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

US Army Veteran Arrested in New York for possession of AR15 Magazines

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Justin, Feb 1, 2013.

  1. Justin

    Justin Moderator Staff Member


    Injured veteran arrested in weapons investigation
    MONDAY, JANUARY 7, 2013
    A A
    print this article
    e-mail this article

    A former Fort Drum soldier who was injured in special forces training was arrested Sunday night when he was found with prohibited rounds of ammunition, the Jefferson County Sheriff
  2. jamesbeat

    jamesbeat Well-Known Member

    That doesn't explain what exactly he was arrested for.

    I don't think that the law banning all >10 round magazines has taken effect yet has it?

    Pre-ban magazines were grandfathered in but will soon be illegal under the new law. Did he maybe have already-illegal post-ban magazines?

    It's also possible that he had legal pre-ban magazines but they arrested him anyway...
  3. OpelBlitz

    OpelBlitz Well-Known Member

    That's sad. :(
  4. clamman

    clamman Well-Known Member

    Did you read the comment?
  5. greenmtnguy

    greenmtnguy Well-Known Member

    I also thought that they had until next year to sell out or dispose of those >10 round magazines. And, he didn't even have any ammunition according to the comment? Only empty mags? It is time to turn NYC into the 51 state and let them do whatever they want there and the rest of New York can come back to the land of reality.
  6. fanchisimo

    fanchisimo Well-Known Member

    I would think if he could get the financial support to fight this, in time this could lead to a supreme court ruling on magazine capacity. It is gonna happen, if we could head off all these magazine bans floating around, that'd save some time. The fact that they were empty and no other gun was present seems to invalidate the felony possession of a weapon. However, you can be arrested just for having the pieces of metal to make a lightning link because those pieces are considered a machine gun.
  7. zxcvbob

    zxcvbob Well-Known Member

    The police who arrested his were probably in violation of the new law at the time too.
  8. Sav .250

    Sav .250 Well-Known Member

    What he was or wasn`t has nothing to do with the reported charges.
  9. taliv

    taliv Moderator

    i haven't seen the law, but what i read was that you have a year to get rid of them, but as of the signing of the law you are only allowed to put 7 rounds in the mag. so if he had a 10 round mag and put 8 rounds in it he would be in violation.

    i could be completely mistaken on this
  10. jamesbeat

    jamesbeat Well-Known Member

    This was probably a case of (currently) legal pre-ban mags + police not knowing the laws that they are enforcing.
    How much do they pay out for wrongful arrest these days?
  11. 06

    06 Well-Known Member

    Like what Hank Williams Jr said in his old song---"send me to h--- or NY city, it is all the same to me". Made a vow never to return there myself. Our church is active in the Sou. Baptist Disaster Relief Teams and I was asked several times if I was going up. Was going till the unions barred the Georgia Power company from helping them--after they had driven up there. There are just more needs elsewhere that we can go to instead of there. NY is a different place with a different agenda.
  12. timmy4

    timmy4 Well-Known Member

    The 7 round limitation is stupid. I've spent some time in here arguing for limiting high capacity magazines, but this particular limitation makes no sense even to me.

    I also don't believe that anyone should be arrested for having a high capacity magazine. That's just really stupid as well. Even if they became illegal, at worst you should have to pay a fine. Arrests should only take place in our society when you are actively committing a crime, or in possession of stolen goods, etc.
  13. radiotom

    radiotom Well-Known Member

    Well, timmy, you reap what you sow.
  14. timmy4

    timmy4 Well-Known Member

    Do I? Well, perhaps.

    But on the other hand, I could argue just as easily that the NRA and their supporters' refusal to compromise on even the most mild of regulations are what's causing more extreme laws like this one to be enacted. You're vacating the middle ground, and leaving the debate wide open for the extremists to jump in. Folks like me who are moderate on this issue have very little influence at the present time.
  15. Solo

    Solo Well-Known Member

    Was it the ACLU's fault that we got the PATRIOT Act because they refused to compromise on our rights to privacy, a speedy trial, and trail by jury?
  16. jamesbeat

    jamesbeat Well-Known Member

    Timmy, I do see your point in a way, but there's a big problem with a moderate stance on gun laws; there isn't one.
    This was referred to in another post here, but I'll point you in the direction so you can read further. Look up 'slippery slope' on wikipedia and scroll down to the part showing Eugene Volokh's Mechanisms of the Slippery Slope.

    This guy wasn't doing any harm. If ever there was a victimless crime, this is it.
  17. timmy4

    timmy4 Well-Known Member

    No, but not quite an accurate analogy. The ACLU is a loud organization, but they hardly represent millions of people with a single pluralistic goal in mind. I believe the NRA could have compromised on any number of specific issues without compromising their core convictions, and many of these stupid laws could have been prevented.
  18. mcdonl

    mcdonl Well-Known Member

    Nor will that change. I wanted to try the middle of the road approach. Was actually told by one of my states Senators to either work with SAM (Sportsman Alliance of Maine) or the Maine Handgun Violence Coalition. The far right and far left of the issue.

    Needless to say the SAM will be coming to our next gun club meeting and I am taking an active role to stop any and all bans of anykind. No one in the middle is being heard. Pick a side and fight.
  19. timmy4

    timmy4 Well-Known Member

    I agree about the victimless crime part. Based on what we know, this guy should NOT have been arrested.

    As to the slippery slope argument, I don't buy it. Every proposed law in this country, regardless of the issues involved, should be considered on it's own individual merits, and not as part of some trend one way or the other. If a law makes sense, we should pass it, and if it doesn't make sense, we should not.
  20. radiotom

    radiotom Well-Known Member

    There is no middle ground on a constitutionally granted right. You either have it or you don't. They've been taking your proposed "middle ground" for almost a century now, and these 2nd Amendment infractions are becoming more and more frequent. By believing there is still a middle ground shows how little you have been paying attention. The fictitious middle ground is just another device used to bring us closer and closer to the end of 2nd Amendment.

Share This Page