On January 30th a Wisconsin man named Nazir al-Mujaahid was shopping at an Aldis when two assailants armed with a sawed off shotgun began threatening a cashier and other patrons. Mujaahid, who had gotten his concealed carry permit a few weeks prior, opened fire on the man saving the innocent people at the store from these maniacs. As is procedure Mujaahid’s gun and holster were confiscated until an investigation was complete. The law requires them to then return the weapon to Mujaahid

Mujaahid was cleared of any wrong doing, yet police have not and seemingly will not return Nazir al-Mujaahid’s weapon:

A gun rights advocacy group has taken Milwaukee police to task for refusing to give back a gun used in an Aldi grocery store shooting that was ruled justifiable and legal.

Police say the gun is still evidence in the case.

Nazir Al-Mujaahid shot and injured a suspected robber who was threatening a cashier and waving a sawed-off rifle at other patrons on Jan. 30. Al-Mujaahid had gotten a concealed-carry permit a couple of weeks earlier. The suspect fled, was later arrested and charged in the Aldi robbery and two other armed holdups.

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm cleared Al-Mujaahid, 35, of any criminal wrongdoing, but police still have his gun and holster, according to Nik Clark, president of Wisconsin Carry Inc., a gun rights advocacy group.

“WCI believes that these acts by the Milwaukee Police Department represent violations to law-abiding citizens’ constitutionally guaranteed right to be free from illegal seizures of their private property and their constitutionally recognized right to keep and bear arms,” Clark said in a news release Tuesday.

The department “appears to have a practice of concocting baseless reasons to seize any and all guns they come across in the city – even when those guns have never been used in connection with a crime,” the release states.

Police spokeswoman Anne E. Schwartz said Tuesday that Al-Mujaahid’s weapon is still considered evidence in the pending case against the two men charged in the armed robbery.

Schwartz’s explanation seems strange. Why would the gun used by a citizen to stop and armed robbery be used as evidence against the pair?

Al-Mujaahid apparently once loaned a gun to a friend who then lent the gun to a relative who was a felon, but Mujaahid was cleared in that case of any wrong doing. It seems likely though that police are making up reasons to deny this man his rights before he has broken any laws.

This reminds me of the gun confiscations by New Orleans police during Katrina. Word on the street on that affair was that police didn’t want to return guns (and other confiscated property) because they sold them already. But NOPD is notoriously corrupt, I haven’t heard the same thing about cops in Milwaukee.

According to activists in the area the cops and the left leaning officials have been involved in active campaigns to harass and intimidate gun owners and Black gun owners are particularly vulnerable. It seems like this case is part of an overall pattern of targeting law abiding citizens who stand up for freedom and self-reliance – especially if they’re Black.

h/t Ammoland