Man Jailed for Self-defense...New York, of course

[DragonFire]

So who gets to decide?

The people we elect into office.
Do you vote? In every election, not just the presidential ones?

What makes them better than, say, you or me?

Nothing, but if everyone had to vote or agree to every law before it was passed, than we'd be voting all the time, and probably no laws would be passed.

Why do you think that not everyone should be able to buy or carry?

I'd prefer convicted felons, mental patients, juveniles, (and these days) non-citizens to not being able to own guns. Plus, if a person isn't committed enough to go through a resonable licensing process, then I don't think they are committed enough to responsibly own a gun either. (and no, I don't believe every licensing process is a resonable one)

your life is over regulated by other human beings. That is wrong !!! That is not TRUE FREEDOM !!!

I completely agree, I just don't see an alternative.

YOUR freedom ends where it affects ME, and mine ends where it affects you. If for me to be "Truly Free", it means you have to be free to harm me, than I'm willing to give up "true freedom" for some security and peace of mind.

And before you say it, yeah, in alot of ways I see us giving up too much freedom for a false sense of security. But I also believe that laws are laws and individuals can't decide which ones they want to obey, and which ones they want to disobey without consequences. Don't like a law, fight to get it changed. Work to get polticians elected who are favorable to your ideas and values.

 

[blackguns]

Yeah I think we missed the point in this article.

He is NOT being tried for shooting the guy. Right or wrong the DA tried to bring that charge and the good people of Upstate stopped it cold.

This guy is being held for carrying with out a permit. Period. If this took place in the city limits he is actually looking at serious time. I think they still have PROJECT EXILE in the city. Basically if you are convicted of a weapons charge in the city limits you are sent to FEDERAL prision. This was not a NY or even CA program, project exile was first started in Virginia.

This is a case of breaking a gun law. It had nothing to do with shooting the attacker. The guy could have walked up and stood next to a cop and had the gun fall out of his pants and he would still be in this much trouble.

I don't like it, I will vote to change it, but in the meantime I jumped through the hoops that allow me to access my rights to carry.

I shouldn't have to but I do, and until i can change it I preferrr to stay out of prision.

 

[HankB]

Not quite. It's a right given to us by the Constitution. Apparently even the framers of the Constitution recognzied the fact that this right wasn't a "given" otherwise they wouldn't have felt the need to spell it out.

No. The Constitution does not grant rights - the Constitution prohibits government from infringing rights which the Founders recognized as inherent.

Think about the wording in the Bill of Rights:

"Congress shall make no law . . . "

". . . shall not be infringed."

" No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered . . . "

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, . . ."

It's not until the 6th amendment - dealing with the right to a trial by jury - that one can plausibly argue of rights being "granted."

Of course, I'm an engineer, not a lawyer, so I believe the words mean just what they say . . . and I don't see "auras" and "penumbras" the way some judges do.

 

[armedpolak]

HankB, DragonFire

Thank you, HankB. Exactly the point I was trying to make.

DragonFire...

"I'd prefer convicted felons, mental patients, juveniles, (and these days) non-citizens to not being able to own guns." - Of course! But they will anyways if they try hard enough. Regulating hurts the good guys.

"I completely agree, I just don't see an alternative." - Stop the over-regulation! Too many laws!

"Don't like a law, fight to get it changed." - Or removed

 

[USSR]

Good post, although I'll disagree with the following:

Plus, if a person isn't committed enough to go through a resonable licensing process, then I don't think they are committed enough to responsibly own a gun either.

Substitute "gun" with "handgun", and I have no problem. Unlike some states, like Illinois, New York State has no licensing provision/requirement for long guns; nor should we have one IMHO.

Don

 

[History Prof]

HankB, you beat me to it. NONE of the amendments in the Bill of Rights *gives* freedom, they *protect* freedoms that are "Natural Rights" or "God Given Rights," depending upon your personal point of view. Both "Natural" and "God Given" fall under the blanket term "Inalienable Rights." Inalienable means that they are rights that you already have. The reason that the founders "felt the need to spell it out" is that they recognized that governments have a habit of trampling these rights (read your US History from 1763-1775). Therefore, the Bill of Rights was written to PREVENT government from infringing upon rights, not to *grant*them.

So far, so good, right?


DragonFire, you further stated:

I need a permit to drive a car, I need to register to vote, and license to even get married.

You may drive a car without a license on private property. Licensing is to protect the general public from untrained drivers in PUBLIC roadways. Civil Libertarians still debate this one.

Voter registration? It is only a record keeping system to be sure voters are eligible. It CANNOT be denied (but again, this right has been trampled throughout our history, too).

Marriage license? Again, a state created record keeping thing. In the eyes of God, you are married the minute you do the funky tango. Many states have "Common Law" marriage - shack up for a few years, and the state consideres you married. No License required.

 

[ChickenHawk]

It always amazes me when threads turn to this discussion.

I have a CHL and carry every time and every where I legally can. I am a big time believer in RKBA, I try to be a positive influence about gun ownership to friends and in every conversation I can work the subject into. And I shoot a LOT.

That said, it amazes me how some people consider guns a birthright of some sort. God (if you believe in him) has been around a whole lot longer than guns. They were invented just a few hundred years ago.

They are deadly.

To expect a civil government NOT to have some form of regulation on a deadly weapon isn't reasonable.

I can live with that. And, yes, I know what "Shall not infringe" means, but I don't think our constitutional framers were gods either. Albeit, they did show amazing insight and crafted the best and most enduring document of all time. And 'regulation' and 'permits' needn't be equated with infringement.

So long as 'regulation' isn't prohibition and does not prevent me from buying and carrying my guns I think that is the cost of living in a society with laws (which is sort of my preference). It is however our responsibility (through our power of the vote) to insure that these rights are not taken away from us.

Just my 2 cents,
ChickenHawk

 

[RON in PA]

This is Bernard Goetz all over again. New York City resident tired of being violated by thugs illegally obtains a revolver and while sitting in a subway car is attacked by 4 youths demanding money. Goetz shots one or two, paralyzing one. He turns himself in and is ultimately convicted of unlawful possession. His actions were found to be legitimate self defense. After he does his time, Goetz is convicted in a civil trial brought by the people he shot and is fined some incredible sum.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

DragonFire

DragonFire, you shouldn't need a PERMIT !!!

It's your GOD, not Judge, given right !!!

And BTW, good luck getting a CCW in NYC.

And one more thing. Yes, it is a socialist hell-hole!

I don't recall God signing the Bill of Rights, Constitution, or any federal document. Besides, it would not be a judge-given right, but a legislative-given right.

And if you are going to cite some out of context mish mash from the Bible to justify handguns in New York, I am sure that I and others can cite similar out of context Biblical mish mash where it says the law of the land is supposed to be followed. The law of the land in NY may suck, but it is the law of the land.