right tools while on duty. Every squad car I pass by has either a rifle or a shotgun in the weapons rack.

If the state has a problem with a regular citizen having a rifle that has both a detachable magazine and a pistol grip or adjustable stock, I don't see any good reasons why off-duty LEO's shouldn't be force to abide by the same laws. There are already enough people out there who got into the profession just to be above the law, without the state further encouraging that mindset and sending mixed messages to the public.

If you want to keep an AR-15 style rifle at home, use either a bullet-button magazine lock or get one with a U-15 stock like mine.
One of the problems I have with this whole "Assault weapons" issue is that the law has been written, but they seem to arrest and/or stagmatize the the compliant ones anyway. The people arrested or having their weapons siezed have this burden placed on them to defend or prosecute to prove their case or get their property back. It seems intentional in many cases. If you have money to go around proving a point, then you do OK, but I'd guess that many weapons siezed by government entities were then destroyed because the owners could not muster the necessary funds to get them back, or because it exceeded the value of them to hire legal help to guide you through the process.

[G-Man]

I don't see any issues with LEO's having access to the right tools while on duty. Every squad car I pass by has either a rifle or a shotgun in the weapons rack.

If the state has a problem with a regular citizen having a rifle that has both a detachable magazine and a pistol grip or adjustable stock, I don't see any good reasons why off-duty LEO's shouldn't be force to abide by the same laws. There are already enough people out there who got into the profession just to be above the law, without the state further encouraging that mindset and sending mixed messages to the public.

If you want to keep an AR-15 style rifle at home, use either a bullet-button magazine lock or get one with a U-15 stock like mine.

I think they should make them all legal, not just for LEO's. and yet another point on how stupid this ban is, you put a different stock ON THE SAME GUN and now it is legal? C'mon!

[tw2000si]

There is a reason why the Brady Bill is gone.

[IrishJoe]

One of these rifles is A-OK. One is evil.

More or less;
Same barrel length,
Same cartridge
Same rate of fire
Same magazine capacity

Go figure.


Mini 14
http://members.arstechnica.com/x/excelon/Ruger%20Mini-14%20Wood%20Stock.jpg



AR-15
http://www.keepshooting.com/productimages/firearms/rifles/ar-15postbanbig.jpg

But I digress from the point of this thread.

[Retired]

Um... you all are distracted by the weapon's issue... what about the tax evasion? The article mentions 1/2 million in earnings - in one year? As a chippy? Hm... is that a lot of overtime or what? Making cash deposits? That's suspect.

[Mac]

Um... you all are distracted by the weapon's issue... what about the tax evasion? The article mentions 1/2 million in earnings - in one year? As a chippy? Hm... is that a lot of overtime or what? Making cash deposits? That's suspect.
Just to set the record straight, the press release from FTB states that those earnings were over a period of three years, from 2005-2007.

[Jeff Rhea]

Like most, the AR-15 issue caught my eye. OMG!! He's got an ASSUALT RIFLE!!! Just like 150,000 police officers in this county, and 2 million members of our military. :doh: Only in California and D.C. (although, I hear Congress is trying to outlaw stake knives in D.C.) :hitwall:

P.S. you can buy an AR-15 in any sporting goods store just across the border - no, not Canada or Mexico, I mean in Arizona. BTW, Mexico has a complete ban on the private ownship of firearms. I wonder how well that's working for them? :rolleyes:

[kissyc]

Like most, the AR-15 issue caught my eye. OMG!! He's got an ASSUALT RIFLE!!! Just like 150,000 police officers in this county, and 2 million members of our military. :doh: Only in California and D.C. (although, I hear Congress is trying to outlaw stake knives in D.C.) :hitwall:

P.S. you can buy an AR-15 in any sporting goods store just across the border - no, not Canada or Mexico, I mean in Arizona. BTW, Mexico has a complete ban on the private ownship of firearms. I wonder how well that's working for them? :rolleyes:

You mean assault rifles and steak knives? :biggrin:

[AyatollahGondola]

I wonder how this guys doing,

The tax man doesn't often make criminal charges. They'd rather just pummel you with civil codes where you don't get a court appointed attorney. Ahead of that, they sieze all your funds...to pay the taxes you are accused of evading, and leave you unable to purchase tax accountants and a tax attorney. I wonder if the gun charges were an attempt to get him ousted at his job to further cripple his ability to address the charges financially.