She thought she was just making a strawman purchase, but she'll end up with multiple accessory to murder charges.
Woman charged with providing guns connected to New York Firefighter murders
- Thread starter Onmilo
- Start date
- Status
Even as a Buddhist I can appreciate this.
I recently engaged in a debate with someone where I argued that human kind had solved gun violence over 2,000 years ago. I started quoting the ten commandments, saying "the only gun control law we need: Thou Shalt Not Kill."
We went back and forth for a while, they said "but what if someone uses a firearm to steal?"
“You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor's.”
But what if...
And it went on, and on, with me quoting ancient scripture rebutting each and every argument.
My theory was simple; what religion provides civilization is a moral code that goes above and beyond laws (which lack morality of either color). An individual who lacks a moral code is a leaf in the breeze, no direction.
As a Buddhist I have a very strict personal moral and ethical code that I operate under; it is self-enforced. Although not of those particular faiths, I *do* appreciate that Christianity, Islam, and other faiths provide the same guidance. Catholicism is especially rich and strict with regards to it's morality, with massive volumes and enormous amounts of doctrine dedicated to that very topic.
The problem with TODAY's world is that we've moved from a God fearing society to a God-less society, but there has been no suitable standardized replacement of a value system or code of morality.
The Constitution was drafted when the vast majority of EVERYONE in society was a Sunday-Go-To-Meeting mindset. They neglected to encode a standard of morality or ethics in to the Constitution of the United States. This is the sole, and most serious, shortcoming of our honored Constitution; a failure which we are paying for two centuries later.
Our founding fathers did NOT foresee that our melting pot of a state would eventually erode those moral or ethical standards which were present when the country was founded. They didn't understand that eventually our moral convictions would slip to the point that graphic violence on a flat screen television would be our prime source of entertainment.
As a Buddhist, I personally do not believe in a higher power, other than a state of existence which allows us to be at peace in the world, and to find our place in the universe for the time we're present. But I *can* appreciate the detrimental value a lack of God, of righteousness, of morality, and of any substantial ethical code has had on our society.
We've paid a terrible price, as a society, for our culture to have dismissed God as obsolete, without a value system as strong as religion to guide our actions and mindset. Very few people have the mental strength or self-discipline to maintain a rigid set of honor, ethics, and morality without the reinforcement of codified religious doctrine.
Sorry for the lengthy response, and for touching on the topic of religion on THR, a topic verboten.
However, everyone is looking for an underlying CAUSE to this type of behavior, and it's sitting right in front of our noses - so obvious as to be invisible.
bushmaster1313
Member
From the article in the OP:
Why does a person who killed his grandmother with a hammer get a sentence that allows him to get out of prison?
Why does a person who killed his grandmother with a hammer get a sentence that allows him to get out of prison?
Uh, I'm agnostic and am not trying to drag religion into the mix but one cannot deny that religious practice and belief has been one glue that has molded people of different backgrounds into a state of community if not necessarily civility.
Having respect and compassion for others is a pivotal key in a persons ability to function as a member of any kind of civilized society regardless of their religious conviction.
Having respect and compassion for others is a pivotal key in a persons ability to function as a member of any kind of civilized society regardless of their religious conviction.
stickhauler
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2009
- Messages
- 538
The report I heard stated he had gone with her to buy it. I'm guessing to make sure she bought the right ones. You know, those Bushmasters are the REAL deadly ones!
Bushmaster's getting some bad press, but I'm betting that brand was the first to sell out at gun shops in the wake of this. I was in a shop the day after Sandy Hook, and a guy asked to look at a Colt AR, but asked the salesman to let him look at that "Bushmaster." When told it was a Colt, he looked real disappointed and actually said he really wanted a Bushmaster.
Go figure!
I'm betting they're gonna nail this woman hard! We had a sheriff killed around here a couple of years ago by a mentally ill guy who wasn't allowed to have guns. His girlfriend and her father had bought this lunatic's guns. The guy ended up either killing himself or was shot by the cops who, after getting about 20 cops out there, flat opened up on this house trailer. I hadn't heard that many shots fired that quick since the Army and "Mad Minutes."
His girlfriend is in jail for like 15 years, without chance of parole. Her father likely will die before they sentence him, but the courts are still on him like white on rice!
Bushmaster's getting some bad press, but I'm betting that brand was the first to sell out at gun shops in the wake of this. I was in a shop the day after Sandy Hook, and a guy asked to look at a Colt AR, but asked the salesman to let him look at that "Bushmaster." When told it was a Colt, he looked real disappointed and actually said he really wanted a Bushmaster.
Go figure!
I'm betting they're gonna nail this woman hard! We had a sheriff killed around here a couple of years ago by a mentally ill guy who wasn't allowed to have guns. His girlfriend and her father had bought this lunatic's guns. The guy ended up either killing himself or was shot by the cops who, after getting about 20 cops out there, flat opened up on this house trailer. I hadn't heard that many shots fired that quick since the Army and "Mad Minutes."
His girlfriend is in jail for like 15 years, without chance of parole. Her father likely will die before they sentence him, but the courts are still on him like white on rice!
Steve H
Member
True VERY true
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
For the same reasons other convicted murderers get released. There are a surprising number released every year. For example, NC released 300 violent offenders last year, 27 of whom had been convicted of first degree murder.
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/6286921/
In CA, 80% of those eligible for parole under Brown have been, but note that a Stnaford study found that by and large, released murderers are seemingly good citizens based on a lack of followup arrests.
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/state&id=8538491
If they are not sentenced to die or life without parole, they can get paroled before their full sentence is up or released after their sentence is up. That is how the legal system works.
MachIVshooter
Member
I'm sure careful examination of each case that was part of that statistic would show most of the offenders who stayed out of trouble after release were not the kind to kill in cold blood. In other words, "not the murderin' type".
This is why painting with a borad brush is always a bad idea. Aside from wrongful convictions, there are many cases where the conviction is not accurately representative of the crime. Some very depraved acts get labeled with less-than-frightening verbiage, while at the same time a person might end up with a murder rap even though it was really self defense, but not a clear-cut enough case to avoid conviction by a jury of their peers.
Likewise, while this girl should definitely not be let off scott free, the prosecutor and sentencing judge will need to consider many things before deciding if/how long to lock her up. Maybe she didn't even know he was a convicted murderer. Maybe he had a very convoluted and convincing argument to compell her to buy the weapons for him. It is highly doubtful that this woman would have proceeded with the transaction knowing that he intended to kill firemen. By all accounts, the man was intelligent, so it's reasonable to assume that he could be very manipulative and convincing. Young people often have poor judgement and a definitive lack of understanding in how the world works.
Again, ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the law, but state of mind and intentions do play a part in charges filed and sentencing. That's why we have varying degrees of crimes and varying sentences that are left up to the prosecutor, judge and jury to decide if the individual in question is deserving of a certain level of punishment for their crime.
larryh1108
Member
All very true. However, by breaking the law, 4 people were shot and 2 of them were killed by her reckless disregard for the law. Right now, the govt is using all murders involving guns as the poster to restrict gun owners. The truth is we have laws in place that aren't being enforced enough to address this issue.
This woman needs to be the poster child for what happens if you buy guns for anybody else, period. Not thinking they will kill someone is a lame excuse. What if he sold the guns to another recently paroled felon who used them to shoot up (whatever). Once she bought the guns for him, the flood gates opened for a lot of catastrophes. That is why this law is in effect. To prevent crimes like this. The public blames the guns. The truth is, the people who break the laws should be punished to the fullest and be on the nightly news like the tragedies were. This woman should be tried and if found guilty, spend the maximum in a federal prison with no hope of early release. This should be the headlines on the news showing that it will not be tolerated any more and you will serve hard time if you do. A slap on the wrist for a first violation and a tearful apology with a plea of ignorance does not cut it for me. She needs to pay for being stupid and made an example of. Blame the person, not the guns.
MachIVshooter
Member
He had a handgun that she didn't buy. Suggesting that if she hadn't bought the rifle the tragedy would have been averted is as foolish as the posturing of the anti-gun crowd.
Not suggesting she shouldn't be punished, but if the climate were a little different, I don't think so many on this board would be eager to see an example made out of her. It's not like she was buying quantities of guns and fencing them to violent felons. If that were the case, I'd be right there with everyone saying "string her up!". As it were, I'm considering the likliehood that a young and impressionable woman was convinced by an intelligent and manipulative criminal that what she was doing wasn't really a big deal. Or maybe he leveraged her into it somehow, extorted her.
We have no idea who or what she is right now, how she came to know the perpetrator, and how he convinced her to buy these guns. What she did was wrong and illegal, but it seems that everyone here is operating under the pretense that she is as guilty as he is. Imagine if you sold a gun to someone, not knowing they were prohibited, and then found yourself facing charges and public ridicule because that firearm was used to commit murders; I very seriously doubt you'd be saying "yep, I screwed up. Throw the book at me, I deserve it. I sold him the gun, so it's my fault those people are dead."
Let's not be guilty of the same emotional knee-jerk reactions as the anti-gun crowd we despise so.
Loosely quoting the shooter, after being denied parole on his fourth attempt, having killed his 92 y.o. granny with a hammer, "I can't see what it is in my record that has made them decline to parole me" As we know they finally did let him out. Good work N.Y. State Parole Board. Of course the straw-purchaser needs to spend a good long time in prison.
Slipknot_Slim
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2012
- Messages
- 58
They are like pit bulls. It all depends on how they are raised. My Bushmaster has never hurt anyone.
larryh1108
Member
Seriously? This guy set fires to lure firefighters. He then took a snipers position to gun them down when they arrived. She did not sell him anything, she lied on the 4473 form and purchased him guns which is a serious offense in itself. Of course, the antis want to ban guns instead of enforcing the laws we already have. In my mind, by committing a crime of straw purchasing guns for this guy who later used them to shoot down firefighters responding to fires he started, she is just as guilty of them being shot as he is. If someone dies during the course of a felony, everyone involved is also guilty of murder whether they pulled the trigger or not. Crying ignorance does not stop all the illegal straw purchases. Enforcing the straw purchase laws to the maximum the law allows in every case is the only way to send the message it won't be tolerated. You do the crime, you do the time. Or, the antis can just blame the guns and take away our rights because we are bleeding hearts to the ignorant.
MachIVshooter
Member
Larry, I'm not saying she shouldn't be punished. She comitted a crime, she now has to face the consequences. What those consequences are will be up to the prosecutor, judge and jury who are actually privvy to the details. We are not.
What I AM saying is that many pro gun folks, in an effort to appeal to the other side during these difficult times, are screaming to crucify this woman without really knowing much about the case.
We always cite how "the criminals will get the guns anyway", yet so many are quick to jump on the bandwagon that she is complicit in these crimes because it is politically and socially expedient to do so. Right now we have 4 high profile shootings within a month and 4 dead perpetrators, so this woman is bearing the brunt of the national anger for all of it because she's the only one we can punish. Wouldn't surprise me if internal guilt and external ridicule drive her to suicide.
Carry on as you wish, but I'll tell you right now that even publicly executing her for her crimes would not stop or even slow down the wave of legislative action we're up against.
What I AM saying is that many pro gun folks, in an effort to appeal to the other side during these difficult times, are screaming to crucify this woman without really knowing much about the case.
We always cite how "the criminals will get the guns anyway", yet so many are quick to jump on the bandwagon that she is complicit in these crimes because it is politically and socially expedient to do so. Right now we have 4 high profile shootings within a month and 4 dead perpetrators, so this woman is bearing the brunt of the national anger for all of it because she's the only one we can punish. Wouldn't surprise me if internal guilt and external ridicule drive her to suicide.
Carry on as you wish, but I'll tell you right now that even publicly executing her for her crimes would not stop or even slow down the wave of legislative action we're up against.
thump_rrr
Member
In my opinion she should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
This has nothing to do with what gun owners are now facing but as a simple rule of law.
Nobody put a gun to her head to buy him those guns.
MachIVshooter
Member
She may (very likely will) be. That's up to the judge.
That's just naive. Straw purchases happen all the time, and those weapons are used nefariously all the time. The cases just don't make the news because they aren't a component of high profile tragedies, and people don't really care when it's just a bunch of gang bangers offing each other.
Like I said, she's up against an enraged nation who is heaping the blame of 35 homicides spread over 4 incidents on the only living party that had any remote amount of criminal culpability.
How do you know? Maybe he did threaten her life, or threaten someone she cares about. We don't know if threats/blackmail/extortion/coercion were factors. Once again, we're not privvy to the information that would allow us to reasonably judge her character.
larryh1108
Member
MachIV, This does have nothing to do with the current state of what is going on but it also has everything to do with it as well. I've read (in these forums) that 80% of the guns gotten by people who should not have them were received in F2F sales, straw purchases and black market. However, the antis want to go after legal gun owners because people do get these guns illegally. As has been said many times since this all came about, we have plenty of laws in place. Enforce them to the fullest extent of the law instead of passing new legislation that the criminals will ignore.
This woman is innocent until proven guilty. No doubt. A court will decide her culpability. However, that being said, if she is found guilty of a straw purchase then she should also be connected to the deaths her illegal actions resulted in. That is my opinion and that is up for debate. If you sell F2F and truly believe it is a legal sale then that is different than taking the person to the gun store and buying him weapons as a straw purchase. Totally, 100% illegal and her actions led to the deaths of 2 firefighters in an ambush. She has to have some culpability there. Perhaps reckless endangerment? Point is, use this very public case to show anyone who does a straw purchase that they will be next. Give her the maximum. No chance of early out. Federal prison. Yes, make her the poster person for straw purchases. Let them know it will be more than a $1000 fine and 6 months of community service. Make a straw purchase a mandatory 10 years with no chance of parole. Mean business. If it is proven she did it under duress (2 years ago?) then, of course, those need to be considered in her case. All the evidence needs to be presented and let the courts decide but if she is guilty, make it count.
I feel this way, not because of Sandy Hook but because he ambushed first responders. Men and women who protect us were killed doing their jobs. Whoever had a hand in it should be severely punished. She had her arm in it. She is the poison in the gun culture.
I do feel that new legislation should be passed that makes any crime committed with a firearm present, whether used or not, should have a minimum 10 years added to any time ordered by the courts. This cannot run concurrent and cannot be reduced in a plea bargain. Make every criminal know that if you bring a firearm to the circus then the stakes go up big time with no chance of getting off. If we enforce the laws we have we won't need to listen to people who wish to punish us for the deeds of the criminally few.
This woman is innocent until proven guilty. No doubt. A court will decide her culpability. However, that being said, if she is found guilty of a straw purchase then she should also be connected to the deaths her illegal actions resulted in. That is my opinion and that is up for debate. If you sell F2F and truly believe it is a legal sale then that is different than taking the person to the gun store and buying him weapons as a straw purchase. Totally, 100% illegal and her actions led to the deaths of 2 firefighters in an ambush. She has to have some culpability there. Perhaps reckless endangerment? Point is, use this very public case to show anyone who does a straw purchase that they will be next. Give her the maximum. No chance of early out. Federal prison. Yes, make her the poster person for straw purchases. Let them know it will be more than a $1000 fine and 6 months of community service. Make a straw purchase a mandatory 10 years with no chance of parole. Mean business. If it is proven she did it under duress (2 years ago?) then, of course, those need to be considered in her case. All the evidence needs to be presented and let the courts decide but if she is guilty, make it count.
I feel this way, not because of Sandy Hook but because he ambushed first responders. Men and women who protect us were killed doing their jobs. Whoever had a hand in it should be severely punished. She had her arm in it. She is the poison in the gun culture.
I do feel that new legislation should be passed that makes any crime committed with a firearm present, whether used or not, should have a minimum 10 years added to any time ordered by the courts. This cannot run concurrent and cannot be reduced in a plea bargain. Make every criminal know that if you bring a firearm to the circus then the stakes go up big time with no chance of getting off. If we enforce the laws we have we won't need to listen to people who wish to punish us for the deeds of the criminally few.
MachIVshooter
Member
Look, I'm not suggesting we "let it slide". As I've been saying all along, she did the crime, she'll have to do the time. I'm just not ready to burn her at the stake without knowing a whole lot more about the case.
Be careful. Zero tolerance policies have ensnared a lot of people who shouldn't have been. Suppose you're lawfully carrying your CCW, you are about to cross an icy street, but as you step off the curb, you slip. While flailing about trying to stay upright, you hit the lady who was crossing next to you in the face. She goes down and starts screaming, pretty soon an officer who was walking out of a coffee shop a little ways up the street hears the commotion and comes over to check it out. He sees you, standing over this lady with a bloody nose, and starts to make his own assumptions. She wasn't paying attention to what was going on; she just knows you hit her. No witnesses to say you fell, only her accusing you of assault. You had your gun, so now you're facing 10 years in prison for a crime you didn't commit.
Think it's not possible? Think again.
larryh1108
Member
Your analogy is correct. However, it falls under the same thing we (gun owners) are facing... paying the price for a 1 in 10million occurance.
In your scenario, a court of law would have to prove motive and intent. If they somehow can make up something that sticks, then that guy is in deep doo doo. It is highly unlikely that they could find motive and intent from what the officer found.
We do have to get the guns out of the hands of the criminal element as well as the mentally infirm. The criminal element has been addressed with laws that are not working but the system failed, not the laws. Looking at an additional 10 years for any crime committed while having a firearm present adds teeth to the laws in place. It would cross over to anybody involved (3 men hold up a gas station, 1 has a gun, all 3 get the penalty whether they knew the guy was armed or not). This adds peer pressure to the situation as well. Knowing the penalty is not negotiable and it is substantial makes them think twice about carrying a firearm, legally or not. Is it perfect? No, but I'd bet the number of armed crimes would plummet. It will never stop them but they will make the offenders think twice about bringing a gun. We have laws in place. Let's make them effective instead of passing more useless legislation.
In your scenario, a court of law would have to prove motive and intent. If they somehow can make up something that sticks, then that guy is in deep doo doo. It is highly unlikely that they could find motive and intent from what the officer found.
We do have to get the guns out of the hands of the criminal element as well as the mentally infirm. The criminal element has been addressed with laws that are not working but the system failed, not the laws. Looking at an additional 10 years for any crime committed while having a firearm present adds teeth to the laws in place. It would cross over to anybody involved (3 men hold up a gas station, 1 has a gun, all 3 get the penalty whether they knew the guy was armed or not). This adds peer pressure to the situation as well. Knowing the penalty is not negotiable and it is substantial makes them think twice about carrying a firearm, legally or not. Is it perfect? No, but I'd bet the number of armed crimes would plummet. It will never stop them but they will make the offenders think twice about bringing a gun. We have laws in place. Let's make them effective instead of passing more useless legislation.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Well, the laws are part of the system.
Funny, we thought jail/prison time for crimes already added teeth. Now you want more teeth. Somewhere along the way, we are going to need a dentist.
Yep, they think twice and then do it anyway.
Funny, you are saying that the laws haven't failed, but the system has, and your answer is to add more laws. If the laws haven't failed, why are you wanting to add more laws?
MachIVshooter
Member
But they shouldn't have to with this girl? You said:
She made a straw purchase, and will face the penalty for that. But to go beyond this, you have to establish that she either intended for him to hurt people with the weapons, or that she knew he would and purchased them for him anyway. Maybe she did know, and if that's the case, she should most definitely face additional charges of depraved indifference or even accessory. But I really, REALLY doubt the man told her "Hey, I'm a convicted murderer, so I can't legally have a gun, but I got some killin' to do, so would you mind buying this shotgun and rifle for me?"
larryh1108
Member
Adding more laws or enforcing the ones we already have?
Ok, have it your way.
Let them have their AWB and hi cap mag ban to solve the issue. That's what they want anyway. Why try to fix what is actually wrong? If you have a better solution I'd like to hear it.
How do we get as many guns as possible out of the hands of the criminal element? Yes, I'd like some teeth in the laws we already have. Use a firearm, spend time in prison instead of community service and an ankle bracelet. What we have in place now sure doesn't do it so instead of snarky comments how about some suggestions we can actually use to solve this issue? Oh, I know. It's not your problem. So many feel that way anyways. If we aren't part of the solution then we are part of the problem.
Ok, have it your way.
Let them have their AWB and hi cap mag ban to solve the issue. That's what they want anyway. Why try to fix what is actually wrong? If you have a better solution I'd like to hear it.
How do we get as many guns as possible out of the hands of the criminal element? Yes, I'd like some teeth in the laws we already have. Use a firearm, spend time in prison instead of community service and an ankle bracelet. What we have in place now sure doesn't do it so instead of snarky comments how about some suggestions we can actually use to solve this issue? Oh, I know. It's not your problem. So many feel that way anyways. If we aren't part of the solution then we are part of the problem.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
