Pregnant woman faces a felony after trying to bring an unloaded handgun to MN from NY


PDA






Bubbles
April 2, 2013, 12:35 AM
Sigh. NYC catches another one.
Pregnant woman faces a felony after trying to bring an unloaded handgun back to Minnesota (http://www.wday.com/event/article/id/77862/group/News/)

According to her Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=924394355780&set=a.792492183790.2173167.163902426&type=1&theater), she tried to do her due diligence. Unfortunately she failed.

If you enjoyed reading about "Pregnant woman faces a felony after trying to bring an unloaded handgun to MN from NY" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
r1derbike
April 2, 2013, 12:41 AM
Good grief. I hope they didn't take her picture and distribute "desensitizing" targets to members of our alphabet soup agencies.

usmarine0352_2005
April 2, 2013, 12:49 AM
.

Looks like the perfect plaintiff for a 2nd Amendment SCOTUS case. And the most important part, she said she's going to fight it.
.

joeschmoe
April 2, 2013, 12:57 AM
You can't take a gun for a weekend in NY?

huntsman
April 2, 2013, 01:03 AM
This is where the gun grabbers win, if they are allowed to continue to fracture RKBA state by state and on the municipal level they don't need a ban. citizens will be intimidated or confused and law abiding citizens become criminals through a deliberate end-around on the 2nd amendment.

Bubbles
April 2, 2013, 09:28 AM
You can't take a gun for a weekend in NY?
Not New York city. She checked it at LaGuardia.

JohnBT
April 2, 2013, 09:35 AM
Oh, she was at an airport. From the thread title I just assumed she was driving. Getting caught at a NY airport shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

Madcap_Magician
April 2, 2013, 09:45 AM
A short list of some of the things that New York considers less offensive than a pregnant woman having a gun and ammunition with no criminal intent (Class C Felony):

CLASS D FELONIES:

120.02 Reckless Assault of a Child
120.05 Assault in the Second Degree
120.18 Menacing a Police Officer
120.60 Stalking in the First Degree
121.12 Strangulation in the Second Degree
125.12 Vehicular Manslaughter in the Second Degree
130.30 Rape in the Second Degree
130.66 Aggravated Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree
140.20 Burglary in the Third Degree
160.05 Robbery in the Third Degree
200.45 Bribing a Public Official
210.15 Perjury in the First Degree
215.16 Intimidating a Witness or Victim in the Second Degree
263.10 Promoting an Obscene Sexual Performance by a Child
490.10 Soliciting or Providing Support for an Act of Terrorism in the Second Degree

CLASS E FELONIES
120.70 Luring a Child
125.10 Criminally Negligent Homicide
130.53 Persistent Sexual Abuse
130.85 Female Genital Mutilation
260.00 Abandonment of a Child

As always, good to know they have their priorities in order.

scaatylobo
April 2, 2013, 09:45 AM
I wish I had a dollar for every time and every day I was asked about transporting a firearm by car & plane from another state to or from NYS.

I am retired LEO from Niagara Falls NY and that question is SO often asked that I wonder where any got their information from in the first place.

Even LEO's ask me as I keep up on the law and my fellow officers [ and retirees ] ask me a few times a year.

They are also the least knowledgable as to LEOSA/HR218.

Sadly there are many arrests at the 2 bridges in this city due to those coming back into the state ,or attempting to go from --- oh say Fl to Canada and they too get arrested.

I see NO INTENT to commit a crime,the authoritys see a arrest and its all B.S. as the criminals get a free ride with a plea bargain.

I hope this lady gets JUSTICE and not the 'law' as it is written = BADLY.

lonehunter
April 2, 2013, 11:50 AM
Not New York city. She checked it at LaGuardia.
Any out of state handgun any where in NY state is a NO NO! Only NY resident can get a pistol permit and the pistol has to be on there permit to be leagal.

PavePusher
April 2, 2013, 05:59 PM
If she traveled directly from PA to the La Guardia airport, she should be covered by FOPA, and have an excellent law suit against the City of New York.

Sadly, being on a military enlisted paycheck with a second child on the way, they won't have the finances to fight this on their own dime. Anyone know if there's a legal defense fund we can donate to yet?

Side note: This is why I don't fly through NY or similar places anymore. Fortunately, SouthWest has direct flights to Manchester, N.H., only 45 minutes drive from "home".

joeschmoe
April 2, 2013, 06:18 PM
Really? There are gun owners who don't know you can't take a pistol into NY? You've never heard that NY has really draconian gun laws? The repeated warnings on the airlines/TSA website to check with local laws did not give you a clue?

usmarine0352_2005
April 2, 2013, 06:19 PM
.

I think she asked for money on her FB acct that is linked in the OP.



She should get a hold of the SAF and NRA.
.

joeschmoe
April 2, 2013, 06:20 PM
If she traveled directly from PA to the La Guardia airport, she should be covered by FOPA, and have an excellent law suit against the City of New York.

Sadly, being on a military enlisted paycheck with a second child on the way, they won't have the finances to fight this on their own dime. Anyone know if there's a legal defense fund we can donate to yet?

Side note: This is why I don't fly through NY or similar places anymore. Fortunately, SouthWest has direct flights to Manchester, N.H., only 45 minutes drive from "home".

The article states NY was her destination. With a gun. That's not covered under FOPA.

CoRoMo
April 2, 2013, 06:21 PM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=924394355780&set=a.792492183790.2173167.163902426&type=1&theater

I would like to say that my treatment while in the custody of the New York Port Authority Police was fantastic.
She should have used a sarcasm smiley after that sentence.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=924394355780&set=a.792492183790.2173167.163902426&type=1&theater

Laws should be meant to keep people safe and to punish criminals who intentionally do wrong. Laws should not be used to heavily punish those doing everything possible to try to do the right thing
Some laws are designed to do just what she experienced; to catch and punish innocent and honest people... as a means to suppress gun ownership.

Old Fuff
April 2, 2013, 07:41 PM
I am confused... :confused: again... :uhoh:

As I understand it NYC Mayor Bloombrain is trying to get all of the handguns not in the hands of his police out of his utopian ivory tower.

So this lady is trying to help by reducing the number to one less.

And this gets her arrested! No mention of what happened to the 6-year-old son if he was with her. Hopefully he was not caught with a water pistol.

Our national government is badly in need of money - maybe they can sell this worthless piece of real estate back to the Indians.

InkEd
April 2, 2013, 08:42 PM
It is TIME to start SUING the <deleted> OUT of EVERY last one of this IDIOTIC agencies, cities and politicians that insist on trying to trample on the 2A!

As a due-paying member of the NRA-ILA, I am officially asking that the organization fully support this case all the way to the SCOTUS.

All of this stuff in NY as gotten completely out of hand.

Blackstone
April 2, 2013, 08:48 PM
A short list of some of the things that New York considers less offensive than a pregnant woman having a gun and ammunition with no criminal intent (Class C Felony):

CLASS D FELONIES:

120.02 Reckless Assault of a Child
120.05 Assault in the Second Degree
120.18 Menacing a Police Officer
120.60 Stalking in the First Degree
121.12 Strangulation in the Second Degree
125.12 Vehicular Manslaughter in the Second Degree
130.30 Rape in the Second Degree
130.66 Aggravated Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree
140.20 Burglary in the Third Degree
160.05 Robbery in the Third Degree
200.45 Bribing a Public Official
210.15 Perjury in the First Degree
215.16 Intimidating a Witness or Victim in the Second Degree
263.10 Promoting an Obscene Sexual Performance by a Child
490.10 Soliciting or Providing Support for an Act of Terrorism in the Second Degree

CLASS E FELONIES
120.70 Luring a Child
125.10 Criminally Negligent Homicide
130.53 Persistent Sexual Abuse
130.85 Female Genital Mutilation
260.00 Abandonment of a Child

As always, good to know they have their priorities in order.
This makes my blood absolutely boil. I hope she takes this to the highest court of the land and wins.

alsaqr
April 2, 2013, 08:57 PM
Really? There are gun owners who don't know you can't take a pistol into NY? You've never heard that NY has really draconian gun laws? The repeated warnings on the airlines/TSA website to check with local laws did not give you a clue?

^^^^^^^This^^^^^^^

For many years travelers have been warned not to bring guns in luggage to La Guardia, Newark and JFK. If your flight makes an unscheduled landing at one of these airports do not claim the bag that contains the gun.

steelerdude99
April 2, 2013, 09:09 PM
http://www.wday.com/event/article/id/77862/group/News

Delta and TSA claim it's the travelers responsibility to know each state's law. In New York, if you're in possession of both a gun and ammunition, the firearm is considered loaded. For Beth, her confusion turned into a crime.
...

The absurdity of NY law, GUN + AMMO possession = "loaded gun" ?

Torian
April 2, 2013, 09:20 PM
A simple slip up at the airport with a firearm is all that it takes to get a felony on your record.

They could care less about intent. I'll pass. If I really need to bring a firearm I'll drive.

SharpsDressedMan
April 2, 2013, 09:48 PM
The federal Firearms Owners Protection Act was supposed to cover firearms in interstate transit, and protect travelers with firearms from unreasonable state laws. I wonder why it does not cover her; she might have stepped outside the limits of that law with some activity while traveling.

Derry 1946
April 2, 2013, 09:58 PM
FOPA covers "just passing through," not stopping. Along with "your face is going to freeze like that," every parent should tell every child not to claim baggage with a gun in NYC.

MErl
April 2, 2013, 10:18 PM
so what are your options if you get diverted? you cannot get your bag back at all?

say I was flying to VT for a vacation and got diverted for whatever reason. Could get a car and drive from there faster than another fight would be arranged so what happens to my bag?

alsaqr
April 2, 2013, 10:44 PM
so what are your options if you get diverted? you cannot get your bag back at all?

Do not claim your bag if it contains a gun. Folks get arrested for doing so.

say I was flying to VT for a vacation and got diverted for whatever reason. Could get a car and drive from there faster than another fight would be arranged so what happens to my bag?

Tell the airline to forward your bag to the VT airport that was your destination.

X-JaVeN-X
April 2, 2013, 10:53 PM
Really? There are gun owners who don't know you can't take a pistol into NY? You've never heard that NY has really draconian gun laws? The repeated warnings on the airlines/TSA website to check with local laws did not give you a clue?

You do realize that not all gun owners (and I would go as far as saying the majority of gun owners) do not frequent gun forums and read law books on in depth gun laws of every state. The average gun owner here grew up shooting guns and uses them for hunting and sport. They could care less what the law in New York is. I can easily see how someone traveling at an airport for the first time would naturally call the airport and ask how to legally transport the gun. There should be a system in place that lets the person know if the state they are going to does not allow it.

When you drive down the street, there are signs that tell you the speed limit. You don't have to go law enforcement in every state you plan to venture through and find out what the various speed limits are going to be before traveling. The road signs provide an easy outlet for that information. An airport should be able to provide the same courtesy, ESPECIALLY if it's ran by any form of government. The fact that this woman can be charged with a crime over this is despicable.

JohnsXDM
April 3, 2013, 01:29 AM
I was listening to a "progressive" radio station today ( keep your friends close, keep your enemy's closer) and believe it or not he ( Ed Schwartz) could not believe this. He was talking about how they need to standardize travel laws and that this woman should NOT be charged! This from a guy who is very anti. NYC and California,,,,,,2 places nukes should be tested!

TenDriver
April 3, 2013, 01:46 AM
Hopefully FOPA covers her. I can't imagine why anyone would fly into and out of LaGarbage unless they were spending some time in NYC though, possibly negating FOPA.

In regards to everyone saying "she should have known better...", I call BS. It seems to me the Second Amendment says I can bear arms. NYC is not private property where someone can tell me my firearm is not welcome. An overly simplistic view for sure, but at some point Bloomberg has to be tried when it comes to NYC gun laws.

I look forward to a case like this going to the Supreme Court. I hope it happens sooner rather than later.

docnyt
April 3, 2013, 02:21 AM
I sincerely hope legislative groups back her up. It sounds like the right case to challenge NYC's draconian laws - military wife, pregnant, from out of state. If she shows up in court still carrying child, a jury may be persuaded to take her side.

usmarine0352_2005
April 3, 2013, 02:28 AM
.

Would this be a good case for SCOTUS?
.

PabloJ
April 3, 2013, 02:35 AM
Any out of state handgun any where in NY state is a NO NO! Only NY resident can get a pistol permit and the pistol has to be on there permit to be leagal.
From living there years ago one must have either "limited permit" (for range use for example) or carry permit to buy handgun in NY as state resident. I had pay fine for turning right on red (to such turns allowed in NYC and Suffolk Co.). One is responsible for following local laws as ignorance will not be acceptable defense against fine and or changes.

Double Naught Spy
April 3, 2013, 09:34 AM
Would this be a good case for SCOTUS?

No, at least not any more so than any other contraband case.

alsaqr
April 3, 2013, 09:48 AM
They could care less what the law in New York is.

Yep, you got that right. However, ignorance of the law is not a legal excuse for breaking the law.

Torian
April 3, 2013, 10:21 AM
Yep, you got that right. However, ignorance of the law is not a legal excuse for breaking the law.
True, however...the laws as currently written in this situation seemed designed to entangle gun owners with the slightest slip up.

TenDriver
April 3, 2013, 10:26 AM
True, however...the laws as currently written in this situation seemed designed to entangle gun owners with the slightest slip up.

Further, the law is designed to deny a Constitutionally guaranteed right. To compare local gun laws to local traffic laws is in the same apples to oranges category as comparing vehicular accident deaths to gun deaths. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say my right to drive a vehicle shall not be infringed. At some point a case over these laws will need to go to the Supreme Court. Given the way the public has been voting lately, the sooner the better. Our window of opportunity to cement gun laws in this country closes a little each day.

Vurtle
April 3, 2013, 11:12 AM
I tend to think our gun laws were cemented in place a long time ago in a document called the Bill of Rights. Any person that tries to create a law or has created a law that opposes that should be charged as a domestic terrorist.

Bill_Shelton
April 3, 2013, 11:43 AM
New York City corrupts everything. From it's over-paid Baseball Team to it's money-grubbing Wall Street to it's Draconian Laws - everything NYC touches is fouled and it leaks out upon the rest of America. New York City has been a basket case for as long as I've been alive and it has gotten worse. It sucked back in the 1960's, and it sucks even more now.

I don't do business with them. I will not go there.

Archaic
April 4, 2013, 11:30 PM
I mean, I am terribly upset and disappointed that this happened to her, but REALLY? I'm more careful than that when I fly with a handgun in and out of Dallas. As gun owners we HAVE to know the law, we cannot just guess.

Onward Allusion
April 5, 2013, 12:19 AM
A couple of you guys here need to get off your high horse. You know damn well who I am referring to. While some of us old-timers on this forum or other gun forums would probably be just a hair more careful, this lady DID her due diligence. It was the State's screwed up laws that made a criminal out of a law abiding citizen. NYC is a seriously F*'d up place to visit or even just passing through. I really hope that nothing like this happens to the couple of you guys on here in your lifetimes. This kind of crap makes my blood boil, especially coming from so called gun enthusiasts and 2nd Amendment believers. You have been brain washed into believing that if it is the law, then it must be right.

One more thing about laws... They had certain laws in a certain place at a particular time in history. I bet you jokers would have followed those laws too. Think about it guys.

Onward Allusion
April 5, 2013, 01:23 AM
Bill_Shelton
New York City corrupts everything. From it's over-paid Baseball Team to it's money-grubbing Wall Street to it's Draconian Laws - everything NYC touches is fouled and it leaks out upon the rest of America. New York City has been a basket case for as long as I've been alive and it has gotten worse. It sucked back in the 1960's, and it sucks even more now.

I don't do business with them. I will not go there.

Got a friend who is a partner with a huge firm in NYC. She rakes in millions a year. The family has been invited numerous times to visit their estate & play with their toys. Never had the heart to tell her that we will never visit NY or NJ. Those States will never see a dime of my money.

PavePusher
May 2, 2013, 06:10 AM
The article states NY was her destination. With a gun. That's not covered under FOPA.
O.K., I saw Pennsylvania in there at some point as the final destination. Which would make transiting NYC & NYS lawful under FOPA. Maybe it was on her FB page... which now appears to be unavailable.

I'll just chalk this up to a big SHRUG.

Midwest
May 2, 2013, 01:38 PM
My only two questions are.

Why wasn't there any successful challenge to the "Sullivan Law" ?

And how many challenges were there to the "Sullivan Law" since its inception on August 31 1911?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_Act

coloradokevin
May 2, 2013, 02:05 PM
I hate NYC. I have family there, as does my girlfriend. We went there a couple of years ago, and I got a huge ration of poop from the port authority police while trying to fly out of there with my gun (I'm LE, and thereby covered by a particular federal law that allows for nationwide CCW. I would have been arrested and charged with a felony if I wasn't -- per the officers).

I can't believe NYC gets away with this crap. They've apparently been doing it for years. If you are visiting NYC and are not in LE, DO NOT TAKE A GUN THERE! That place is barely part of America anymore.


You can't take a gun for a weekend in NY?


Nope. And doing so is a felony. I don't have time to find it right now, but if you read through my posts you can probably find my story about encountering the port authority police when I attempted to check my gun at the counter (per normal airline procedures that apply anywhere else in the country, and exactly in line with the procedures posted by the TSA even in LaGuardia). I felt like I was treated like a criminal by fellow LE officers, and I was even told I'd have been charged with a felony if I wasn't a cop. It's ridiculous! I'm glad I wasn't arrested, but no one else should be either.

The most ironic/pathetic part of the whole thing is that you'll have no problem getting a gun into NYC: the airport hands you your bags on the baggage carousel just like anywhere else... but when you try to take your gun back out of NYC, they take you out of line and to jail, then charge you with a crime that would strip you of your gun rights everywhere.

JRH6856
May 2, 2013, 02:10 PM
I guess I don't understand the thread title. Is she being charged because she is pregnant? Or is pregnancy somehow an affirmative defense? :confused:

Manco
May 2, 2013, 03:06 PM
The most ironic/pathetic part of the whole thing is that you'll have no problem getting a gun into NYC: the airport hands you your bags on the baggage carousel just like anywhere else... but when you try to take your gun back out of NYC, they take you out of line and to jail, then charge you with a crime that would strip you of your gun rights everywhere.

The point, as with virtually all gun control laws, is to disarm citizens in any manner that is possible, regardless of whether it makes sense or would prevent violent crime. While it's particularly ironic in this case as well as pathetic in general, what happened is completely consistent with the true goal of gun control everywhere. If NY can't get you on the way in, then they'll get you on the way out, which is analogous, if you think about it, to creating anti-gun laws that only impact law-abiding citizens--they can't stop criminals this way, but at least it helps disarm the rest of the population, one little bit at a time.

Actually preventing violent crime is never a consideration, except for what is told to the public through the media. And anybody who points out this obvious fact is attacked using purely emotional arguments involving the suffering of the victims of violent crimes that happened to be perpetrated using firearms. "We must do something for them" even if it would not prevent others from being harmed in the future and is therefore completely pointless...well, it couldn't be completely pointless, now could it? Somebody must stand to gain from eventually disarming the population, or else so much effort would not be expended to do so. :scrutiny:

I guess I don't understand the thread title. Is she being charged because she is pregnant? Or is pregnancy somehow an affirmative defense? :confused:

There are certain automatic emotional reactions most people have to pregnant women. It would be a win for gun control to successfully prosecute and imprison a type of person the public tends to sympathize with and believe means no harm. On the other hand, perhaps our side could use her condition to our advantage in court. Yes, this argument is calculating and cynical, but no more so than those we are up against.

HankR
May 2, 2013, 03:25 PM
(on pregnant women). It would be a win for gun control to successfully prosecute and imprison a type of person the public tends to sympathize with and believe means no harm. On the other hand, perhaps our side could use her condition to our advantage in court. Yes, this argument is calculating and cynical, but no more so than those we are up against.


I doubt if she'll still be pregnant when the court cases roll around in a few years

Manco
May 2, 2013, 04:12 PM
I doubt if she'll still be pregnant when the court cases roll around in a few years

The fact of the time could still be brought up--emotional and illogical arguments are made in courts, too, not just in legislatures and the media.

Bubbles
May 2, 2013, 05:03 PM
I guess I don't understand the thread title.
Using the title of the news article decreases the likelihood of dupe threads.

harrygunner
May 2, 2013, 05:08 PM
How can this situation stand? Also, a northeastern winter storm could take you into NYS when you had no intention of being in that state.

One winter my flight from the east coast to the west coast was canceled due to snow. The airline placed us on a bus into NYS. Once there, the anticipated incoming plane was stuck in Newark, so they rerouted us again. My point is, a flight may be unable to depart with the airline offering overnight hotel arrangements in NYC or as in my adventure, driven into such a state as New York. Fortunately, I did not bring a handgun on that trip.

If my flight is ever diverted into NY or NJ while I have a gun in my luggage, I'm heading to the car rental booths and driving to Pennsylvania.

breakingcontact
May 2, 2013, 05:12 PM
citizens will be intimidated or confused and law abiding citizens become criminals

This is their intent, has nothing to do with gun crime. The radical left thinks you're a criminal for having any firearm.

Bill4282
May 2, 2013, 05:13 PM
The most ironic/pathetic part of the whole thing is that you'll have no problem getting a gun into NYC: the airport hands you your bags on the baggage carousel just like anywhere else... but when you try to take your gun back out of NYC, they take you out of line and to jail, then charge you with a crime that would strip you of your gun rights everywhere.. There have been many, many of these cases. They have arrested folks picking up from baggage claim when tipped off by airlines or TSA if a checked gun is in luggage.The local NYC courts have ruled that a stop within NYS terminates FOPA for nonLEOs. In reality, the DA pleads down to misdemeanor, $1000 fine, time served and gun forfeiture. Just a money maker for NYC. If flying anywhere that could be diverted to NYC, ship gun to final destination FFL. I refuse to go to New England states, which should be given to Canada and good riddance. Give CA to Mexico.

TX1911fan
May 2, 2013, 05:47 PM
The one advantage to these threads is to provide information to those of us who may get diverted to NY for some reason. If that happens, I now know to not collect my bag. I'll just call the airline and ask them to forward it to my final destination. Pretty hard for NY to arrest me if I am not in possession, right?

JRH6856
May 2, 2013, 06:05 PM
If flying anywhere that could be diverted to NYC, ship gun to final destination FFL.

If the gun is a handgun, and you are not a resident of the state of final destination, exactly how does this help?

TheSaint
May 2, 2013, 07:00 PM
A short list of some of the things that New York considers less offensive than a pregnant woman having a gun and ammunition with no criminal intent (Class C Felony):

CLASS D FELONIES:

120.02 Reckless Assault of a Child
120.05 Assault in the Second Degree
120.18 Menacing a Police Officer
120.60 Stalking in the First Degree
121.12 Strangulation in the Second Degree
125.12 Vehicular Manslaughter in the Second Degree
130.30 Rape in the Second Degree
130.66 Aggravated Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree
140.20 Burglary in the Third Degree
160.05 Robbery in the Third Degree
200.45 Bribing a Public Official
210.15 Perjury in the First Degree
215.16 Intimidating a Witness or Victim in the Second Degree
263.10 Promoting an Obscene Sexual Performance by a Child
490.10 Soliciting or Providing Support for an Act of Terrorism in the Second Degree

CLASS E FELONIES
120.70 Luring a Child
125.10 Criminally Negligent Homicide
130.53 Persistent Sexual Abuse
130.85 Female Genital Mutilation
260.00 Abandonment of a Child

As always, good to know they have their priorities in order.

Outrageous! We need to call the Dutch up and get them to dredge that wasteland of political corruption and let it float out to sea. Rumor has it they know a thing or two about aquatic engineering projects. As another commenter noted, they are barely part of the United States any more with such draconian laws and I say that as a Californian! :what:

Al Thompson
May 2, 2013, 08:13 PM
This one's done till we read something new.

If you enjoyed reading about "Pregnant woman faces a felony after trying to bring an unloaded handgun to MN from NY" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!