Case of judged by 12 than carried by 6: Woman in NYC shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Aim1

member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,310
Woman moved to NYC from North Carolina where her pistol was legal but her gun was not legal in NYC without a permit.

Her ex-bf broke into her house and she shot him in the neck where he was taken to the hospital and expected to survive. She was taken into custody for having the gun.

This suspect chased her from NC to NYC, who knows what he would have done to her. Hopefully all charges are dropped but we'll see.

If not, could this be a perfect 2nd Amendment gun case? Your 2nd Amendment rights don't end when you cross state, county, or city lines.




http://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/0...er-door-and-shes-taken-into-custody-heres-why



NYC woman shoots ex-boyfriend after he kicks open her door—and she’s taken into custody. Here’s why.

Jan 3, 2018 3:52 pm

A Brooklyn woman shot her ex-boyfriend in the neck after he kicked open her apartment door — but the woman who defended herself was taken into custody, police sources told the New York Daily News.
Click to expand...
 
Hate for people to be unwilling test cases. Hopefully the community (we, the gun loving community) will step forward to help out.
 
Aim1 wrote:
If not, could this be a perfect 2nd Amendment gun case? [Emphasis in original]
Click to expand...


No.


Your 2nd Amendment rights don't end when you cross state, county, or city lines. [Emphasis in original]
Click to expand...

States are allowed to place reasonable restrictions on firearms within their own borders.
 
The Community didn't step forward for George Zimmerman, and he was a neighborhood
watch volunteer. They gladly threw him under the bus, without a second thought.
 
Danoobie said:
The Community didn't step forward for George Zimmerman, and he was a neighborhood
watch volunteer. They gladly threw him under the bus, without a second thought.
Click to expand...


Completely different case.


Zimmerman was out on the street when a confrontation happened, this lady was in her house when the suspect broke in.
 
She broke NYC laws. It’s unfortunate. She survived but her troubles have just begun. Guess she she didn’t have the means to move to another state? A free state?
 
hdwhit said:

No.



States are allowed to place reasonable restrictions on firearms within their own borders.
Click to expand...




Sure states have some leeway but no state can bar you from legally having a gun in your HOME. Unless she's a felon or for some reason isn't allowed to have a gun in her home, she should be covered by the 2nd Amendment.


Also, if your restrictions for permits to have guns are so restrictive that only a select few can obtain them that is illegal such as D.C.
 
This does have the possibility of being a test case that could overturn the 2nd Circuit's string of anti-gun decisions. The state's reasoning for regulating handguns rests upon public safety justification but this involves a private home where someone forcibly entered-not carry outside of the home.

Heller and MacDonald as well as other circuits' caselaw suggest that almost complete bans are unreasonable because they hinder legitimate usage of firearms including self defense. Always have to be careful about the case facts as news stories never report very accurately or completely. But, a sympathetic defendant using a firearm for self protection against an apparent stalker in her home and being charged might suggest that NYC regulations are unreasonable if they do not permit ownership of a handgun in a private home. Given that the permitting process in NYC is may issue and is notorious for being rife with costs, imposing unnecessary burdens, and requiring for political, celebrity, or law enforcement clout to get one, is ripe for being overturned. Discovery on such a case would probably reveal all sorts of shady interactions to get a permit which result in an arbitrary and capricious exercise of administrative power.

Right now, the 2nd and 9th Circuits are out of step with the others on state firearm laws with perhaps the 4th joining them. Speedy appointments and confirmations of pro-2a court of appeals judges may tip the balance.
 
The twelve who will judge will do so in a trial court. The question of Constitutionality will not come up there.

A "test case" would occur down the road, after conviction and an appeal. And that's a loooong road.
 
Kleanbore said:
The twelve who will judge will do so in a trial court. The question of Constitutionality will not come up there.

A "test case" would occur down the road, after conviction and an appeal. And that's a loooong road.
Click to expand...



Sadly justice is a long road for many folks.
 
She would have to be convicted and appeal the conviction to make it a constitutional test case.
I think New York has avoided test cases with good gal or good guy defendants by settling at lower levels of the judicial system, and press on only when the gun law violator was clearly a criminal.
 
GBExpat said:
I, for one, willed be shocked if that happens ... no, shocked is not quite strong enough. STUNNED. There, that's better. :)
Click to expand...
If charges are dropped, it has no chance of being a test case.
Kleanbore said:
The twelve who will judge will do so in a trial court. The question of Constitutionality will not come up there.

A "test case" would occur down the road, after conviction and an appeal. And that's a loooong road.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. If she challenges the constitutionality of the laws with which she is charged, and preserves those challenges on appeal, this can become a Constitutional case.
Carl N. Brown said:
She would have to be convicted and appeal the conviction to make it a constitutional test case.
Click to expand...
Yes, and she has to challenge constitutionality from the beginning.
 
Aim1 said:
Sure states have some leeway but no state can bar you from legally having a gun in your HOME.
Click to expand...

At this point in time that statement is patently false. There are plenty of places where local laws on the books and enforced prevent people from having guns the home, or anywhere for that matter. Common examples include all the states which mandate FOID or permits just to possess a handgun in th first place, regardless if its your home or elsewhere. NY happens to be one of these states. Without that permit, she is barred from having a handgun regardless what people might feel the law should be otherwise.
 
Without knowing all the details we can’t be sure, but it seems to have potential as a test case.
Heller succeeded in showing DC has a de facto ban on guns, NY laws seem pretty close to that.
It might depend on if she TRIED to get a legal gun and was denied without being a prohibited person.
The charges might be dropped or reduced to something she would plea to. As noted above, NY wouldn’t want a good test case out there to threaten their overbearing gun laws.
 
[QUOTE="Peter Gun, post: As noted above, NY wouldn’t want a good test case out there to threaten their overbearing gun laws.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, and therein lies the rub. The sad reality is prevailing mindset ( within the city at least ) accepts that the only folks who should be "packing" are LE. This thinking (that guns in general are inherently evil and dangerous) is so pervasive that the thought of protecting oneself is completely out of the question.
 
My statement "The twelve who will judge will do so in a trial court. The question of Constitutionality will not come up there" should more accurately be expressed "the question of Constitutionality will not be resolved there".
 
Last edited:
illinoisburt said:
At this point in time that statement is patently false. There are plenty of places where local laws on the books and enforced prevent people from having guns the home, or anywhere for that matter. Common examples include all the states which mandate FOID or permits just to possess a handgun in th first place, regardless if its your home or elsewhere. NY happens to be one of these states. Without that permit, she is barred from having a handgun regardless what people might feel the law should be otherwise.
Click to expand...


This should be challenged eventually too. You shouldn’t have to have a FOID card to own a gun.
 
I read about the permitting process for that city. It is certainly onerous, costly in time and dollars.

One article about this case stated she recently moved to Brooklyn. Following NYC's procedures would have left her defenseless. To follow New York law, she would have had to leave the handgun out of the state for months.

IMO, states rights are trumped by human rights. Rather than drivers licenses, I look at enslavement for guidance. Basic human rights were ignored by law in several states.

We even talk about moving to "free states" to live where rights codified by the Constitution are respected. Today, most would not accept humans having to move to live free.

Why should it be different to enjoy the codified human right to defend against death or bodily harm?
 
harrygunner said:
I read about the permitting process for that city. It is certainly onerous, costly in time and dollars.

One article about this case stated she recently moved to Brooklyn. Following NYC's procedures would have left her defenseless. To follow New York law, she would have had to leave the handgun out of the state for months.

IMO, states rights are trumped by human rights. Rather than drivers licenses, I look at enslavement for guidance. Basic human rights were ignored by law in several states.

We even talk about moving to "free states" to live where rights codified by the Constitution are respected. Today, most would not accept humans having to move to live free.

Why should it be different to enjoy the codified human right to defend against death or bodily harm?
Click to expand...

I think that you hit the nail on the head. I also think that "states rights" is a misnomer and that phrase does not appear in the Constitution. Rights are for individuals, powers are delegated by the people to entities called states in order to protect those individual rights. Thus, the Tenth Amendment mentions only powers, not rights. Thus, those arguing for "states' rights" are really saying that a state power should trump the U.S. Bill of Rights or the Constitution depending on which individual right you are talking about.
 
"States are allowed to place reasonable restrictions on firearms within their own borders"

Is not allowing you to have a gun without having a special permit a reasonable restriction ?. I guess it is in todays world where the 2nd amendment has been basterdized .
 
I’m not sure why she moved to NY. Maybe had family there or something. I doubt she even considered the gun laws. But I can think of about 45 better states to move to.
 
Aim1 said:
Completely different case.


Zimmerman was out on the street when a confrontation happened, this lady was in her house when the suspect broke in.
Click to expand...

Oh, YES, you're right, a VERY different case. In a state where personal firearms are deemed acceptable, this man volunteered hundreds of
hours to keep his community safe, and was still shunned by those he protected for years.

NOW, if a community which should have been lining up to kiss GZ's butt will throw HIM under the bus, why should this woman,
who was in her home, doing nothing for the community, in a gun unfriendly state, expect any community support?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Man Armed with ‘Assault Rifle’ Threatens Ex-Girlfriend, She Kills him
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
Robert
Robert
S
  • Locked
Intruder Shot During A Frightening Home Invasion
2
Replies
47
Views
3K
Jorg Nysgerrig
J
D
  • Locked
(NY) Gun in Oven Shoots Woman
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
cordex
C
D
  • Locked
(OH) Police: Gun Fires In Woman's Pants During Jail Visit
Replies
2
Views
646
Preacherman
P
A
  • Locked
Woman shoots kills home invader
Replies
8
Views
698
Standing Wolf
S
Back
Top