So the owner chose to not press charges in exchange for getting the firearms back immediately. If he had pressed charges it may be a year or more before he gets the firearms back. So there is the rest of the story.

So the owner chose to not press charges in exchange for getting the firearms back immediately. If he had pressed charges it may be a year or more before he gets the firearms back. So there is the rest of the story.

Hey, the criminals have rights!

The victim, not so much. 

Having to choose between punishing the criminals or being victimized a second time by the "justice" system ... something just doesn't seem right!     

So the owner chose to not press charges in exchange for getting the firearms back immediately. If he had pressed charges it may be a year or more before he gets the firearms back. So there is the rest of the story.

Photos and videos are used ALL THE TIME as evidence in court and works just fine.  The evidence can be examined, authenticated, whatever to make the case.

Why, in this modern age, do we have to keep someone's property to convict?  Take video from all sides, close-ups, stills, glamor shots ... whatever is needed.  But there is no reason to keep the property. 

Property can even be tagged, marked or otherwise identified by serial numbers, etc.  If it's needed in court, that's all that's nevessary to know this was the exact property involved.

Sometimes I think our system is designed to be cumbersome and burdensome for the state and victims on purpose!

Little confused here.Does it mean the accused ( till proven guilty ) will go free to this bad stuff again if the owner decided not to press charges against them.Can the State or Federal press charges against them?. Sad but I strongly believe bad actions deserves punishment.Hope this is not the end of this story. 

Little confused here.Does it mean the accused ( till proven guilty ) will go free to this bad stuff again if the owner decided not to press charges against them.Can the State or Federal press charges against them?. Sad but I strongly believe bad actions deserves punishment.Hope this is not the end of this story. 

They are not going to be punished for what they did. It was the choice of the owner not to punish them. He made the conscience decision not to punish them because they told him they would have to hold on to the weapons until the trial was over. And he felt it was better than having to shell out a $500 reward in exchange for not prosecuting.   

They are not going to be punished for what they did. It was the choice of the owner not to punish them. He made the conscience decision not to punish them because they told him they would have to hold on to the weapons until the trial was over. And he felt it was better than having to shell out a $500 reward in exchange for not prosecuting.

And here I was thinking that I would have been "too cynical" to post that I bet the guy(s) get a short probation even if they had priors. Nothing. Nothing at all. How is that even possible? How is "the system" conditioning those people to behave in the future? It's bad enough that there is often "almost" no consequences... but no consequences at all? Ridiculous.  How can anyone wonder why the public has no faith in any branch of government and thus largely refrain from voting or any other involvement?

And here I was thinking that I would have been "too cynical" to post that I bet the guy(s) get a short probation even if they had priors. Nothing. Nothing at all. How is that even possible? How is "the system" conditioning those people to behave in the future? It's bad enough that there is often "almost" no consequences... but no consequences at all? Ridiculous.  How can anyone wonder why the public has no faith in any branch of government and thus largely refrain from voting or any other involvement?

I don't want to sound cynical myself, but if you ever get a chance to look up what the average prison term is for adults who murder children it will make you puke. Murdering a child gets you much less of a punishment than murdering another adult. It is truly sick. I wish I could find the link to the statistics I saw.

So, these people/person stole firearms, which is a class B felony in and of itself.  Add to that being in possession of firearms they may not be able to possess legally (pass a background check?), and I'm sure there is enough here for the State Prosecutor to go after WITHOUT the theft charges.

This needs to be all over the news.  If this state is pushing for continued and/or additional gun control laws, then maybe they need to start enforcing the laws AGAINST THE REAL CRIMINALS and stop harassing the law abiding owners!!!

Pretty sad.  The perps should never be able to own or purchase ever.  They should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.  So only thing left after the slap on the wrist is stolen vehicle?  I think we've all been done a disservice.

I don't know the owner personally, but I do know that he is elderly.
I suspect he may not wish to go to court because of the physical and mental strain.

Is it possible for the state or fed to prosecute without the owner?

I don't know the owner personally, but I do know that he is elderly.
I suspect he may not wish to go to court because of the physical and mental strain.

Is it possible for the state or fed to prosecute without the owner?

If the crime is against the people of the state, in addition to being against the gun owner, then yes!  The state AG has the ability, and the sworn duty, to execute the law against the thieves.

The federal and state gun laws are meant to protect the people, not an individual.  There is no reason I can see why the AG should, or would, refuse to prosecute.  With the fact they admitted guilt and returned the guns, the AG will be able to get a conviction in his sleep!