Dear Seanand Alan


January 24, 2003, 06:37 AM
Sean and Alan:

Last night I heard both of you express outrage over Ronald Dixon being prosecuted for defending his
home and family with a weapon. The fact is that Mr. Dixon violated a fundamental law in New York
State that criminalizes the possession of a handgun without a permit and that specific gun being
registered with the state. I've heard, that in New York City, the common citizen cannot get a permit
unless they are among the elite or well connected. Mr. Dixon's attempt to register his weapon would
probably have been denied.

What about the thousands of "other" Ronald Dixons in New York, who illegally possess handguns (in
their homes) for the sole purpose defending themselves and their families? Are you (and the other Fox News analysts) going to pick up their cause and express outrage at the plethora of gun laws that criminalize them? Will Mr. Dixon's case and your subsequent outrage cause you to use your media access to take a truly fair, balanced and in-depth look at the impact of guns and gun control on our society?

Opportunity knocks for the Pro-gun Lobby. Mr. Dixon could become the poster person for those who
believe that the antigun lobby is now doing harm to our society by restricting the natural right of honest, peaceful people to defend themselves and their property.

I'm hoping that Mr. Dixon is prosecuted and found guilty under New York gun laws. I hope that his
case finds its way (through appeals) to the highest court possible. I hope that that court is forced to
provide a ruling on whether a constitutionally defined militia conscript's (Mr. Dixon) 2nd Amendment rights were violated when he was prosecuted for securing his small piece of the free state.

If you enjoyed reading about "Dear Seanand Alan" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
January 24, 2003, 10:14 AM
Mr. Dixon's attempt to register his weapon would have been denied.Unless Dixon had a legal impairment (e.g., being a felon) the legal presumption is that it would have been approved. Otherwise, the law is arbitrary and capricious. We know it is, but submitting a valid application according to the law tolls it.

The outcome will be interesting.

January 24, 2003, 11:15 AM
NY law requires that you get the permit and have the gun placed (registered) on the permit before you take possesion (of the gun).

Dixon violated several NYS gun laws the minute he set foot in NYS with the weapon. He should have had the gun delivered to an NYS FFL and held there for him while he secured his permit.

NY law is very restrictive on possession.

For example:

My Dad passed away this past October leaving behind an heirloom .22 revolver that he legally owned. I have an unrestricted (except NYC) NYS carry permit with two much more powerful firearms registered on it. In order for me to take possesion of that gun my Mom had to have a lawyer obtain an official court order (that specifically mentioned the gun) stating that she was the estate's executor. We also had to provide a notorized letter, from my Mom, relinquishing the gun to me. Then I had to have the gun registered on my permit. We had 30 days to accomplish the above because the State retained the right to confiscate the gun, as a nuisance, if still in my Mom's possession after that period. We could have had it placed in the hands of the police during the paperwork cycle - I chose to have my Mom hold it risking the 30 day time limit because I wasn't confident that I'd see it again.

January 24, 2003, 03:53 PM

I always tell people to let an FFL hold the gun until they can make arrangements for it. ( I too am a NY resident.) I am against police depts holding firearms as many times they get damaged in one way or another or are difficult to get back.

I also believe that you can have your pistol on someone elses license so they can use it. Father, son, wife, daughter, etc..... are examples.

As the pisols are still licensed to someone the state does not get involved. Only the permit of the deceased becomes invalid. If the deceased has firearms that are only on his license then you should get them to an FFL.

Charlie Hynes, the DA, is a bleeding heart creep so expect a conviction on this one!

January 24, 2003, 06:11 PM
As a lesson to all. Take care of firearms inheritance issues while you are still alive. It would have been much easier for my Dad and I to co-own the firearm.

Standing Wolf
January 25, 2003, 01:06 AM
Clearly, New York is in gross, wanton, witting violation of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

January 26, 2003, 02:57 AM
:cuss: New York!

Half of my family is from New York. Some of my roots are there. I thank God every day that there is an entire continent between me and that Godforsaken coast.

Of course the Kommiefornians are bringing their BS here as they abandon the bankrupt Liberalista commie hellhole they created for themselves.:cuss: :fire: :banghead:

It is a very good letter BTW. Too bad that neither of those two dullwits will "get" it. Hannity understands/supports the R.K.B.A. about as much as I understand/support Al-Qaeda.

I'm still trying to figure out what people see in him. :confused:

Ed Brunner
January 26, 2003, 04:37 AM
I believe the man being discussed lives in NEWYORKCITY where mere subjects are not allowed a handgun permit. In other portions of the EMPIRE subjects often can get a permit, but not always.

When Jim March is finished taking the K out of Kali, maybe he can take the empire out of the Empire State.

Then he could put the Constitution back into the Constitution State.


January 26, 2003, 09:45 AM
In Onondaga County I had to take care of who would get my handguns before I even got my permit. It was part of the application. I had to put on file who was to get my guns in the event of my death. It was signed by me and wittnessed by one of the ladies at the licencsing dept.

If you enjoyed reading about "Dear Seanand Alan" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!