The "Safe Act" strikes: NY man charged for having 9 Bullets in Gun

There is no "Duty to Inform" in NY law.

This happened just north of NY City, one of the few areas of NY where the magazine limit would be enforced.
 
Police charged Dean with unlawful possession of certain ammunition feeding devices, third-degree aggravated unlicensed operation and other vehicle infractions.
Click to expand...
I'm a bit confused by the "unlawful possession of certain ammunition feeding devices" charge. Either the device is illegal or it's not. A charge for "loading a feeding device above lawful limits" might make more sense.

In any case, it looks like there are other factors in the arrest, and the magazine charge was just tacked on.
 
https://www.nyspnews.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=30582
Yep, lamp out, driving on a suspended license, didn't keep gun fully concealed such that it was spotted, and too much ammo in gun.

He certainly could have been arrested anyway on aggravated Unlicensed Operation of a Motor Vehicle 3rd Degree anyway, LOL. So blaming his arrest just on the Safe Act is pretty silly. The combination of factors certainly sealed it for him.

Also see...http://www.newyorkcriminallawyer-bl...ird-degree-aggravated-unlicensed-operati.html
 
Perhaps I should have clarified. "NY man charged for having 9 bullets in gun."

The guy had the arrest coming, but note, they will treat him as a poster child for this legislation.
 
I'd tend to think that this was an instance wherein the officers decided to "throw the book at him". It doesn't sound like he's a poster child for RKBA arms.
 
The guy had the arrest coming, but note, they will treat him as a poster child for this legislation.
Click to expand...
I doubt this'll get much traction in the mainstream media. Had he committed a serious crime, perhaps.

That said, prior to Emerson, we had a long history of poorly-mounted 2A defenses on the part of very unsympathetic plaintiffs. I'd really not like to see us go back to that.
 
amathis, in your defense, lots of news outlets, blogs, and forums have posted exactly what you posted (or at least pretty close), giving the indication that this guy did nothing else wrong and was somehow targeted or unjustly treated by the cops by enforcing the law.

Your source, Greg Ball's site, conveniently left out relevant information by deceptively classifying the AUO 3rd simply as "other vehicle infractions." The lamp being out is a vehicle infraction. Driving without a license is NOT a vehicle infraction. It is a driver infraction and an arrestable offense.

In short, you were duped by someone with an agenda. I don't like the law either, but the misrepresentation by somebody who should know better, a lawmaker, for crying out loud, isn't something that can be excused under the guise that he could not have known. He knows the difference between vehicle infractions and driver infractions but decided not to include that information.

There is a reason why politically motivated blogs should not be considered primary sources.
 
And just who exactly is liable when someone with only 7 rounds is attacked by multiple assailants or a hopped up druggie and runs out of bullets and subsequently dies as a result?

This is the problem with these stupid laws. I cannot understand why the idiots voted into office think by keeping law abiding people from protecting themselves, that somehow we will all be protected.

BTW - this guy that was arrested was apparently NOT a law abiding citizen. If had be abiding by the laws he probably wouldn't have been stopped in the first place.
 
Quote:
The guy had the arrest coming, but note, they will treat him as a poster child for this legislation.
Click to expand...

I doubt this'll get much traction in the mainstream media. Had he committed a serious crime, perhaps.

That said, prior to Emerson, we had a long history of poorly-mounted 2A defenses on the part of very unsympathetic plaintiffs. I'd really not like to see us go back to that.
Click to expand...

I suspect they will raise him up as an example: "See this bad man driving without a license! Gun owners aren't law abiding citizens. . . . ."
 
I'd tend to think that this was an instance wherein the officers decided to "throw the book at him". It doesn't sound like he's a poster child for RKBA arms.
Click to expand...

Although technically true, lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater. If we are talking about 2A rights, this fellow may be just as much a poster child for the cause as a jew arrested in WWII Germany, after being pulled over for a suspended license. *assuming they had them) you get my drift.
 
Ruthless4christ said:
Although technically true, lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater. If we are talking about 2A rights, this fellow may be just as much a poster child for the cause as a jew arrested in WWII Germany, after being pulled over for a suspended license. *assuming they had them) you get my drift.
Click to expand...
I don't get your drift at all. What correlation are you attempting to create?
 
Aguila, he is invoking Godwin's Law. It is a feeble reductionist argument to compare situations to Nazism, Hitler, or their travesties in order to make their argument sound more significant. Basically, he is saying we are like the Jews of the period and New York government is like that of Hitler's regime.
 
myusername said:
BTW - this guy that was arrested was apparently NOT a law abiding citizen. If had be abiding by the laws he probably wouldn't have been stopped in the first place.
Click to expand...

You gotta be kidding me. He was stopped for having a light over his license plate out. That was what triggered the traffic stop in the first place. Did he violate other laws? Certainly, but none that would have caused a traffic stop. I can understand him being arrested for driving on a suspended license. The extra 2 rounds in his mag is a stupid law that should have never been passed. If he knew about that law however, he should have followed it. I would just carry a few mags with 7 rounds in it.
 
Aguila, he is invoking Godwin's Law. It is a feeble reductionist argument to compare situations to Nazism, Hitler, or their travesties in order to make their argument sound more significant. Basically, he is saying we are like the Jews of the period and New York government is like that of Hitler's regime.
Click to expand...

I'm so sorry I have seen the light. How foolish of me to think that criminals no longer have any civil rights. By all means anytime someone is a victim of an unjust law or unjust treatment at all lets criminalize him for any other infractions relating to other portions of the law by which he may be guilty, and ignore any legitimate claims he has in regards to other abuses.
 
Last edited:
Lets not overlook criminal behavior in the zeal of our hatred of the SAFE Act.

Inadequate license plate lights. It IS a law and the police DO routinely make traffic stops on its basis.

It's a legitimate stop, which brings to light a host of additional CRIMES. This isn't even about the SAFE Act. The SAFE Act charge is nothing more than a place holder. People like this are routinely charged with everything the officers can find because they know most of the charges will be dropped or pled down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top