1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

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

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by bdgackle, Feb 8, 2013.

  1. bdgackle

    bdgackle Well-Known Member

    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.
  2. longspurr

    longspurr Well-Known Member

    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.
  3. Trent

    Trent Resident Wiseguy

    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.

  4. bdgackle

    bdgackle Well-Known Member

    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.
  5. HorseSoldier

    HorseSoldier Well-Known Member

    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?
  6. Fanfare Ends

    Fanfare Ends Active Member

    Legal Defense Fund for Nathan Haddad

  7. RetiredUSNChief

    RetiredUSNChief Well-Known Member

    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.
  8. usmarine0352_2005

    usmarine0352_2005 Well-Known Member


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

    RetiredUSNChief Well-Known Member

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

  10. jumperdoc

    jumperdoc New Member

    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.

  11. HorseSoldier

    HorseSoldier Well-Known Member

    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).
  12. Hardtarget

    Hardtarget Well-Known Member

    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.


Share This Page