Tea Party Guy's Charges Dropped in NYC

[Birch Knoll]

Does anyone else find it astonishing that this Tea Party Guy didn't get his weapon back even after the charges were dropped?

Well, no, not at all.

Isn't that theft?

No. You do realize that, under New York law, he was in illegal possession of a handgun, right? They're not going to give it back to him, regardless of the fact that they have agreed to allow him to plead to a much lesser infraction.

If they arn't returning the firearm what is he suppose to do? Get it removed from his lisence for confiscation?

Do CA carry permits list particular firearms? If so, yes, I'd imagine he'd want to get it removed.

Or file for it as a stolen firearm with the ATF?

It's certainly not stolen.

 

[wannabeagunsmith]

He should sue them over his gun. Who cares if it costs more than the pistol is worth, it may very well open up the door for more people to stand up for their rights.

 

[Birch Knoll]

He should sue them over his gun.

He. Committed. A. Crime.

He has no reason to expect his gun to be returned, any more than a guy who sticks up a liquor store would get his gun back, if for some reason, he was permitted to plead to a lesser offense.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Richard. and. Mildred. Loving. Committed. A. Crime.

And got a law overturned by the Supreme Court.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_Integrity_Act_of_1924

 

[Birch Knoll]

That's nice. Considering that Meckler pled guilty to disorderly conduct and paid his fine, I don't think the Supreme Court will be overturning anything for him.

 

[bushmaster1313]

He is one lucky dude.

He committed a felony worth 3 1/2 years in the slammer that would have also divested him of his 2nd Amendment rights for ever -- and he gets off with a slap on the wrist.

Don't get me wrong, I think the law he broke is boneheaded, but it is the law and he is very lucky.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

The Loving couple pled guilty to a felony and were convicted in 1959 with 1 year sentence (of possible 5 years) suspended on the condition they leave Virginia. That did not stop the Supreme Court from hearing their appeal and overturning the law in 1967.

 

[Birch Knoll]

Let us know how Meckler v. New York comes out, won't you?

 

[Carl N. Brown]

That would be up to Meckler, who does seem ready to pursue the case. (http://www.markmeckler.com/nyc-gun-charges-dropped-now-i-can-speak-out/)

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/hold_your_fire_4dW6vKJHy3GFawLPw5riDM
Sally Goldenberg and Jamie Schram, "Pols urge DA to go easy on gun-toting Ground Zero tourist", New York Post, 30 Dec 2011.

New York City Councilman Peter Vallone Jr., who is chairman of the Public Safety Committee, said prosecuting people like Graves will spur gun advocates to fight harder against restrictions on weapons.

"By prosecuting this woman and seeking 3 1/2 years of jail, we are shooting our own [gun-control] efforts in the foot and giving the rest of the country ammunition," Vallone said, according to the New York Post. "Clearly the laws are too strict here," he added.

With pressure inside as well as outside NY, the law may be changed before a Meckler v NY becomes necessary.

 

[Neverwinter]

With pressure inside as well as outside NY, the law may be changed before a Meckler v NY becomes necessary.

That's good news, at least in regards to increasing the dialog that occurs on exactly how unfair the NYC laws are.

 

[verge]

Why Not?

I posted it on the sight and I will post it again here. If there is no legal basis for NYC to confiscate, keep and presumably destroy said weapons why not file a Class Action suit against the city. I understand any individual could not win without spending far more than the gun is worth and even if they did win it would not affect the policy of the city. However, if 5000 people filed a class action suit and each one contributed $100 to the cause they would have a pool of $500,000. If they won and the city had to pay each the cost of an average firearm it would cost the city tens of millions. That might make a difference.

 

[bushmaster1313]

Mr. Meckler committed a felony.
He is lucky to be out of prison with his 2nd Amendment Rights intact.
For crying out loud, Mr. Meckler is a lawyer who should have known better.
He got off with a slap on the wrist.

I wonder if he gets to keep his law license.

Don't get me wrong. I disagree with the draconian NYC handgun laws, but the way to fight the system is from within the system, not from within a prison cell.

 

[Cap'n Jack Burntbeard]

Mr. Meckler is a lawyer who should have known better.

Has anyone thought about the possibility that these three cases were all on purpose?
A civil disobedience operation to make NYC look bad?
The nurse, the marine, and the lawyer, all squeaky clean, too clean.

Why these cases, why now? Everyone knows how bad NYC is, no one in their right mind would innocently think that their carry permit works in that hellhole, the only reason to do this was to provoke them, cause them bad press, and sow dissent on the inside.

 

[Birch Knoll]

Has anyone thought about the possibility that these three cases were all on purpose?
A civil disobedience operation to make NYC look bad?
The nurse, the marine, and the lawyer, all squeaky clean, too clean.

That would be a big risk for these folks; there never was any guarantee that they'd get off with an infraction. Any of them could have done jail time. The lawyer could have been disbarred, the nurse could lose her license.

 

[bushmaster1313]

What is the status of the nurse and the Marine?

 

[Mr. T]

I am not familiar with this case. Can anyone give the particulars of the case. I've heard others say this man committed a crime. What was the particular crime that was committed? Thank you.

 

[bushmaster1313]

Mr. Meckler, to the best of my understanding, brought his handgun to New York City, stayed a day or so doing business in New York City, and then declared it at the airport on his way home, causing his arrest on felony possesion of a handgun in New York City.

Had he been just passing through, FOPA may have protected him. But unfortunately for Mr. Meckler, New York City was an intermediate destination on his trip and he was in possession of a handgun he should not have had in New York City.

 

[Mr. T]

Thanks Bushmaster1313.

 

[cor_man257]

He. Committed. A. Crime.

On his website he says different. He claims that "disorderly conduct" isnt a felony, misdemeanor or even a crime. I might have to double check on it to believe him... but if he was the one there im inclined to believe him.

I am pleased to announce that the criminal case against me has been dropped. Although I was originally charged with a violent felony, the case against me was resolved with a plea to “disorderly conduct. ” Disorderly Conduct is not a felony or a misdemeanor, or even a crime. The facts underlying my plea are that I declared a legally purchased, properly licensed and unloaded firearm at an airport counter. Apparently, much to my surprise, in New York City, it is considered “disorderly conduct” to exercise your constitutionally guaranteed, Second Amendment rights.

If thats the case, and its not a crime, then they dont really have any reason to keep his firearm.

EDIT: I just verified that in New York this is NOT A CRIME. Its a violation. If ever asked if he has been convicted of a crime he can say no. So NO he did not commit a crime. So then why isn't his firearm returned?

Links to penal code
Here and here

 

[Birch Knoll]

On his website he says different. He claims that "disorderly conduct" isnt a felony, misdemeanor or even a crime. I might have to double check on it to believe him... but if he was the one there im inclined to believe him.

Yes, he was allowed to plead guilty to an infraction rather than face prosecution on the felony possession charge. That doesn't change the fact that he actually committed a felony. Almost certainly, forfeiture of the gun was a condition of the plea deal.

 

[Hardware]

The Firearm Owner's Protection Act should have shielded Mr. Meckler. Under Federal law he is allowed to transport a firearm from one location where he can legally possess it to another location legal for him to possess it. As long as it is in a locked container and not readily accessible by him.

I can understand him taking a plea and surrendering his firearm, given the distance he would have to travel to make legal appearances. We really need a relatively local person from a gun friendly state who is willing to spend what it takes and gamble their freedom to make these ridiculous laws go away.

Any wealthy, freedom minded gun owners near Scranton ready to take one for the team?

 

[Birch Knoll]

The Firearm Owner's Protection Act should have shielded Mr. Meckler.

No. He was not in transit through New York. New York was his destination. FOPA does not apply.

 

[wojownik]

FOPA does not cover someone under these circumstances. In this case, he actually stayed at a hotel in the boundaries of NYC for at least a day or two. Appeals for the Third Circuit has set a precedent that since a firearm is readily accessible during a hotel stay, FOPA`s protections do not apply.

In that case, he technically was no longer transporting "a firearm from any place where he or she may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he or she may lawfully possess and carry it".

While he could lawfully possess it in his destination, he was not lawfully able to possess and carry it in the point of origination (NYC). And vice versa.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Even transiting from Pennsylvania to Maine or Vermont, I would route around NYC. NY state reluctantly accepts the Federal FOPA, but NYC is a realm unto itself.

I also agree with this guy:
THR > Social Situations > Legal > NYC arrests CCWing nurse from TN #Post 61
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=7850788#post7850788