Quantcast

Should New York tourists have their lives destroyed because of concealed carry l

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

BLADEMDA

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
20,580
Reaction score
6,852
Just a few days before Christmas, Meredith Graves made a mistake that could end her medical career and send her to prison for at least 3 ½ years. The 39-year-old fourth-year medical student was carrying a permitted concealed handgun when she saw the sign at the 9/11 Memorial saying “No guns allowed.” She did the responsible thing and asked a security guard where she could check her weapon. Unfortunately, while her Tennessee concealed carry license is recognized in 40 states, New York isn’t one of them. Meredith was arrested.
Just a week earlier, Californian Mark Meckler told LaGuardia Airport officials that he had licensed handgun in a locked safe in checked baggage. At virtually any other airport in the country, checking a gun locked in a box wouldn’t be a problem. Meckler was arrested and charged with second-degree possession of an illegal weapons. He faces up to 15 years in prison.
Even New York’s second most powerful Democrat and a strong gun control advocate, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver thinks that tourists who accidentally break the state’s strict carry laws shouldn’t have their lives destroyed. “Her actions show a clear indication that she didn’t know she was breaking the law, and when she saw the sign, she said, ‘OK, I do have a gun. Take it from me.’ There was no criminal intent,” said Silver.
As the Tennessean newspaper (Nashville) put it: “[Meredith’s] arrest highlights the confusing patchwork of concealed weapons laws across the nation.”
But New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the local District Attorneys don’t seem interested in showing mercy. They take a zero tolerance approach towards these mistakes. Indeed, a week after Graves arrest, Mayor Bloomberg attacked her at a press conference claiming: “Let's assume she didn't get arrested for carrying a gun, she probably would have gotten arrested for the cocaine that was in her pocket.” But that same day the Manhattan District Attorney’s office acknowledged that Graves did not have any cocaine.
At the Republican presidential debate last night in South Carolina sponsored by Fox News, Republican candidates competed with each other over demonstrating who was the strongest supporter of letting Americans have the right to defend themselves. It is an issue that President Obama’s consistent opposition to gun ownership makes him particularly vulnerable on.
But last night no one took up the cause of Graves, Meckler, and the others who have their lives risk being destroyed by New York City’s laws.
For decades, treating licenses for guns like those for cars was the mantra among gun control advocates. Yet, you don't need a driver's license to drive a car on private property, merely on public roads. And once you get a license, you are allowed to drive any car on any public road anywhere in the United States. You are responsible for obeying the different traffic regulations in different states, but as long as you do, you are fine.
As the four individuals mentioned above learned, current gun laws are much more restrictive than those that apply to cars and drivers. Not only do many states regulate guns when they are on your own property, a license to carry a concealed handgun won’t let you travel the way a driver’s license does.
The proposed National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act passed the US House this last November by a 272 to 154 vote contains two provisions: if your state issues a concealed handgun license, that permit will let you travel to other states. Of course, you also have to follow the rules in the state you visit, so for Illinois -- the single state that still bans concealed handguns -- an out-of-state license wouldn't let you carry a concealed handgun there.
If this proposed law had been in effect when Graves or Jerome visited New York, they would have been fine. New Yorker permit holders would have had to obey the signs and turned in their guns. That is precisely what Graves and Jerome tried to do. The only difference is that they didn’t have a New York permit. Similarly, Benedetto and Meckler would have had no problem checking their locked and safely stored unloaded guns on their planes.
Gun control advocates warn that letting people carry concealed handguns constitutes a “dangerous measure” and “harmful legislation.” But we now have extensive experience with concealed-handgun permit holders. In 2011, about 7 million Americans hold permits that allow them to carry concealed handguns, and only one state, Illinois, still bans concealed carry.
Over the last couple of weeks, the New York Times has launched an attack on the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, apparently worried that it will become law (see also here). So what’s their evidence? They claim that in North Carolina over a five-year period about 40 permit holders a year committed some type of gun or weapons related offense and 12 are involved with some type of weapons related offense. With over 240,000 permit holders, those cases come to annual rates of 0.017 and 0.005 percent, and even the Times concedes that this represents “a small percentage of those with permits.”
The New York Times refuses to share its data and won't provide more details, but if North Carolina follows the typical pattern of states that detailed data is available for, the vast majority of these cases probably don’t involve guns and, even when guns are involved, the guns are unlikely to have been used to harm people – e.g., such as in cases where a permit holder accidentally carried a permitted gun into a gun-free zone.
The same pattern has been observed in state after state. Take Florida. Between Oct. 1, 1987, and July 31, 2011, Florida issued permits to over 2 million people, many of whom renewed their permits multiple times. Only 168 had their permits revoked for a firearms-related violation -- about 0.01 percent.
The Times focused on its finding that North Carolina sheriff departments mistakenly didn’t revoke permits for some permit holders who had committed crimes. The obvious concern is that these individuals might have used their permits to commit another crime. But despite the mistakes and the understandable fears, the story couldn’t identify a single such case over the five years that were studied.
The newspaper also claims that “a few independent researchers” find benefits from right-to-carry laws, and that “many other studies have found no net effect of concealed carry laws or have come to the opposite conclusion." But that is simply false. Overwhelmingly, academic research supports the benefits from these laws. Among peer-reviewed academic studies by criminologists and economists, 18 find that right-to-carry laws reduce violent crime, 10 claim no effect, and just one claims one type of crime increases slightly (an older date list of research is available here).
The incidents with Graves, Meckler, Benedetto, and Jerome shouldn’t keep happening. What is clear is that if the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act passes, just like the original ruckus over passing concealed handgun laws, the fears about allowing people to travel with guns will soon be forgotten.
John R. Lott, Jr. is a FoxNews.com contributor. He is an economist and author of the third edition of "More Guns, Less Crime" (University of Chicago Press, 2010).


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/01/17/should-new-york-tourists-have-their-lives-destroyed-because-concealed-carry/?intcmp=obnetwork#ixzz1sIvb9gNT
 

BLADEMDA

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
20,580
Reaction score
6,852
graves-pix_t300.jpg

Photo by Matthew McDermott, New York Post
Meredith Graves of Blount County leaves a Manhattan court yesterday after pleading guilty.




A Blount County woman arrested on a gun possession charge while visiting New York City has pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge, according to the Associated Press.
a.inline_topic:hover { background-color: #EAEAEA;}Meredith Graves, a registered nurse from Louisville, was spared jail time under the plea deal.
She pleaded guilty Monday to criminal possession of a weapon, according to the AP.
Charged with felony gun possession, Graves posted a $2,000 bond and faced a minimum sentence of 3½ years in prison after reportedly requesting to check her loaded, .32-caliber handgun with police at the World Trade Center Memorial on Dec. 22.
A sign at the memorial states that no guns are allowed on the site.
New York's strict gun laws make it illegal for most out-of-state visitors to carry a concealed weapon, unless the firearm is also licensed in New York, according to AP.
Graves' lawyer said bringing the gun to New York was "inadvertent," according to the AP.
He said what she did is not a crime in Tennessee.
The Memphis Commercial Appeal gun permit database confirms the 39-year-old Graves was issued a permit to carry a concealed weapon on Aug. 16, 2008. The permit expires in 2012.
More details as they develop online and in Wednesday's News Sentinel.

© 2012, Knoxville News Sentinel Co.
 

BLADEMDA

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
20,580
Reaction score
6,852
When I travel I must research all the gun laws of each state I pass though on the highway. I never bring a gun to NY State. It just isn't worth the hassle.

Why is it I have a driver's license from one state which lets me drive in all 50 but I can "carry concealed" when I visit another state despite my CC weapon's permit? Yes, I need to obey all local laws and ordinances but being arrested for trying to obey a NYC ordinance? If Meredith Graves had a NYC Permit for that gun she never would have been arrested in the first place; but, since she only had her TN permit then she was in violation of the law.

The reason NYC gets away with this stuff is because nobody has challenged this yet up to SCOTUS.
the NYC law is unconstitutional in the sense it makes no provisions for Citizens of other states who are legal, permitted gun owners.
 

BLADEMDA

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
20,580
Reaction score
6,852
Gun-toting tourist gets plea deal

MELISSA GRACE
Monday, March 19, 2012

A Tennessee medical student busted on a felony as she tried to check a loaded gun at Ground Zero walked away with a no-jail plea deal Monday.
Tourist Meredith Graves pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor possession count for the gun, which was licensed in her home state.
"Yes," Graves, 39, replied when a Manhattan judge asked if she were guilty of fourth-degree criminal possession of a weapon.
Her lawyer said the admission should not cloud his client's future.
"This is not the kind of case that should prevent her from being a doctor," attorney Daniel Horwitz said. "Licensing boards have a lot of discretion."




pixel.gif

"It's the type of disposition that will allow her to get on with her life and career," he continued, explaining why Graves, whose husband accompanied her to New York for her court appearance, decided to plead guilty. "What she did is not a crime in Tennessee."
Graves will have pay a $200 fine in the case.
Graves, who is set to graduate from medical school in May, has secured a residency, said Horwitz. He declined to reveal where she intends to practice, though he said it was not in New York.
Horwitz said Graves' decision to bring the "very small" .32 caliber gun to New York was "inadvertent."
"Somehow the bag got packed and the gun was in it," he said.
Graves attempted to check her gun during a Dec. 22 visit to the 9/11 Memorial when she was arrested on a stiff state gun possession charge that required state prison time. Manhattan prosecutors dismissed that charge.
Graves has contended she didn't realize her gun license was not good in New York.
 

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
When I travel I must research all the gun laws of each state I pass though on the highway. I never bring a gun to NY State. It just isn't worth the hassle.

Why is it I have a driver's license from one state which lets me drive in all 50 but I can "carry concealed" when I visit another state despite my CC weapon's permit? Yes, I need to obey all local laws and ordinances but being arrested for trying to obey a NYC ordinance? If Meredith Graves had a NYC Permit for that gun she never would have been arrested in the first place; but, since she only had her TN permit then she was in violation of the law.

The reason NYC gets away with this stuff is because nobody has challenged this yet up to SCOTUS.
the NYC law is unconstitutional in the sense it makes no provisions for Citizens of other states who are legal, permitted gun owners.


Blade!

Nice to see this thread, I respectfully disagree with you here though. First off, I see you're quite annoyed with these laws. True, the doctor-to-be who did the right thing and turned in the weapon, getting arrested and potentially having a career tossed out (which I wouldn't think would happen, and seemingly hasn't) is a foolish way to play things out. Granted, she forgot the gun was in her baggage (per her lawyer) But knew she had it on her when at Ground Zero? :rolleyes: Regardless, she'll be fine and I know that's not the crux of your annoyance with NYC gun laws (her one case).

Anyway, having grown up just outside the big Apple, (suburb 25 mins outside), I think NYC has its hands full with gun problems and Laws. To preempt much of how you may reply, I understand the argument, I understand those who feel the laws are unconstitutional, but I don't think that's really the case, as you say, just yet.

First off...

just the title to your thread. (i'm not picking on a title, just getting to what you are saying overall.)

You wrote,

"Should New York tourists have their lives destroyed because of concealed carry l(aws)?"

Are tourists having their lives destroyed Blade? ;) Of course not. Or are you flexing your fiction prose? :)
But that statement couldn't be further off. What's the equivalent statement about 2012 anesthesia
"Risk from anesthetic death in skyrockets in setting of Michael Jackson's bedroom! Ban propofol in US!!"
I mean, come on Blade.

Why is it I have a driver's license from one state which lets me drive in all 50 but I can "carry concealed" when I visit another state despite my CC weapon's permit?
I suspect you well know the answer here, but just don't like it? Big difference when it comes to reciprocity of a drivers' license and a heated item like a weapon - something that was dealt with in the bill of rights. I also think you meant to write cannot?

Yes, I need to obey all local laws and ordinances but being arrested for trying to obey a NYC ordinance?
That's not actually correct. Obeying the ordinance meant not having a weapon on her - in the first place. You're an empiricist Blade, I think you hate these laws, and are not looking at this clearly. She was arrested because she hadn't obeyed the law. (again, i think this is the price to pay for NYCs no-tolerance gun laws. The question becomes: is the means to an end justified? For the 8 million other NYers who were not arrested on a gun crime that day, I think the law is doing its job.

If Meredith Graves had a NYC Permit for that gun she never would have been arrested in the first place; but, since she only had her TN permit then she was in violation of the law.
Agreed. But come on, states' rights to regulate Blade. And this gets into your uncons argument, I'm sure. We cannot live in Arkansas and expect to have laws applied the same as Wyoming??

The reason NYC gets away with this stuff is because nobody has challenged this yet up to SCOTUS.
the NYC law is unconstitutional in the sense it makes no provisions for Citizens of other states who are legal, permitted gun owners
Well, I disagree. Big surprise. ;) First off, there's the chance that it will be challenged and SCOTUS will find it constitutional. Remember, the recent WASHINGTON DC cases discussed a BAN on carrying. This has nothing to do with NYC as a band doesn't exist - until SCOTUS says the regulations to get a NYC CCW are tantamount to a ban. And as SCOTUS often reminds us, no right in the Cons is without its limits. Should they find the NYC environment fitting of its regulations (not bans) it'll be held up.

Last time I checked, having provisions for other state gun owners carrying across state lines, CCW, was not a provision set forth in the US Constitution. Heck, the last time SCOTUS took on a 2nd Ammendment case, according to my PoliSci classes and distant memory, 1930s. Double heck, the 2nd amendment needing looking at, lingo wise, for the longest time, this is not an open and closed case. First a personal weapon needed to be incorporated into the language. And it was. CCW is not an unlimited right. It never will be. (never use never, but I'll be in northern saskatoon when that happens). Remember, SCOTUS has incredible power when taking on a case and making a decision. You know its over massive form of power? Just as in the constitution: remaining silent on a topic. That's an ENORMOUS form of speech. Ever since Marbury v Madison (which is another post should you like to discuss). I doubt you're an absolute fundamentalist when it comes to the Constitution. I think if we take away personal frustration and the fact that this gal is about to be a doc, and you hate flying to NY without your sidearm, we can look clearly at these laws. Do they make sense in BFE? NO. Just NYC and the like. Thus the beauty of federalism.

I don't want CCW running rampant in NYC. Why? So it can be like the wild 70s and 80s? No thanks. Rights with limits. Always have been, always will be. SCOTUS and only SCOTUS declare constitutionality when challenged. Your last statement is false.

D712
 

BLADEMDA

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
20,580
Reaction score
6,852
Allowing a provision in the NYC for "accidental Violations" by American Citizens from other states who have CCW permits should be included in the law. Clearly, accidental violation should be limited to a brief period of time like 5-7 days, heavy fine like $1,000 and loss of weapon; these seem to be much "fairer" than 3.5 years in jail on a felony charge.

I'm not as certain SCOTUS would allow NYC to jail a law abiding citizen of TN with no history of any crimes and who has a CCW permit for 3.5 years due to an accidental violation. Certainly, I would like to see the case tried before the SCOTUS but it won't likely happen anytime soon.

Again, NYC can make its own laws but calling something a FELONY which carries a severe penalty like 3.5 years in jail is a big deal. SCOTUS May allow wiggle room in here for law abiding citizens of the USA with CCW permits from other states not to serve 3.5 years in jail due to that NYC law. I do agree only SCOTUS or the NY Supreme Court can rule the NYC gun law unconstitutional.(other lower federal courts would rule first)

I could be wrong here but the law is supposed to make common sense. In this case it simple doesn't.
 

periopdoc

Cardiac Anesthesiologist
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2008
Messages
2,367
Reaction score
616
While I am a supporter of national reciprocity, I have little sympathy for gun owners who aren't responsible enough to thoroughly investigate the laws in states they are visiting and carrying in before they visit. "I heard it was legal on an internet forum" is not good enough.

Further, right-to-carry is only one part of the equation and there will still be issues once a national reciprocity law is passed. Gun owners also need a full understanding of applicable lawful self defense statutes if they elect to carry in another jurisdiction.

If Graves was too irresponsible to even research applicable carry laws I am sure she had no clue about the legal issues of utilizing of her weapon in the state. While bringing the gun to New York may arguable have been "inadvertent," illegally carrying it concealed on the streets of New York was pre-meditated and irresponsible
I do wonder what they would do if I were on a flight, say from Florida to Maine, and I was diverted to NY for mechanical difficulties and required to overnight in NY. My weapon is legal in the state I was traveling from and to and I had no expectation that I would be in NY, but now I am in NY with an illegal weapon. Would I be arrested when I checked in for the next morning's flight to Maine? Likely. Would I be prosecuted? Hmmm.

- pod
 
Last edited:

BLADEMDA

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
20,580
Reaction score
6,852
On November 28, 2008, Burress suffered an accidental self-inflicted gunshot wound to the right thigh in the New York City nightclub LQ when his Glock pistol, tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants, began sliding down his leg; apparently in reaching for the gun he inadvertently depressed the trigger, causing the gun to fire.[15] However, the Manhattan District Attorney stated Burress was in fact wearing jeans.[16] The injury was not life-threatening and he was released from an area hospital the next afternoon.[17] Two days later, Burress turned himself in to police to face charges of criminal possession of a handgun.[18] It was later discovered that New York City police learned about the incident only after seeing it on television and were not called by New York-Presbyterian Hospital as required by law. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg called the hospital actions an "outrage" and stated that they are a "chargeable offense". Bloomberg also urged that Burress be prosecuted to the fullest extent, saying that any punishment short of the minimum 3½ years for unlawful carrying of a handgun would be "a mockery of the law."[19][20] Burress had an expired (concealed carry (CCW)) license from Florida, but no New York license.
On December 2, 2008, Burress posted bail of $100,000.[21] Later in the day, Burress reported to Giants Stadium as per team policy for injured but active players and was told he would be suspended without pay[22] for the remaining four games of the 2008 regular season for conduct detrimental to the team. In addition, the Giants placed Burress on their reserve/non-football injury list,[23] meaning he was ineligible to return for the playoffs. Burress was also scheduled to receive $1 million from his signing bonus on December 10, 2008, initially withheld by the team.[24] The NFL Players Association filed a grievance, saying the team violated the collective bargaining agreement and challenging the suspension and fine received by Burress.[25] A Special Master in arbitration subsequently ruled that the Giants must deliver the entire $1 million to Burress, as per the collective bargaining agreement. "To think that a player could carry a loaded gun into a nightclub, shoot himself and miss the rest of the season but get to keep his entire signing bonus illustrates one of the serious flaws in the current system," said Giants co-owner John Mara in a statement afterward.[26]
On December 23, 2008, a search of Burress' New Jersey home by the Totowa, New Jersey Police, the New York Police Department and investigators from the Manhattan District Attorney turned up a 9 mm handgun, a rifle, ammunition and the clothing believed to be worn by Burress on the night of his accidental shooting.[27] On June 12, 2009 Burress' attorney Benjamin Brafman announced that he had been unable to reach a sentencing agreement.[28]
Burress asked a Manhattan grand jury for sympathy during two hours of testimony on July 29, 2009.[29] On Monday, August 3, 2009, prosecutors announced that Burress had been indicted[30] by the grand jury on two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and a single count of reckless endangerment in the second degree, both felonies.[31][32]
On August 20, 2009, Burress accepted a plea deal that would put him in prison for two years with an additional two years of supervised release.[30] His sentencing was held on September 22, 2009. Burress hired a prison consultant to advise him on what to expect while in prison.[33] In January 2010, Burress applied for and was denied a work release from prison.[34] On June 6, 2011, Burress was released from a protective custody unit of the Oneida Correctional Facility in Rome, New York.[35][36]
 

BLADEMDA

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
20,580
Reaction score
6,852
While I am a supporter of national reciprocity, I have little sympathy for gun owners who aren't responsible enough to thoroughly investigate the laws in states they are visiting and carrying in before they visit. "I heard it was legal on an internet forum" is not good enough.

Further, right-to-carry is only one part of the equation and there will still be issues once a national reciprocity law is passed. Gun owners also need a full understanding of applicable lawful self defense statutes if they elect to carry in another jurisdiction.

If Graves was too irresponsible to even research applicable carry laws I am sure she had no clue about the legal issues of utilizing of her weapon in the state. While bringing the gun to New York may arguable have been "inadvertent," illegally carrying it concealed on the streets of New York was pre-meditated and irresponsible.

I do wonder what they would do if I were on a flight, say from Florida to Maine, and I was diverted to NY for mechanical difficulties and required to overnight in NY. My weapon is legal in the state I was traveling from and to and I had no expectation that I would be in NY, but now I am in NY with an illegal weapon. Would I be arrested when I checked in for the next morning's flight to Maine? Likely. Would I be prosecuted? Hmmm.

- pod


AS the NYC law stands now if you walk into a police station on DAY 1 of your visit to NYC and turn your gun in they will arrerst you. I don't see how this helps compliance of NYC gun laws.

Graves should NOT have turned her gun in that day. Instead, she should have left the area and tossed it into the river then returned to Ground Zero. Or, simply leave the gun hidden wherever she was staying in NYC.
 

periopdoc

Cardiac Anesthesiologist
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2008
Messages
2,367
Reaction score
616
AS the NYC law stands now if you walk into a police station on DAY 1 of your visit to NYC and turn your gun in they will arrerst you. I don't see how this helps compliance of NYC gun laws.

Well the whole point is to keep you from bringing your guns to NYC. If you don't bring your guns, you will be in compliance with ALL NYC gun laws. Seems pretty effective to me, unconstitutional IMHO, but effective.

- pod
 

pgg

Laugh at me, will they?
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Messages
13,860
Reaction score
15,047
I do wonder what they would do if I were on a flight, say from Florida to Maine, and I was diverted to NY for mechanical difficulties and required to overnight in NY. My weapon is legal in the state I was traveling from and to and I had no expectation that I would be in NY, but now I am in NY with an illegal weapon. Would I be arrested when I checked in for the next morning's flight to Maine? Likely. Would I be prosecuted? Hmmm.

- pod

This has happened. I'll try to look up the actual case later and post the reference.

Short version - some guy was traveling with a gun (I think it was some flavor of black rifle), flight was diverted to an airport in NY. Or maybe it was supposed to be a stop/refuel but the flight was cancelled for weather or mechanical reasons. Airline put up the passengers in a hotel for the night. He claimed his bags, and somehow got caught with the gun, and was arrested and successfully prosecuted. NY's argument was that he should've notified the airport police and NOT claimed his checked bags.
 

pgg

Laugh at me, will they?
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Messages
13,860
Reaction score
15,047
I don't want CCW running rampant in NYC. Why? So it can be like the wild 70s and 80s? No thanks. Rights with limits. Always have been, always will be. SCOTUS and only SCOTUS declare constitutionality when challenged. Your last statement is false.

Can you point to a single state, city, or other geographic area where shall-issue CCW as resulted in a wild increase in gun violence or crime?

Blood is not running in the streets because of lawful CCW. That Zimmerman's case is national news just underscores how astonishingly rare it is for a lawful carrier to be involved in a controversial shooting.

Rtc.gif


You're entitled to your opinion on the subject of course, but your fear of wild west semi-random shootings is simply unfounded. It's been 25+ years since CCW laws really started moving en masse toward shall issue. Except for California, which is its own special kind of ****ed up, carry permits are issued by state authorities and there aren't exceptions for cities or urban areas.



From your previous posts I know where you come down on the issue of "rights with limits" when the right in question is speech. And I absolutely agree with you. And so does the Supreme Court: strict scrutiny.

I personally believe than within the next 5 years SCOTUS will rule on the level of scrutiny that must be applied to proposed 2nd Amendment restrictions, and I think it will be strict. If the Heller/McDonald 5 are still breathing on that day, I think that's about as close to a sure thing as anything SCOTUS-related ever is. But of course the proof will be in the decision they hand down.


In time I hope you'll come around and agree that armed self defense is a civil right every bit as important as speech, assembly, etc - and that you'll see that the price we pay when this right is arbitrarily restricted or prohibited to a class of people is far too high for the promised (but never delivered) societal benefits.
 

BLADEMDA

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
20,580
Reaction score
6,852
Well the whole point is to keep you from bringing your guns to NYC. If you don't bring your guns, you will be in compliance with ALL NYC gun laws. Seems pretty effective to me, unconstitutional IMHO, but effective.

- pod

So the criminals in NYC are in compliance with the gun laws? Any evidence that law abiding citizens of NYC would increase the crime rate if they could actually get a permit?
NYC makes it difficult and expensive to get a CCW permit
 

periopdoc

Cardiac Anesthesiologist
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2008
Messages
2,367
Reaction score
616
So the criminals in NYC are in compliance with the gun laws? Any evidence that law abiding citizens of NYC would increase the crime rate if they could actually get a permit? NYC makes it difficult and expensive to get a CCW permit

Huh? Where did that come from? When did we start talking about NYC residents and criminals? We were talking about visitors from other jurisdictions where they are licensed to carry. Or did you mean to reply to D712?

You said.

AS the NYC law stands now if you (as a visitor) walk into a police station on DAY 1 of your visit to NYC and turn your gun in they will arrerst (sic) you. I don't see how this helps compliance of NYC gun laws.

I said

Well the whole point is to keep you (the visitor) from bringing your guns to NYC. If you don't bring your guns, you will be in compliance with ALL NYC gun laws. Seems pretty effective to me, unconstitutional IMHO, but effective.

Neither of us were talking about residents, criminals, or safety, just whether current gun restrictions in NYC help with visitor compliance with NYC gun laws. Yes, they do. They are unconstitutional IMHO, but they do help keep visitors in compliance with NYC gun laws. If you don't bring a gun in the first place (due to overly restrictive right-to-carry laws), you don't have to worry about any of the other gun laws (which in the grand scheme of things are significantly more important to worry about).

- pod
 

loveoforganic

-Account Deactivated-
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
4,218
Reaction score
13
I do wonder what they would do if I were on a flight, say from Florida to Maine, and I was diverted to NY for mechanical difficulties and required to overnight in NY. My weapon is legal in the state I was traveling from and to and I had no expectation that I would be in NY, but now I am in NY with an illegal weapon. Would I be arrested when I checked in for the next morning's flight to Maine? Likely. Would I be prosecuted? Hmmm.

- pod

Interesting scenario - do you take control of your checked baggage following a diverted flight? Haven't been on a flight that's had to change course before
 

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
Allowing a provision in the NYC for "accidental Violations" by American Citizens from other states who have CCW permits should be included in the law. Clearly, accidental violation should be limited to a brief period of time like 5-7 days, heavy fine like $1,000 and loss of weapon; these seem to be much "fairer" than 3.5 years in jail on a felony charge.

I'm not as certain SCOTUS would allow NYC to jail a law abiding citizen of TN with no history of any crimes and who has a CCW permit for 3.5 years due to an accidental violation. Certainly, I would like to see the case tried before the SCOTUS but it won't likely happen anytime soon.

Again, NYC can make its own laws but calling something a FELONY which carries a severe penalty like 3.5 years in jail is a big deal. SCOTUS May allow wiggle room in here for law abiding citizens of the USA with CCW permits from other states not to serve 3.5 years in jail due to that NYC law. I do agree only SCOTUS or the NY Supreme Court can rule the NYC gun law unconstitutional.(other lower federal courts would rule first)

I could be wrong here but the law is supposed to make common sense. In this case it simple doesn't.


First bold sentence, that's a tough one Blade. How do you PROVE accidental? A law that leaves such a gaping loophole will be exploited. Then, for example, every person who wants to bring a gun from California or Montana to NY, can effectively do so in claiming it was an accident. This isn't the way I think this should be handled Blade. When thinking of your punishment and suggestion for accidental CCW infraction, 5-7 days in jail etc, the med student, correct me if I'm wrong, got 20% of your suggested 1000 fine. So, the current laws and leeway provided for judges etc, is working fine. If previously convicted hoodlum is arrested at Ground Zero, resists arrest, is being a genuine idiot, MAYBE he would get 3.5 years, MAYBE. So, let the law stand and let the judges do what they do. It worked fine in the med students case. Absolutely fine. Annoying for her, but, guess what, check NYC gun laws before carrying... I don't see a soul looking to ruin her career and have her serve 3+ years in jail.

Having a felony on the books and charging someone for a lesser misdemeanor is a-ok in my hands. DAs have this leeway. Let them use it. And when they need to lock down on someone, at least the law is there.

Law here, IMHO makes perfectly common sense.

D712
 

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
While I am a supporter of national reciprocity, I have little sympathy for gun owners who aren't responsible enough to thoroughly investigate the laws in states they are visiting and carrying in before they visit. "I heard it was legal on an internet forum" is not good enough.

Further, right-to-carry is only one part of the equation and there will still be issues once a national reciprocity law is passed. Gun owners also need a full understanding of applicable lawful self defense statutes if they elect to carry in another jurisdiction.

If Graves was too irresponsible to even research applicable carry laws I am sure she had no clue about the legal issues of utilizing of her weapon in the state. While bringing the gun to New York may arguable have been "inadvertent," illegally carrying it concealed on the streets of New York was pre-meditated and irresponsible.

I do wonder what they would do if I were on a flight, say from Florida to Maine, and I was diverted to NY for mechanical difficulties and required to overnight in NY. My weapon is legal in the state I was traveling from and to and I had no expectation that I would be in NY, but now I am in NY with an illegal weapon. Would I be arrested when I checked in for the next morning's flight to Maine? Likely. Would I be prosecuted? Hmmm.

- pod

:thumbup:
 

periopdoc

Cardiac Anesthesiologist
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2008
Messages
2,367
Reaction score
616
I have landed in Chicago once and NYC once where I was scheduled to connect to other cities but had my flight cancelled due to weather at my next destination. Both times I was given the option of picking up my luggage and coming back the next morning. At the time I was interviewing for residency and I did not bring a weapon with me. The same thing happened innumerable times flying to Juneau when no visibility conditions in Juneau resulted in a diversion to Ketchikan or a return to Seattle. I suspect the issue would be even more problematic if we diverted to somewhere in Canada, although I also suspect that the Canadians would be more understanding of the issue.

- pod
 

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
Can you point to a single state, city, or other geographic area where shall-issue CCW as resulted in a wild increase in gun violence or crime?

No, I cannot. Can you point to a single state, city or other geographic area where shall-issue CCW has resulted in DECREASED gun violence or crime?

Blood is not running in the streets because of lawful CCW. That Zimmerman's case is national news just underscores how astonishingly rare it is for a lawful carrier to be involved in a controversial shooting.

Have you lived in NYC? Either now or the 80s, 90s? (asking seriously, just out of reference). I wasn't thinking of Zimm at all when I posted initially. That crap happens every day in the US. My point is NYC is a unique place and its State Legislature can impose laws at will up a point, if or when, SCOTUS steps in.

You're entitled to your opinion on the subject of course, but your fear of wild west semi-random shootings is simply unfounded.
It's not as simple as that. Robert DeNiro wants to carry a weapon, allow him. I'm not worried about Bobby D. Just don't think NYC needs more weapons on its streets. Plain and simple. And yes, the fact that retired Cops, Agents, Troopers are issued the overwhelming majority of CCW for NYC is exactly as it should be. They make the streets safer. Period.

From your previous posts I know where you come down on the issue of "rights with limits" when the right in question is speech. And I absolutely agree with you. And so does the Supreme Court: strict scrutiny.
I personally believe than within the next 5 years SCOTUS will rule on the level of scrutiny that must be applied to proposed 2nd Amendment restrictions, and I think it will be strict. If the Heller/McDonald 5 are still breathing on that day, I think that's about as close to a sure thing as anything SCOTUS-related ever is. But of course the proof will be in the decision they hand down.
Do you doubt for a second that SCOTUS will apply anything less than strict scrutiny to the 2nd amendment? Everyone sees this stuff as so black and white, but it's not. I found Cons Law fascinating when I studied it. Take pornography for example, what is porn in Kalispell, MT (shout out) is not porn in New York City. I mean, the SAME pictures, the same actions, the same movies, as determined by SCOTUS, fall under different definitions based upon the local community. Now, 2nd amendment is a different beast, of course, but to expect LA = Des Boise = Miami = Seattle = BFE = Washington DC, with CCW "rights" is just unfounded and I think completely ridiculous. IMHO.

In time I hope you'll come around and agree that armed self defense is a civil right
It is. 2nd amendment. Though it needed some "defining" by SCOTUS since written 200 years ago, agreed?

every bit as important as speech, assembly, etc
Absolutely. I don't play favorites with the Bill of Rights. Though 1, 4, and 6, have a special place in my heart. :D

and that you'll see that the price we pay when this right is arbitrarily restricted or prohibited to a class of people is far too high for the promised (but never delivered) societal benefits.
Lost me. I see nothing arbitrary about limiting CCW in NYC. Nothing at all. Nor do I see CCW limited to a certain class (debatable), nor do I see that societal benefits have been curtailed per se. Who is losing out here? Is it the homeowner who lives on West 4th in the Village that wants CCW but is denied because his last name isn't Scorcese or DeNiro? Is that what you mean. That person has EVERY right to apply. That person has every right to PURCHASE and keep a weapon for protection in his/her home. (some would argue that CCW wasn't even a figment of the Founders' imaginations as everyone carried open back then). In 2012, calling NYC's laws unconstitutional, with all mitigating circumstances, is...ahead of its curve, at best.

Respectfully agree to disagree.

D712
 

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
So the criminals in NYC are in compliance with the gun laws? Any evidence that law abiding citizens of NYC would increase the crime rate if they could actually get a permit?
NYC makes it difficult and expensive to get a CCW permit

NYC does make it hard and expensive. But until SCOTUS finds those methods uncons, it is what it is. And I don't think the restriction is excessive. Not to mention unwarranted.

D712
 

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
AS the NYC law stands now if you walk into a police station on DAY 1 of your visit to NYC and turn your gun in they will arrerst you. I don't see how this helps compliance of NYC gun laws.

Graves should NOT have turned her gun in that day. Instead, she should have left the area and tossed it into the river then returned to Ground Zero. Or, simply leave the gun hidden wherever she was staying in NYC.

My advice is for visitors from other states: please do not arrive into NYC and walk into a Precinct with a weapon. Unless you have a gold badge from the Federal Government. And unless you'd like to be arrested. Problem solved.

:p

D712
 
Last edited:

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
Take a look. You won't get a permit to carry a gun in NYC unless you can justify the reason for such a weapon. You must show due cause to legally carry a gun. That's some Second Amendment right if you can call it such.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/permits/HandGunLicenseApplicationFormsComplete.pdf

Blade

Los Angeles' CCW App:

http://www.lasdhq.org/contact_us/inquiry/gen_pub_ccw_app.pdf

Which includes the following requirement and language within (page 7 I think)...

"If the CCW license is desired for self-protection, the protection of others, or for the protection of large sums of money or valuable property, you are required to explain and provide good cause for issuance of the license. For example, has your fife or property been threatened or jeopardized? Explain incidents and include dates, times, locations, and names of police agencies to which these incidents were reported.
Details of Reason for Applicant Desiring a CCW License (use additional sheets if needed)."

Sorry, but when big cities are dealing with high crime rates, and have populations the size of several rural states combined, in a small area, they have the right to legislate CCW, which isn't provided for, explicitly, in the Constitution. It's their right. And as stated before, no right, none, are without limits. When dealing with the well being of the community, SCOTUS has demonstrated over and over that states have the right to protect citizens as it sees fit.

I could probably post 100 city CCW applications with similar language.

States have rights too.

D712
 

BLADEMDA

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
20,580
Reaction score
6,852
Blade

Los Angeles' CCW App:

http://www.lasdhq.org/contact_us/inquiry/gen_pub_ccw_app.pdf

Which includes the following requirement and language within (page 7 I think)...

"If the CCW license is desired for self-protection, the protection of others, or for the protection of large sums of money or valuable property, you are required to explain and provide good cause for issuance of the license. For example, has your fife or property been threatened or jeopardized? Explain incidents and include dates, times, locations, and names of police agencies to which these incidents were reported.
Details of Reason for Applicant Desiring a CCW License (use additional sheets if needed)."

Sorry, but when big cities are dealing with high crime rates, and have populations the size of several rural states combined, in a small area, they have the right to legislate CCW, which isn't provided for, explicitly, in the Constitution. It's their right. And as stated before, no right, none, are without limits. When dealing with the well being of the community, SCOTUS has demonstrated over and over that states have the right to protect citizens as it sees fit.

I could probably post 100 city CCW applications with similar language.

States have rights too.

D712

So I have the right to bear arms only in certain states or cities? This is your interpretation of the second Amendent?

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/right-own-gun-under-heller-30295.html
 

partydoc

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
539
Reaction score
247
So I have the right to bear arms only in certain states or cities? This is your interpretation of the second Amendent?

The interpretation that the second amendment allows for citizens to walk around with guns is also up for debate.
 

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
So I have the right to bear arms only in certain states or cities? This is your interpretation of the second Amendent?

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/right-own-gun-under-heller-30295.html

I wasn't going to quote Heller. But I'm glad u did. That case has nothing
To do with NYC ccw applications and their constitutionality. You do understand that right?
NYC doesn't BAN firearms. And the militia angle, well I never argued that.
What Heller answers i pull from your link:


"The bottom line:*You have a constitutional right to possess a firearm regardless of whether you are serving in a militia. But just how far that right extends remains up in the air."

That's what YOUR supreme court found in Heller.

And that's how I see it. Rights with limits.

D712
 

loveoforganic

-Account Deactivated-
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
4,218
Reaction score
13
D712 - Those gun laws keep who exactly from carrying firearms?

The young business professional? Or the guy flying MS13 tats?

Edit: Don't worry about the MS13 guy though, they tend to prefer safe unshootable machetes :D
 
Last edited:

pgg

Laugh at me, will they?
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Messages
13,860
Reaction score
15,047
Take a look. You won't get a permit to carry a gun in NYC unless you can justify the reason for such a weapon. You must show due cause to legally carry a gun. That's some Second Amendment right if you can call it such.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/permits/HandGunLicenseApplicationFormsComplete.pdf

It's the same everywhere in California. CA is an odd exception to the trend of shall-issue everywhere. Instead of a state-wide issuing authority, it's up to each individual city police department or county sheriff. They are required to use the standard CA Dept of Justice CCW application ...

Unfortunately, there's a fair amount of blatantly illegal activity by police departments and sheriffs. For example, some require letters of reference (which state law prohibits) or charge fees greater than what state law permits. It's kind of frustrating - the same PD that issued my permit 2 years ago (and followed the law in doing so) asked my wife for reference letters.

(Which highlights another problem with complex and restrictive gun laws - most police officers and agencies in CA don't understand the laws.)


There is a VERY aggressive, VERY well organized effort underway to get CA to go essentially shall-issue in all jurisdictions. They've been picking off the low-hanging fruit first but have an essentially unbroken string of victories with re-educating and re-calibrating sheriffs and police chiefs. LA and SF are coming ... in time.


Oddly enough, because CA permits have (historically) been so hard to get, they actually tend to have fewer limits than those issued in some other states. Whatever authority issues the permit, it's good statewide without additional restrictions. For example, with my CA permit, issued in a nearly-shall-issue rural county, I can carry into a school in San Francisco or Los Angeles ... even though SF hasn't issued a permit to one of its own residents in, well, just about forever.


So d712, how does that make you feel? Knowing that people who live in LA can't get permits, but people who live in other counties can carry whatever they like whereever they like in your city? :D

Discretionary issue is the new separate but equal. You guys in LA don't get the same civil rights as the rest of us do, even in the same state. This should upset you.
 

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
So d712, how does that make you feel? Knowing that people who live in LA can't get permits, but people who live in other counties can carry whatever they like whereever they like in your city? :D

Discretionary issue is the new separate but equal. You guys in LA don't get the same civil rights as the rest of us do, even in the same state. This should upset you.

You have got to be joking, Pgg. :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: If there's ONE thing Hollywood can be proud of, it's promoting civil rights. More so than any other institution I can think of. Or as George Clooney so perfectly said in his 2006 Oscar Speech:

"I would say that, you know, we are a little bit out of touch in Hollywood every once in a while. I think it's probably a good thing. We're the ones who talk about AIDS when it was just being whispered, and we talked about civil rights when it wasn't really popular. And we, you know, we bring up subjects. This Academy, this group of people gave Hattie McDaniel an Oscar in 1939 when blacks were still sitting in the backs of theaters. I'm proud to be a part of this Academy, proud to be part of this community, and proud to be out of touch."

That's how it makes me feel PGG. I think I've answered your question pretty clearly. :thumbup:

D712
 

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
D712 - Those gun laws keep who exactly from carrying firearms?

The young business professional? Or the guy flying MS13 tats?

Edit: Don't worry about the MS13 guy though, they tend to prefer safe unshootable machetes :D

I'm not the one arguing who should and shouldn't get guns in NYC. I'm the one arguing NYC's ability to do so.

(but to answer your question, probably both, and I'm ok with that. Means to an end. Apply for your permit NYC dwellers, you have every right...)

D712
 

BLADEMDA

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
20,580
Reaction score
6,852

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
Please read my second reference above. A Federal judge just ruled Maryland's gun law is unconstitutional. NYC Is not far behind.
Will do. But the first one proved zip in regard to ny. I saw it was a law firm like and I'm sure it's just stating one of their cases. I will. And sure, SCOTUS May rule on NYC soon. A test case may arise. Cross that bridge when it comes.

Your response to my Heller post?

D712
 

metalephrine

Full Member
Removed
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I think that there should be NO CCW, one should be required to carry said weapons openly, if I had my way everyone would be required to own a weapon and carry it.
 

BADMD

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
856
Reaction score
34
I do wonder what they would do if I were on a flight, say from Florida to Maine, and I was diverted to NY for mechanical difficulties and required to overnight in NY. My weapon is legal in the state I was traveling from and to and I had no expectation that I would be in NY, but now I am in NY with an illegal weapon. Would I be arrested when I checked in for the next morning's flight to Maine? Likely. Would I be prosecuted? Hmmm.

Yes, you would be prosecuted. That is very much the scenario that happened to Gregg Revell. He missed his connection, reclaimed his luggage and was arrested the next day when declared his firearm while checking in for his rescheduled flight. While the charges against him were ultimately dismissed, the 3rd Circuit ruled that he did not have protection under the Firearm Owners Protection Act because he had possession of the gun thus it was not "not readily accessible" (note the double negative).

Basically, in that case, you can't reclaim your baggage and must leave it in the possession of the airline, even if they don't want it. I've seen one argument that says you should deliberately use a key lock of some kind instead of a combination lock. If you are forced to reclaim your luggage, find a way to secure that key somewhere prior to getting the bag that contains your gun. The next morning you declare your gun, hand the bag with it to the TSA and then publicly and preferably while video taping, recover the secured key. It probably won't prevent an arrest, but it will show that you took deliberate steps to prevent the gun from being readily accessible and you can claim FOPA protection.
 

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
Please read my second reference above. A Federal judge just ruled Maryland's gun law is unconstitutional. NYC Is not far behind.

Yeah, just what I thought a law firm discussing one of their clients and stating their obvious opinion that NYC's CCW laws are unconstitutional. Look, I disagree, and only time will tell. In fact, they are not unconstitutional on their face as SCOTUS hasn't said they are. That article, though hardly an academic opinion as I'm sure you will agree, presents both sides (surprisingly). Pick the paragraphs where it supports what I'm saying, it's in there.

Frankly, I'm surprised you haven't tried to make the connection that MD's ban is what, in effect, NYC has going on (through their application prices etc). A virtual ban in other words. THAT's the argument for it to be ruled unconstitutional. If you somehow keep people from voting (in other words, "sure vote") then require voters to pay 1000 to vote, that would be no bueno and that's the angle I think will be presented in regard to NYC's law. But that's not what I'm hearing from your side Blade. I'm just hearing frustration that NYC has no right to do what they are doing. Period. And that's simply wrong. Until otherwise challenged. Notice strict scrutiny and the mention in your link. If you're going to limit rights, you have to do so when the state has a reason. I'd say, in NYC, gun control laws will be VERY VERY hard to repeal. Modify, lower app costs, etc, sure. Take out a line of law here or there, fine. Turn it into rural Wyoming? Never ever. Won't happen. There will be a massive compelling interest presented by the state.

D712
 

Narcotized

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
1,255
Reaction score
3
It's not as simple as that. Robert DeNiro wants to carry a weapon, allow him. I'm not worried about Bobby D.

D712

Clearly you did not see Dinero in The Untouchables, Godfather Part 2, Any movie with Joe Pesci, Cape Fear, or as the lunatic in-law in the Focker movies. He's the last guy I want packing a concealed gun.
 

doctor712

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2
Narcotized

You forgot Midnight Run!!!!

:)

D712
 

Narcotized

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
1,255
Reaction score
3
Narcotized

You forgot Midnight Run!!!!

:)

D712

Dude, Midnight Run is one of my ALLTIME favorite movies!!! Except Jack Walsh is so righteous he can carry a gun ANYTIME as far as I'm concerned. I left it out on purpose!
 

pgg

Laugh at me, will they?
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Messages
13,860
Reaction score
15,047
You have got to be joking, Pgg. :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: If there's ONE thing Hollywood can be proud of, it's promoting civil rights.

Except for the civil right protected by the 2nd Amendment. On that count, you guys are not our friends. ;)

Incidentally, Hollywood actually enjoys special protection of its own firearm ownership rights. Check out the CA DOJ applications for various permits ... there's always an exception for film studios - it's explicitly listed as an acceptable 'good cause'. And said permits are simply unobtainable for people outside of Hollywood.
 

pgg

Laugh at me, will they?
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Messages
13,860
Reaction score
15,047
Yes, you would be prosecuted. That is very much the scenario that happened to Gregg Revell. He missed his connection, reclaimed his luggage and was arrested the next day when declared his firearm while checking in for his rescheduled flight. While the charges against him were ultimately dismissed, the 3rd Circuit ruled that he did not have protection under the Firearm Owners Protection Act because he had possession of the gun thus it was not "not readily accessible" (note the double negative).

Basically, in that case, you can't reclaim your baggage and must leave it in the possession of the airline, even if they don't want it. I've seen one argument that says you should deliberately use a key lock of some kind instead of a combination lock. If you are forced to reclaim your luggage, find a way to secure that key somewhere prior to getting the bag that contains your gun. The next morning you declare your gun, hand the bag with it to the TSA and then publicly and preferably while video taping, recover the secured key. It probably won't prevent an arrest, but it will show that you took deliberate steps to prevent the gun from being readily accessible and you can claim FOPA protection.

Yeah, Revell was the one I was thinking of.

There's also this case.
 
Top