Nathan Haddad would be facing a shorter prison sentence if he raped someone


PDA






bdgackle
February 8, 2013, 04:12 PM
In addition to a second amendment argument, we need to be pushing the eighth amendment as well. It is interesting to examine a list of the crimes that New York State considers LESS serious than simple possession of a few magazines.

Nathan Haddad, for those who haven’t been following, is a veteran with no previous criminal record who was arrested in New York State for having five empty thirty round magazines in the trunk of his car. This “crime” carries a maximum prison sentence of thirty five years (five class D felonies). Forcible rape and child molestation both carry a maximum sentence of twenty five years (class A felony). That is an interesting comparison, no?

A partial list of charges that carry shorter maximum sentences in New York than what Nathan Haddad is facing includes: Manslaughter, Attempted Murder, Rape, Kidnapping, Arson, Incest, Robbery, Burglary, Possession of a Chemical or Biological Weapon, Intimidating a Witness, Grand Larceny, Bribery, Compelling Prostitution, Manufacturing Methamphetamine, Soliciting an Act of Terrorism, Money Laundering, Forgery, and Criminal Conspiracy (Source: http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/offense_level.htm)

Even if you don’t believe these laws infringe on the second amendment (a point I am not conceding), the punishments stipulated for breaking these laws are clearly violations of the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

Furthermore, is there ANY OTHER issue where an action is a felony in one state, and perfectly legal in the next? Or that is a felony at the state level, but legal at the federal level? It seems like most felonies are crimes that are universally considered very serious -- stealing stuff, hurting people, killing people, etc. Weapons offenses are the only exception I can think of to this. How can the federal government and the rest of the states justify the lifetime stigma of calling someone a “felon” for actions that they would not even consider simple infractions?

If someone is wanted for magazine possession in New York, and they make it across the line into Pennsylvania, how is it right that Pennsylvania would extradite that person back to New York? Maybe it is time for the free states to declare that they will provide asylum for American citizens that are accused of non-crimes by the more repressive regimes.
.

If you enjoyed reading about "Nathan Haddad would be facing a shorter prison sentence if he raped someone" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Cosmoline
February 8, 2013, 04:14 PM
Maybe it is time for the free states to declare that they will provide asylum for American citizens that are accused of non-crimes by the more repressive regimes.

There's the full faith and credit problem to deal with.

bdgackle
February 8, 2013, 04:16 PM
I see your full faith and credit issue, and raise you a concealed carry permit.

MDW GUNS
February 8, 2013, 04:23 PM
I feel for the guy.
This makes NY an oppressive state.
If I would live in NY I would be properly considered a "terrorist" by now!

wacki
February 8, 2013, 04:25 PM
great comparison. proof that or freedoms to defend ourselves are persecuted.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

zorro45
February 8, 2013, 04:32 PM
For the sake of responding to the argument, carrying a firearm in CT in a public K-12 school without permission of the Superintendent is a felony, in Utah it is an "attaboy."

bdgackle
February 8, 2013, 04:33 PM
It appears Cosmoline has made a good point -- and it goes beyond the full faith and credit clause. Article 4, section 2 of the constitution states:

"A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime."

Still, I wonder whether "Crime" could be challenged, and the basis that there are certain things that New York et al do not have the authority to declare a "Crime". If nothing else, it would buy time for those fleeing -- since New York would have to take the free state to court, and the SAFE act would meanwhile be making its own way through the court system.

States are presently passing laws protecting their citizens from federal confiscation, in contradiction to federal supremecy. These are primarily symbolic acts for that reason, but they carry weight nonetheless. An assylum act would have similar results. If push comes to shove and we must resist, I'd much rather see states throwing their weight around, rather than leaving resistance to individual people. Much less messy that way.

zorro45
February 8, 2013, 04:57 PM
Are we sure these magazines weren't for the 458 SOCOM and not the AR-15?

Trent
February 8, 2013, 04:59 PM
And so it begins....

bdgackle
February 8, 2013, 05:03 PM
Yeah, I love the 458 SOCOM thing. You can get 10 of those into the magazine, though, so they're still illegal in New York... unless you had them before the ban, AND you remember never to put more than 7 in them. :banghead:

vaupet
February 8, 2013, 06:04 PM
@mdw guns and you had to watch your back for drones:evil::evil:

radiotom
February 8, 2013, 06:15 PM
For the sake of responding to the argument, carrying a firearm in CT in a public K-12 school without permission of the Superintendent is a felony, in Utah it is an "attaboy."
History shows that the children are safer in Utah than Connecticut, doesn't it?

HorseSoldier
February 8, 2013, 06:39 PM
Seems like the last time states got this out of sync with one another on definitions of legal and illegal it had something to do with the right of one guy to own another guy as property . . .

usmarine0352_2005
February 8, 2013, 08:30 PM
.



http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2013/feb/6/miller-vet-arrested-high-capacity-magazines-new-yo/


.
Former Army Staff Sgt. Nathan Haddad was arrested in LeRay, Ny. earlier this year for possessing five 30-round magazines, which are perfectly legal nearly everywhere else in the country. New York passed a law in 1994 prohibiting magazines over 10 rounds.

For this, the veteran of the war in Iraq, who devotes his free time to supporting other veterans, was thrown in jail and charged with five felonies and faces a maximum of seven years in state prison. If he is convicted of even one felony, he will lose his Second Amendment right for life.
.



This article says he's only facing 7 years.



Which one is correct?
.

pharmer
February 8, 2013, 08:31 PM
If every gun owner kicked a buck, he could afford a legal defense that would spank Gov Andy. Joe

Averageman
February 8, 2013, 10:02 PM
In the very state Haddad was arrested in, a reporter on a National Sunday political show pulled out his 30 rnd magazine for all to see. He was charged with NO crime, but then of course he was fighting FOR Gun Control.
No one Man is more or less exempt from any Law when they have equal protection under the law, am I not right?
Now, that would be a point in my case if I was defending Mr. Haddad.

Deltaboy
February 8, 2013, 10:55 PM
NY is totally nuts. So I will continue to be content with seeing the Empire state building and the Statue of Liberty on TV and in pictures. That state will never my shadow fall. Prayers Sent For this hero.

bdgackle
February 8, 2013, 11:49 PM
I saw another article that said 35 years. I suppose I haven't seen anything that proves this is correct. Seven years is the max for possession of a single mag. Most of what I have read assumes they can be added up... but I could be wrong about that. Any lawyer types out there want to comment?

barnbwt
February 9, 2013, 01:16 AM
Furthermore, is there ANY OTHER issue where an action is a felony in one state, and perfectly legal in the next?
No one Man is more or less exempt from any Law when they have equal protection under the law, am I not right?
Maybe it is time for the free states to declare that they will provide asylum for American citizens that are accused of non-crimes by the more repressive regimes.
Seems like the last time states got this out of sync with one another on definitions of legal and illegal it had something to do with the right of one guy to own another guy as property

And now we have states, governors, and legislators talking openly of nullification and interferrence in Federal Agents' official duties... God, I hope we learned our lesson the first time, and are fully aware of the consequences.

TCB

Jorg Nysgerrig
February 9, 2013, 01:26 AM
Furthermore, is there ANY OTHER issue where an action is a felony in one state, and perfectly legal in the next?
Yes.
Or that is a felony at the state level, but legal at the federal level?
Yes.

Since this is a firearms forum, however, those topics really aren't open for discussion.

bdgackle
February 9, 2013, 04:25 AM
The article posted above indicates that the prosecuting attorney did in fact state that he would be allowed to serve the sentences concurrently, so it looks like seven years is the right number. I stand corrected.

One very interesting quote from her was that she did not understand why there was so much interest in this case. I wonder if a call or letter writing campaign indicating that this behavior on the part of the state is unacceptable could have any influence. I know this person is not elected, but there has to be some sense of accountability there. They don't write the laws, but I have to imagine they have some latitude in deciding who to prosecute. I find it hard to believe that any citizen of that county would find this case to be the best possible use of available tax payer funds.

For anyone interested in contact, the attorney doing the prosecuting is Chief Assistant District Attorney Krystina Mills. She works for Jefferson County District Attorney Cindy Intschert. Listed contact info for the district attorney's office is:

175 Arsenal Street
Watertown, NY 13601

Phone: 315-785-3053
Fax: 315-785-3371

No email is provided on the website.

I would imagine voters in that county hold more sway, but it can't hurt to let these people know that persecuting disabled veterans doesn't make them heroes in the eyes of the american public.

longspurr
February 9, 2013, 07:23 AM
Someone who would send a person to jail for a “magazine” is no different than someone who would send Jews to the Gas chambers! “Its my job” didn't keep Nazi officials from being held accountable.

This “prosecutor” should be put on notice that using the law to unjustly assault citizens of her state is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE.

Legislators who voted for a bill putting people in jail for possessing a piece of unsharpened metal & plastic could and should be held for mental evaluation. A diagnosis of Paranoid & Delusional is an obvious assessment of this behavior.

Call, write, and email the district attorney with these statements. The only thing it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing.

Trent
February 9, 2013, 08:59 AM
It would be highly unusual for a local state's attorney to be on the receiving end of a letter campaign.

We should all send them a bag of nuts.

NUTS!

bdgackle
February 9, 2013, 07:34 PM
It would only be unusual because this degree of over reach was unusual (or at least, less blatant, so we didn't take notice).

Placing enforcement of the law with the executive branch (which this prosecutor is part of) is a deliberate check on the legislature's power. Refusal to enforce these laws on constitutional grounds is reasonable - and even the duty of someone who has taken an oath to uphold the constitution. The fact that this is no longer customary is irrelevant. As citizens, we have the right to petition ALL branches for redress of grievences - and a duty to make ourselves heard, regardless of the odds of changing anything.

If people like this prosecutor don't feel ostracized, we have failed to utilize the soap box. The next steps involve the ballot and jury boxes.

This shouldn't have to be said, but to be clear I would not ever advocate going further, unless all of the above had been subverted by naked force. I feel the need to say this, because I have heard a lot of dark talk lately. I too am skeptical of our ability to vote our way out of that this mess, but if we don't have sufficient public support to make these laws unenforceable by anything short of widespread suspension or subversion of jury trials, then we've got no business starting a fight. That, personally, would be my "line in the sand" - and one I think most reasonable people would agree with, both inside and outside of our community.

HorseSoldier
February 9, 2013, 08:07 PM
So judging by the mailing address for the DA, this offense occurred right outside Ft Drum? :banghead: How long was this guy actually out of the .mil? Were the mags ones that had been issued to him by the .mil, or privately purchased while he was still in the .mil?

Fanfare Ends
February 10, 2013, 03:04 AM
If every gun owner kicked a buck, he could afford a legal defense that would spank Gov Andy. Joe
http://www.gofundme.com/1tkukc

RetiredUSNChief
February 10, 2013, 05:55 AM
So judging by the mailing address for the DA, this offense occurred right outside Ft Drum? :banghead: How long was this guy actually out of the .mil? Were the mags ones that had been issued to him by the .mil, or privately purchased while he was still in the .mil?

I'm wondering about this myself.

According to the Washington Times article I read:

"A police source also said that the magazines were stamped with the words “Restricted. For military use only.”"

Now, if true, this throws a few things into question to me:

He was medically discharged in 2010, after 12 years of service. This put him in the military around 1998, four years after the 1994 ban.

If he obtained them while he was in the military, then he obtained them while they were illegal. AND it would appear that they were stamped as military property, which, while not 100% condeming, certainly throws doubt into the equation as to how he came to legitimately possess military property.


Let's get it clear here that I don't agree with the 1994 AWB or any limitations on magazine capacity. However, in this circumstance, I'm finding it hard to believe that this guy is totally innocent here.

I'd certainly like some more information, certainly some clarification, on this matter.

usmarine0352_2005
February 10, 2013, 06:07 AM
.

Who in the military didn't come home when a mag or two?
.

RetiredUSNChief
February 10, 2013, 06:27 AM
.

Who in the military didn't come home when a mag or two?
.

Soooo...you're asking who out there in the military did not steal military weapons equipment?

:scrutiny:

jumperdoc
February 10, 2013, 08:29 AM
The "Restricted-Military Use Only" stamp is really a moot point. After the Clinton era AWB expired these mags became legal on the civilian market in most states. If he kept some military property when he left service the federal government has juristiction, not the state of New York.

This case is a really good opportunity to get standard capacity mag bans overturned by the courts. If you're complaining that this guy is getting railroaded by a draconian law (I personally believe that he is), donate to his legal defense fund: http://www.gofundme.com/1tkukc The fund saw a flurry of donations when this first made the news, but now has slowed to a trickle and stagnated at about $35k. Encourage the Second Amendment Foundation to get involved with the court action. I don't think that a letter campaign will hurt anything, but after the latest NY gun ban I really don't think most of the people in NYS government can be expected to listen.

$.02

HorseSoldier
February 10, 2013, 03:25 PM
My recollection is the NYS still refers to the post-94 stamps to determine legal/illegal status under the state AWB (well, prior to their current legislative tomfoolery). Whole thing makes me wonder if you could be charged under state statutes about magazines if you were still active duty but law enforcement found you in possession of non-USGI magazines while off post (i.e. the Pmags for sale in PX's in theater you may have brought home from down range).

Hardtarget
February 10, 2013, 04:30 PM
There are several states on my list that I would have moved away from a long time ago. Soon there may not many left I could stay in. This is getting...bad...sad...scary...UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

Fair to say I'm getting worried.

Mark

If you enjoyed reading about "Nathan Haddad would be facing a shorter prison sentence if he raped someone" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!