More than five pounds of marijuana and a loaded assault rifle were among the items seized by drug agents during a raid of a Burlington apartment Thursday morning.
Three people ages 20-21 were arrested and charges were pending in Racine County Circuit Court as of late Thursday morning.
According to a press release issued by the Racine County Sheriff’s Department, agents with the Racine County Metro Drug unit executed a no-knock search warrant of apartment 102 at 357 Market Street at 5:42 a.m.
While searching the apartment, agents seized the marijuana, drug packaging and paraphernalia as well as a loaded AK-47 assault rifle and a loaded 20-gauge shotgun.
Officials said it appeared the suspects were attempting to make hashish from some of the marijuana.
Agents are seeking charges of possession of marijuana with intent to deliver while armed; keeper of a drug place while armed; and possession of drug paraphernalia. Two of the suspects are also facing bail-jumping charges because they were out on bail for previous drug charges.
The suspects are not named here because formal charges have not yet been filed.
For additional information see the April 4 print edition of the Burlington Standard Press.
-
-
-
-
-
Great job Sheriff’s
Dang, that military weaponry AK-forty stuff on our streets is really disturbing. America’s neighborhoods should be a demilitarized zone.
People like these would care less if there was a law banning an assault weapon. They will get one if they want one. Duh they are selling weed which is illegal. Cranley are you a rocket scientist? Doubt it.
I’m sorry John but you’re argument is demonstrably false.
If these guys and other criminals could get fully automatic machine guns, I’m certain they would go for the highest available firepower. However, we as a country decided that the lethal force afforded by machine guns is too great of a threat to public safety to allow them to be on our streets. Consequently, machine guns have been illegal since the 1930’s and they are really hard to get. And THAT is why the numbers of people killed and crimes committed with machine guns over the last 70+ years is vanishingly small. Proof positive that reasonable gun control works well.
I couldn’t care less how many revolvers, deer rifles or shotguns you want to have. But an AK-47 is a military weapon. They have no legitimate civilian use for sporting or self defense. They are designed for one purpose, to kill lots of people fast. They don’t belong on our streets and their use has certainly killed many many more people than pot ever has.
It’s time to ban these weapons of Mass Murder: http://burlingtonareaprogressives.blogspot.com/2013/01/and-again-merry-christmas-from-bloody.html
I wouldn’t read anything form the “Burlingtonareaprogressives” site. Its all B.S. and written by halfwits. No need for a hyperlink.
cranley, what john is saying is that the criminals wont follow the law. they will find a way to get their hands on a gun no matter what they do
Well John I didn’t provide the link for those with closed minds and black and white positions, set in concrete.
Sean, I understood perfectly John’s argument and thereby refuted it with facts and logic. Your simple rewording of his argument doesn’t make it anymore valid.
As demonstrated, reasonable arms control does work and is critical to public safety. Our streets should be a demilitarized zone! http://burlingtonareaprogressives.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-well-regulated-militia-being.html
@ Sean Cranley: Maybe a “Gun Free Zone” sign to piggy-back the Tony Romo signs outside of town would do the trick? “America’s neighborhoods should be a demilitarized zone.” Really? What proof did you provide that gun control works well? Using terms like “Vanishingly Small” does not cut it if you are trying to cite reasons why gun control works.
Do you believe that AK-47 was purchased legally from Reineman’s or Dunham’s? Chances are that it was bought from Milwaukee or Chicago from the trunk of a car for $50.00 with the serial numbers filed off. How in the world would ANY gun legislation have stopped that sale?
Do you believe someone who has a weapon for the purpose of defending drugs & cash is going to worry about 30 round magazines being a prohibited item? Wake up! The only people worried about it are those who actually give a damn about laws and regulations! I can hear it now…”Oh wait! Burlington is a Gun free Zone! I can’t have this gun. It is fully automatic and the clip is too big! darn it…I will have to guard my pot with a knife now. Dang laws…ughh!”
Gun control is not the answer. if it was, we could walk down Division Street in Chicago counting cash and not worry about being killed for it! Chicago has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country. You are twice as likely to be killed by gun violence in Chicago than you are if you were deployed to Afghanistan. Gun control only controls citizens who are already playing by the rules.
I bet if you sent an open letter to criminals everywhere, you could get them to listen and lay down their arms. Reasonable gun control is already in place and is followed every time a non-prohibited citizen purchased a firearm. the proper paperwork is filled out and they subject themselves to a background check. Have you ever looked at a NICS form 4473 or a Wisconsin Handgun Hotline form? It is pretty in-depth and requires giving the government a considerable amount of personal information. I would say this is reasonable. Criminals do not fill this form out. THIS IS WHAT THE ISSUE IS!
Dear OTCS, First off, I did not suggest anything like a “gun free zone”. If you must lie to advance your thoughts, your thoughts are not advanced.
Secondly, I’m talking about military style weapons designed for the battlefield, not handguns, shotguns or hunting rifles, so stick to the subject if you’re going to respond to my position.
Furthermore, while rewording for a third time the already refuted “argument” put forth by John and Sean you asked me “What proof did you provide that gun control works well?” The proof I provided is that machine guns are strictly controlled and because of that their use in crimes is extremely small: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/17/1171047/-There-are-240-000-fully-automatic-guns-in-the-US-and-only-2-deaths-in-80-years
EXCERPT: “In the last 80 years, legally registered machine guns have accounted for TWO deaths. Illegal, or non-registered machine guns account for a fair number of killings – in 1980, 1% of Miami homicides were committed with machine guns.” END
Here is some more documentation: http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcfullau.html
EXCERPT: “in Targeting Guns, Kleck writes, four police officers were killed in the line of duty by machine guns from 1983 to 1992. (713 law enforcement officers were killed during that period, 651 with guns.)
In 1980, when Miami’s homicide rate was at an all-time high, less than 1% of all homicides involved machine guns. (Miami was supposedly a “machine gun Mecca” and drug trafficking capital of the U.S.) Although there are no national figures to compare to, machine gun deaths were probably lower elsewhere. Kleck cites several examples:
– Of 2,200 guns recovered by Minneapolis police (1987-1989), not one was fully automatic.
– A total of 420 weapons, including 375 guns, were seized during drug warrant executions and arrests by the Metropolitan Area Narcotics Squad (Will and Grundie counties in the Chicago metropolitan area, 1980-1989). None of the guns was a machine gun.
– 16 of 2,359 (0.7%) of the guns seized in the Detroit area (1991-1992) in connection with “the investigation of narcotics trafficking operations” were machine guns. END
If we as a people can limit the accessibility and use of machine guns by criminals by imposing strict NATIONAL standards, then we can do the same thing with semi-automatic weapons designed for military use like the AK-47. You’re right about the ineffectiveness of patchwork arms laws around the country. That’s why any effective law, like the effective machine gun prohibition in place for the last 70+ years needs to be national in scope.
Your and John’s and Sean’s reworded “argument” that because criminals will break the law, we might as well not bother to make something illegal is completely ludicrous, ABSURD! You might as well say criminals will rob banks, so why make it illegal? Criminals will sell drugs so why make it illegal? Minors will get alcohol, so why make it illegal?
Heck, criminals will get grenade launchers, bazookas and surface to air missiles, so why make it illegal? Oh yeah, that’s right, they DON’T! You boys are batting ZERO!
There is no legitimate civilian purpose for these military weapons, none. Our communities should be demilitarized zones http://burlingtonareaprogressives.blogspot.com/2012/12/again-ban-weapons-of-mass-murder-again.html
You have excellent copy & paste talent! “America’s neighborhoods should be a demilitarized zone” is essentially saying Gun Free Zone (Achieving the same result). You obviously do not see the importance of the 2nd Amendment. By simply copying & pasting different sites where others speak for you, you have lost all credibility. Best of luck to you. I am done trying to understand your line of thinking. I am going to do some target practice. Have a great day.
OTCS, I’m a gun owner too, and will likely be going to do some target practice as well in the near future, but what an odd response to SC providing the examples you requested of him. You criticize him first for being too loose with his references, then criticize him for being too tight with them. Meanwhile, you say that that AK-47 was bought out of the trunk of a car in Chicago or Milwaukee, but you don’t say where you got that information, and I wonder if you just made that up?
I don’t agree with everything SC posts. In fact I frequently disagree. But at some point I hope we can get back to a place where a divergence of ideas does not automatically lead to disrespect of the person with whom we disagree.
I don’t mean to single you out in particular, as SC and multiple others do the same, whether it’s on this site, in local politics or national politics, or at our own kitchen tables. There is no need to dismiss someone as lacking credibility because of disagreement. We need not give up on trying to understand someone else just because their opinions or positions are different. Listening and understanding the other person’s position is even more important when we disagree with each other. It is how we are able to continue to work with each other in groups and solve problems, even when we have different viewpoints.
Again, I’m not referencing you in particular. We all do it. But we can all do better.
Thank you William. And you’re right, I am guilty as charged from time to time of being dismissive and sharp tongued.
I would also like to point out, that I too own guns. I’m not an anti-gun zealot by any stretch of the imagination. And while I’ve clearly stated one of my positions on guns above, I also recognize that I’m not likely to get my way completely. So be it. But I think reasonable people can compromise and that by doing so we can protect our Constitutional rights AND improve public safety.
Freedom and liberty includes the right to have a reasonable sense of security in our public places to not be victims of someone with ill intent and massive firepower. Give us a chance, at least make’em have to stop to reload.
Thank you Bill! Well said. We have to be able to discuss issues. Hopefully, everyone will try to step out of their own viewpoints once in awhile just to try on some new ideas. Perhaps then, some really creative solutions will be considered. Sticking to the same old ideas regardless of “sides” will just keep us nipping at each other and we will stall as a society.
Well obviously you are NOT open to common sense. You asked for proof, I gave you information in response. You call it “copy and paste”, I call it searching for factual information to support the credibility of my argument and providing documentation and sources.
By the way, you’ve done nothing to counter my argument that controls on machine guns have worked. Or to present any reasoning why AK-47s or the like should be legal or for what purpose. I’m all ears.
I understand that constructing a logical argument, presenting facts to support that argument and, where appropriate, providing sources to backup those facts is not the Cult of Con way. In your faith-based ideology, simple professions dogmatic orthodoxy are believed to be enough and should be taken as the unquestioned truth if uttered by the right people. So it is understandable that in face things like logic, facts and sources, you’d get frustrated and cut & run.
Your statement “America’s neighborhoods should be a demilitarized zone” is essentially saying Gun Free Zone (Achieving the same result).” is either a deliberate mischaracterization of my position or you need to serious work on your reading comprehension. Once again, s-l-o-w-l-y so you can understand, I’m talking only about military weapons like the AK-47, designed for the battlefield. I’m not talking about hand guns, shotguns or hunting rifles. But I understand, in the face of logic, facts and sources, mischaracterization of an opponents positions and attempting to change the subject or compare apples and oranges is Cult of Con standard operating procedure.
I support the Second Amendment, I just don’t support the right of people to have any arms they want. Remember, it reads “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” It says “ARMS”, not guns, not rifles, not firearms, but “arms”. In case you weren’t aware, “arms” is all inclusive. But you can’t have ARMS such as machine guns now, you can’t have grenade launchers, land mines, bazookas, ballistic missiles or thermo-nuclear devices. You right to ARMS is limited for public safety reasons. And it IS Constitutional!
When the founders wrote the second amendment the best arms available were muskets that could be loaded and fired only 3 times a minute by the very best trained soldiers, hardly weapons suited for sneaking up on and killing a couple dozen 1st graders, theater goers or college students. I support your right to have all the muskets, powder horns, lead balls and wadding you can carry!
There is no legitimate civilian purpose for these military weapons that constitute nothing but tools for mass murder in our communities. Our communities should be demilitarized zones, free of weapons of mass murder: http://burlingtonareaprogressives.blogspot.com/2012/07/ban-weapons-of-mass-murder-again.html So YOU have a nice day.
To Sean Cranley and OTCS,
Unfortunately I will not be inviting either of you to my birthday party. I want to spare you the angst of waiting and wondering where your invite is while all your friends and neighbors get their Garfield-themed invitations. I would find it unpleasant and distracting for you two to be in attendance. I hope you understand. I also hope you understand that there will be one of those bouncy castle things. And an expensive clown. Not a local clown. A really good imported one. Possibly purchased out of the trunk of a car in Chicago. I’m not sure. It will be a surprise, but not a surprise that either of you will get to experience. Perhaps next year.
Bummer, bouncy castles and high class clowns. I guess I’ll have to try and be a good boy for next year ;>
Have fun!
Aw, I can’t stay mad at you guys. You can come. Besides, we need as many people as possible in the bouncy castle to keep the hospital emergency department in business.
If you haven’t hired the clown yet, I recommend Tiny Tim as Mervo the Marvelous: http://0.tqn.com/d/horror/1/0/r/1/0/-/TinyTimBloodHarvest.jpg
Bound to be a big hit at any party!