Retired Marine offered NYC gun charge plea deal?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I guess I just do not have the time, money and other resources to try to win cases against states in the Supreme Court.

Idealogically, I agree with you!

Practically, I don't have 2-5 years and $500,000+ to make an issue of it!

So, I try to obey the law and voice my misgivings on the internet... :p


Also, if you want to tell me you would illegally carry a firearm in an area that you were aware it was a crime, what are you really saying?

Would you tell your children it is fine to committ crimes if they didn't 'agree' with law passed by a legislative body?
 
New York Cities disarming the public goes back to the days of the Sullivan Act. This "law" was passed during one of the most corrupt mayoral and state legislative administrations in the history of the USA.
It makes Chicago politics look pale. It was known as Tammany Hall.

This "law" was in-acted to keep weapons out of the hands of certain immigrant populations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_Act
 
So can anyone please explain how NYs' laws are 2A compliant ?

Hmmm, that sounds like that right is still being "infringed".

No. They were not. In fact he could, and probably did, carry a firearm with him to transport the gold. That may have been legal under state and interstate law. Or there may have been a legal way to do it. Even NYC may have allowed him to carry a loaded gun for legit purposes. Even if that were true, that ended when he dropped off the gold. He should have locked up the gun too. Blabing about an unreleated carry infront of NYC cops at a tourist trap was a one way ticket to jail. I don't know of anyone who owns a gun who is unaware of NYC's draconian position on guns. The act of "importing" a gun to NYC alone is a big deal and enough to sink him. Caught with an illegal carry at a monument is a second offense.

I have always argued that NYC's laws are mostly Constitutional because they do allow reasonabee use and posession. Not a total ban. There probably was a legal way for him to do what he needed, but he did at least one or two very serious things he should not have. These aren't little technical violations, they are big ones. He should have known better.
 
Last edited:
New York Cities disarming the public goes back to the days of the Sullivan Act

Yet, to this day NYC specifically allows people to carry loaded firearms for self-defense if they have to transport jewlery, cash, etc. Lots of people do it everyday. The oldest gun store in the country is in Manhattan. That does not allow you to carry a gun to the Empire State building. Even Heller/Mcdonald repeatedly state that this kind of situation is not covered by the 2nd Amendment. This conviction and the rules that led here will stand. IMO.
 
Yet, to this day NYC specifically allows people to carry loaded firearms for self-defense if they have to transport jewelry, cash, etc.
Special privileges for a special minority in no way off sets the infringement on the rights of everyone else. What about the husband "transporting" his paycheck home after working his shift? What about the single mom "transporting" her tips home after working a second job to make ends meet? Are their lives less worthy of protection just because what they are 'transporting' isn't worth as much? :scrutiny:
 
None of those people would be allowed to carry a gun into a NYC monument if NYC says so. "Transporting" a paycheck still would not allow anyone to carry a gun into a monument in NYC.
The people of NYC can change the law. Until then, follow it or go to jail.

The question is; was his right being infringed? No. He is not a single mom transporting a paycheck.
As a gun owner who works hard to try to follow the zillion rules I have to follow, I find it insulting that gun owners claim he was a victim here. He is certainly not a poster child for gun rights or "infringement".

Heller and Mcdonald clearly say that special places like this can be restricted to everybody. So he is not some minority that was discriminated against. Where/when was he infringed? He wasn't.
 
Last edited:
The people of NYC can change the law. Until then, follow it or go to jail.
I never argued that is wasn't "the law" and I agree the Marine did indeed foolishly break "the law". My argument is that its an unjust law that infringes on everyone's rights.

The question is; was his right being infringed? No.
Yes, his rights (along with those of everyone else in NYC) are infringed by NYCs draconian anti-gun laws. The whether he is a single mom, a hardworking husband or a clueless tourist have nothing whatsoever to do with it. Neither does him walking into a store, public street or a "monument". If you start chipping away at rights for this area or that situation, pretty soon you'll be left with no where except you own living room where you can legally exercise them.
 
Most Class A misdemeanors in NY carry a penalty not to exceed one year and/or a max fine of $1000. EXCEPT for criminal possession of a weapon, which is not LESS than one year.
Does anyone have the definition of criminal possession of a weapon?
That's what it really boils down to.
There is a difference between it being criminal to posess a weapon and possessing a weapon with criminal intent.
 
You couldn't pay me to visit a cesspool like that.
The laws are beyond stupid but NYC is pretty nice place to visit. And is far from a cesspool. Stick to good parts and its all bright lights and tourists. Its just like your city and has its bad spots and places to try to shy away from at night.
 
Quote:
The question is; was his right being infringed? No.

Yes, his rights (along with those of everyone else in NYC) are infringed by NYCs draconian anti-gun laws.
100% His rights and everyone elses. Every state that takes away your 2nd amendment right is over stepping its own power.
 
I think he can win if he stands his ground. NY does NOT want their law before the Supreme Court.

Two things about guns in NY (not just NYC). You need "permission" just to have a gun in your house, not just for carry. That is why they don't want their law up at the Supreme Court. If you require a license for a right, it is not a right, it becomes a licensed privilage. The Court's have said so.

Second: Sullivan (the one the Sullivan act was named for) was the head of one of the mobs, as well as a politician. Some of his thugs were being killed when they tried to rob people (usually visitors and immigrents)...THAT is why the gun restrictions, Sullivan was trying to protect his "business interests".

I know when my Grandfather came to teh US from Germany he had on his person a money belt full of gold coin, enough to pay cash for an established farm...and yes, they tried to rob him in NYC...didn't go too well for the mobster from what I was told.
 
http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Novak1.html
Suzanne Novak, "Why the New York State System for Obtaining a License to Carry a Concealed Weapon is Unconstitutional", Fordham Urban Law Journal, November, 1998.

According to Novak, the Sullivan Act violates the NY State Constitution provisions for due process and equal justice in regard to adminstration of licenses in general. That does not even consider violation of RKBA.
 
Does anyone have the definition of criminal possession of a weapon?
That's what it really boils down to.
There is a difference between it being criminal to posess a weapon and possessing a weapon with criminal intent.

I'm north of the city but most of their laws bleed through into my county. It mainly boils down to handguns in my county. Criminal possession of a weapon here pretty much means any un-registered handgun.

In order to touch a handgun in my county you need to have a pistol permit. If you have a handgun and it's not on your permit *bam* charges.
 
I'm north of the city but most of their laws bleed through into my county. It mainly boils down to handguns in my county. Criminal possession of a weapon here pretty much means any un-registered handgun.

In order to touch a handgun in my county you need to have a pistol permit. If you have a handgun and it's not on your permit *bam* charges.
If I remember right, a Rockland County NY news rag published the names, and maybe address's of all handgun permit owners in the county. It is/was public information.

This must of been well received by the burglars who can read.

I resided in NYC for three years. Fantastic. However, enough was enough.

I carried a sap to thump muggers. Used it once with great effect. Now instead of switch blades the muggers carry guns.
 
If I remember right, a Rockland County NY news rag published the names, and maybe address's of all handgun permit owners in the county. It is/was public information.

This must of been well received by the burglars who can read.

I resided in NYC for three years. Fantastic. However, enough was enough.

I carried a sap to thump muggers. Used it once with great effect. Now instead of switch blades the muggers carry guns.

It was all of Rockland and Westchester Counties. I remember that well, was involved in a few of the gun groups who tried to notify the area that it had happened. Was offered online in an excel database. First name, last name and town. The paper was "Kind enough" (their words not mine) to redact street addresses but they were going to publish those as well.

It was all part of their fluff piece, saying hundreds of guns are going unregistered when family members die and that they were all falling through the cracks.

They were less then pleased when their personal information got out on the web though :rolleyes:
 
...NYC is pretty nice place to visit. And is far from a cesspool. Stick to good parts and its all bright lights and tourists.

I don't doubt there's plenty to see and do in New York: I've been there. Any place that deprives me of my right to defend my life against the predators is a cesspool. No American should have to live in fear. There are, indeed, parts of Colorado Springs, the nearest town to me, that I generally avoid, but a.) I go there when I have reasons, and b.) my local sheriff thanked me for keeping and bearing arms.
 
We can talk about the draconian NY City gun law being unconstitutional until the cows come home. In the end the Second Amendment is what SCOTUS says it is. IMO: Heller was not a big win for concealed carry. The fact that SCOTUS, since Heller, has refused cert in concealed carry cases should tell us something.

In Heller, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote:

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues ... The majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues."
 
Last edited:
I'd REALLY like to see a plea of not guilty, a full trial with jury, and the jury refusing to convict, even at any appeal trials. That ought to put the prosecution in their place.
 
maskedman504: "Even if we disagree with the law, we must abide it. We can strive to change it through proper channels. However, to be ignorant of the law or disregard it and ask for for forgiveness after the fact is irresponsible. I hope this marine is not charged with a crime, but should he be, it is only because he did not educate himself before making his own decisions."

As far as the case in question, mm504, you're probably right. There is something missing in this analysis, however.

Before you can abide by a law, you have to understand it. Before it can be properly enforced, law enforcement personnel have to understand it. The way many laws are now written, an unambiguous understanding is nearly impossible to come by. One says this is what a law means and gives several reasons; someone else interprets it to mean something totally different with equally good reason...both in good faith. What then?

The point is that those who write the laws have a duty to make them clear, understandable and unambiguous. Our lawmakers think their duties lie elsewhere.

I have a NYS concealed carry permit. My permit is valid everywhere in NY state EXCEPT NYC. All my centerfire and rimfire handguns are listed on my permit and were required to be approved by a judge before I was given possession. Recently I ordered a cap & ball blackpowder revolver (Remington New Army) from Cabela's who had it delivered by UPS. Reading here and other places online convinced me that the New Army should be at least listed on the permit if not going the full route to a judge.

So I started at the county clerk's office where the handgun permits are issued. The lady there didn't have a clue as to what needed done or whether anything in fact was required. She referred me to the Sheriff. When I checked with the Sheriff, same story; they referred me back to the county clerk's office. Finally, while driving past the state police barracks, I pulled in and asked them. Again, deer in the headlights. They tried the county clerk and Sheriff gambits, but I'd already done that. After three or four officers consulted with each other, I finally got the "verdict" that nothing needed to be done and I should go and enjoy my new gun.

Nice to hear, but not very reassuring. I still don't know whether I'm legal or not. And this IN SPITE of doing everything I could think of to stay legal. So how do you abide by a law that no one knows how to interpret? How is such a law enforced in a fair rather than arbitrary manner? Guess I should be happy I wasn't charged with a felony and thrown in the clink.

As for NYC, another poster got it exactly right. "You couldn't pay me...."
 
I thought D.C. was the last city to have such anti-gun,carry weapons law's.The whole situation in NYC need's to be totally de-constructed and built on the proper existing laws.I spent alot of time yrs. ago fixing windows in the Empire State Building.Pre 9-11 and that whole city was like a different planet.I really couldn't believe it was part of the USA,for Real.To much to go into on this site.
 
Way to go Marine! God willing he will make a point concerning this state's anti-Constitution policies.
 
OrangePwrx: With regards to cap and ball, what I've heard from various persons in NY, is that it's a display piece until you posses 2 of the 3 firing components Cap and ball, cap and powder, powder and ball etc.

Take that advice for as much as you paid for it, but that's what a few of the CAS guys I know have said about NY pistol laws
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top