Aldon Smith, So much for blind justice!


PDA






wally
July 19, 2014, 06:15 PM
What would happen to Joe THR in California caught with three "assault rifles"
legally purchased in Arizona? Felonies dropped to misdemeanors? Doubt it!

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/49ers/2014/07/18/aldon-smith-draws-12-day-sentence-felony-gun-convictions-reduced-to-misdemeanors/

His three CA felony gun possessions:

http://blacksportsonline.com/home/2013/10/photos-of-the-military-assault-riffles-aldon-smith-had-in-his-possession/

I think we can all agree the CA laws are stupid, wrong headed and anti-Second Amendment, but his special treatment makes my blood boil! :fire:

At least he can own guns again in three years.


I just hope anyone else nailed on these charges can use this as a precedent.

If you enjoyed reading about "Aldon Smith, So much for blind justice!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
rskent
July 20, 2014, 05:55 AM
Who's Aldon Smith?

hso
July 20, 2014, 07:30 AM
Wally,

We all know that California has prohibited firearms and that it doesn't matter where you purchase them (although purchasing a firearm in California helps ensure you're not purchasing a prohibited firearm).

We also know that certain firearms like "assault weapons" have to be registered in California and that not doing so puts you in trouble with the law enforcement if you're caught.

We also know that if you're partying with members of the Norteņo street gang at an out-of-control party at Smith's house where he got stabbed and two people were shot it will get the attention of law enforcement who might find 3 prohibited firearms when they respond.

We also know that people who can afford attorney's have a much better chance to get their legal problems resolved through negotiation than those who can't pay for the attorney. A buddy of mine was given the same sentence in the Bay area for a prohibited firearm because he paid for an attorney to establish with the court that he was a responsible member of the community.

So what's your point here? To complain that someone could afford to have an attorney negotiate a lighter sentence or that the prosecutor cut a deal because Smith is a football player for the 49ers?

natman
July 20, 2014, 09:43 AM
Who's Aldon Smith?
Football player for the 49ers.

aarondhgraham
July 20, 2014, 10:26 AM
Never forget we live in America,,,
The land of all the justice we can afford.

There would be nothing wrong with this,,,
If the case set the precedent for all others like it.

The next guy with the same charges,,,
Without this guy's large financial resources,,,
Will be hung out to dry as if he were a domestic terrorist.

Sometimes,,,
I'm glad I'm old.

Aarond

.

230RN
July 20, 2014, 10:54 AM
Somehow the term "Assault Lawyer" popped into my mind.

Justice costs.

wally
July 20, 2014, 11:05 AM
So what's your point here? To complain that someone could afford to have an attorney negotiate a lighter sentence or that the prosecutor cut a deal because Smith is a football player for the 49ers?

We are supposed to all be equal under the law.

Is this the "normal" situation in California for people with enough money for a "good" lawyer to turn felonies into misdemeanors? If so then I guess he didn't get special treatment for being a celebrity, but is special treatment for having enough money really a good thing?

Changing these bad laws would be a better thing, but this will never happen if the rich and connected are immune to these bad laws. The conflict is even more obvious with the drug laws. The rich get rehab, the poor get prison.

hso
July 20, 2014, 11:08 AM
C'mon, no one doesn't understand that any legal representation produces better results than no legal representation and that the better the quality of the legal representation the better the outcome is likely to be.

burrhead
July 20, 2014, 12:05 PM
The way of the world is that people with power/money have an advantage across all cultures and all time. That's just the way it is and anyone over the age of twelve needs to get over it or get more money.

we are not amused
July 20, 2014, 01:14 PM
Wally,

We all know that California has prohibited firearms and that it doesn't matter where you purchase them (although purchasing a firearm in California helps ensure you're not purchasing a prohibited firearm).

We also know that certain firearms like "assault weapons" have to be registered in California and that not doing so puts you in trouble with the law enforcement if you're caught.

We also know that if you're partying with members of the Norteņo street gang at an out-of-control party at Smith's house where he got stabbed and two people were shot it will get the attention of law enforcement who might find 3 prohibited firearms when they respond.

We also know that people who can afford attorney's have a much better chance to get their legal problems resolved through negotiation than those who can't pay for the attorney. A buddy of mine was given the same sentence in the Bay area for a prohibited firearm because he paid for an attorney to establish with the court that he was a responsible member of the community.

So what's your point here? To complain that someone could afford to have an attorney negotiate a lighter sentence or that the prosecutor cut a deal because Smith is a football player for the 49ers?

What do you think?

Some one with a bunch of money buys a reduced sentence, or that Smith is a player for the 49ers?

How about both?

MagnumDweeb
July 20, 2014, 04:07 PM
As a criminal lawyer I can tell you. Justice is easily perceived to be bought and paid for.

The guy who can afford a $50,000 defense is going to have a way better plea deal than the guy who got a public defender. Heck even the guy who can afford a $5,000 defense is going to get a way better deal than the guy who got a public defender.

Clients are their own worst enemies and when they make it easy to get a criminal conviction against them, it's harder to force the prosecutor to meet their burden (beyond a reasonable doubt). Prosecutors are thrown anywhere between one hundred to two hundred cases at a time with instructions (around my way) to make the cases go away ASAP. Getting a private defense attorney from the start makes ASAP harder and harder to happen, thus making the possibility of a sweet deal better and better. And if you're client is innocent, and can afford to depose witnesses, the deal gets even way sweeter and once in a blue moon they drop the charges.

This is truth, this is fact. You don't have to like it. But getting angry about it will only raise your blood pressure.

You can always contact your congress critters about passing equal treatment laws and fixed sentencing guidelines so rich people can't get better deals than poor people. Till then, this will just keep happening. And lawyers will laugh all the way to the bank.

ElToro
July 21, 2014, 10:43 AM
This is local here and I'm a niners fan. But come on. If it was me or any of my gun buddies caught with a non registered assut weapon ? See ya in a few years. I'm seriously I treated why the Feds aren't interested how he, a CA resident waltzed into an AZ gun store and bought the guns, as I understand it. I thought that was fed law.

Hopefully the next guy arrested because he didn't have a bullet button can point to this case for his defense. Also shows the absurdity of how something legal in one state can be a felony in the next

Also helps that your the star defensive lineman for the local team in the same county and just miles as the crow flies from he brand azz new billion dollar stadium. Thankfully the judge wasnt a raiders fan

Sam1911
July 21, 2014, 11:12 AM
The matter that would be interesting to see pursued would be the fact that long gun sales to residents of another state are lawful SO LONG AS the laws of both states are followed. Selling a gun to a resident of another state, when that gun would not be lawful to own in that state, would seem to be a violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(b)(3).

Wonder if they'll follow up on that?

herrwalther
July 21, 2014, 01:19 PM
The only good I can see coming from this case is the celebrity of stupid laws. Maybe, just maybe there will be some people in California who see the Smith case and say "Well those laws are stupid" and do some political activism/vote to get something changed. I doubt it since this is California...

As far as Smith himself is concerned, ignorance of the law is not a defense, he is up fecal matter creek without a paddle.

hso
July 21, 2014, 05:20 PM
the celebrity of stupid laws

I wish that were the case, but Mr. Smith in this case is far from someone we'd want as a poster boy for our side. Instead he helps reinforce the stupid law.

lxd55
July 22, 2014, 12:52 AM
The only good I can see coming from this case is the celebrity of stupid laws. Maybe, just maybe there will be some people in California who see the Smith case and say "Well those laws are stupid" and do some political activism/vote to get something changed. I doubt it since this is California...

As far as Smith himself is concerned, ignorance of the law is not a defense, he is up fecal matter creek without a paddle.
Do not hold your breath

herrwalther
July 22, 2014, 10:40 AM
Do not hold your breath

I won't. I lost any real hope for California years ago.

I wish that were the case, but Mr. Smith in this case is far from someone we'd want as a poster boy for our side. Instead he helps reinforce the stupid law.

I don't either. I don't think he is popular enough to wake up Californian's apathy toward their anti-Constitution laws.

jmr40
July 22, 2014, 06:14 PM
Anytime a celebrity gets what seems like a break from the law the first reaction among most folks is that the break came simply because of their celebrity status. That might be somewhat true, but most anyone who is a decent person with no past criminal record would get similar treatment. It happens a lot. It is just with non-celebrities no one ever knows about it.

In fact the opposite happens sometimes too. A celebrity makes a minor mistake and an over zealous prosecutor will at times try to make a name for themselves and an example of the famous person.

Most of the times when we read about someone getting nailed hard for a seemingly minor incident there are other factors we are not ever made aware of.

danez71
July 22, 2014, 09:33 PM
Where does say he bought them legally in AZ?

And when did he buy them? When did he get busted?



Up until 01-01-2014, registering a rifle wasnt required (non assault weapon).

texasgun
July 24, 2014, 08:45 PM
I do not like the CA law (it's stupid)... but when you live in CA you must obey it. It's PRETTY clear that legally buying an AR15 in NV and bringing it to CA is dumb. Unless you move from another state to CA - it's much less trouble to just buy a legal AR in CA. Colt makes an "ok" version of their LE6940 which I would get in a heartbeat if I had to live in that state.

Tinpig
July 25, 2014, 01:28 AM
Is this the "normal" situation in California for people with enough money for a "good" lawyer to turn felonies into misdemeanors?

Hell, yes. California and every other state, too.

Tinpig

IOwnTheWorld1994
July 25, 2014, 03:04 AM
Senator Leland Yee didn't obey the laws.

Baron_Null
July 26, 2014, 04:17 AM
The way of the world is that people with power/money have an advantage across all cultures and all time. That's just the way it is and anyone over the age of twelve needs to get over it or get more money.
The way of the world is that people with power restrict people's ability to own arms across all cultures and all time. That's just the way it is and anyone over the age of twelve needs to get over it or get a gun with a bullet button.

See anything wrong with this argument once it's framed differently? :rolleyes:

If you enjoyed reading about "Aldon Smith, So much for blind justice!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!