Marine says NO!

This is a discussion on Marine says NO! within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I have seen Marines do some very careless and stupid things with weapons. Just like anybody else. The law is the law no matter who ...

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 68
Like Tree32Likes

Thread: Marine says NO!

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,863
    I have seen Marines do some very careless and stupid things with weapons. Just like anybody else. The law is the law no matter who you are.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Senior Member Array Chad Rogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Metro DC
    Posts
    958
    Quote Originally Posted by Sheldon J View Post
    Or he could have violated posted rules and not declared his gun,
    Doesn't the Empite State building have security screening like at the airport?
    "People who take an Internet handle of a great warrior, are usually the first to go fetal when crunch time comes." - Me

  4. #18
    Distinguished Member Array Stubborn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tampa Fl
    Posts
    1,530
    Quote Originally Posted by lordofwyr View Post
    At this point, I am thinking we just cut our losses and consider selling New York City back to the Native Americans for a handful of wampum.

    That or release about 10,000 screaming Marines on the city and see if maybe they can change their stupid gun laws.

    Either works just fine for this Texas.
    Well one things for certain, if the good Lord ever decided to give this country an enema, He'd insert the syringe right there between NY and NJ.
    tkruf likes this.
    "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it".
    Thomas Jefferson

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  5. #19
    Ex Member Array Bullet1234's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    963
    ALL CWP users should Boycott NEW YORK STATE PERIOD.

  6. #20
    VIP Member
    Array archer51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    21,392
    While I feel for his plight, I also have a hard time feeling too much sympathy for him. He misunderstood the website he visited? Come on, he's an adult, he served in the military and he works in a trade where large sums of cash and jewelry changes hands on a frequent basis. If his reading comprehension is that bad, he needs to find another line of work.

    In the stories that have been posted about this, I have yet to see what site he impossibly went to to check out NY laws.
    Freedom doesn't come free. It is bought and paid for by the lives and blood of our men and women in uniform.

    USAF Retired
    NRA Life Member

  7. #21
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    8,025
    I think they(NYC Prosecutors) are going to make an example of him.
    Which will in turn, most likely make a martyr,{so to speak} of him in the public eye, which may turn the tide against the City, and Bloombutt.
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  8. #22
    VIP Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    2,057
    Quote Originally Posted by JD View Post
    What everyone has to remember, is that as of now, it has been ruled by SCOTUS that states can apply "reasonable" restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms, and that they have not yet declared that we have a constitutional right to carry those arms concealed.

    Many states have permit systems that prohibit out of staters or enters reciprocity agreements with select few other states. If this were a state that had a permit system, but did not honor the IN permit, and this guy carried there and got busted would we be singing the same tune? If I carried in MN with my IA permit, I would be doing so illegally. Where is the outrage against MN?

    He carried in a state that does not honor his permit. Illegally, which is within the parameters of SCOTUS rulings regarding the right to keep and bear arms. PERIOD.

    As for "We the people of the US trusted this Marine with far more dangerous weapons than a hand gun" I get sick and tired of seeing this argument. We the people of the US trust Marines with far more dangerous weapons than a handgun...when on the range, and in theater. Stateside we weren't trusted with a knife greater than 3" in a barracks room or a glass bottle of orange juice for that matter. Where's the outrage over that?

    Are NY gun laws "wrong"? Yes, but claiming ignorance of those laws as a defense is just as wrong.

    I can't see how pleading not guilty of this when he clearly was is going to pan out in his favor...
    Maybe the way it panned out for Rosa Parks, another peaceful protester. And, in the spirit of civil disobedience, Ryan Jerome informed the authorities of his peaceful, illegal action. In our zeal to protect the public peace, let's not throw Jerome to the Bloomburgs of the world. Maybe there are enough people in New York fed up with their chains to rally around this cause?

    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    That is an excellent point in bold. And I agree as we all do the law is wrong but it is a law. But he got a deal which they don't offer everybody. He should have taken it.
    Copped to a mere $1K and 10 days community service? I appreciate and admire his stand.

    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    I have seen Marines do some very careless and stupid things with weapons. Just like anybody else. The law is the law no matter who you are.
    But this is a good example of someone that society should be able to trust with a gun whose training and discipline are exemplary - his carrying a gun illegally by some code none of us want notwithstanding.
    CaptSmith likes this.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  9. #23
    Senior Member Array Chad Rogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Metro DC
    Posts
    958
    Martyr??? There's a whole lot of fantasy visions going on here...
    JD likes this.
    "People who take an Internet handle of a great warrior, are usually the first to go fetal when crunch time comes." - Me

  10. #24
    VIP Member Array Hiram25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wyoming, DE
    Posts
    11,047
    I hope he embarrasses them into dropping the whole thing!
    Hiram25
    You can educate ignorance, you can't fix stupid
    Retired DE Trooper, SA XD40 SC, S&W 2" Airweight
    dukalmighty & Pure Kustom Black Ops Pro "Trooper" Holsters, DE CCDW and LEOSA Permits, Vietnam Vet 68-69 Pleiku

  11. #25
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,017
    What everyone has to remember, is that as of now, it has been ruled by SCOTUS that states can apply "reasonable" restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms, and that they have not yet declared that we have a constitutional right to carry those arms concealed.
    Bingo!!

    Justice Scalia said this in Heller:

    "Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any ,
    weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues ... The majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues."
    Since Heller, SCOTUS has denied cert in two concealed carry cases including Williams v. MD.

  12. #26
    VIP Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    2,057
    Quote Originally Posted by Sig 210 View Post
    Since Heller, SCOTUS has denied cert in two concealed carry cases including Williams v. MD.
    The Supreme Court has denied cert in five carry cases in the last five months, though the Supremes are requesting responses from the government in each case, an unusual treatment in their process of elimination of cases to hear that indicates their keeping an ear to the ground on Second Amendment questions.
    When the court requests responses from the government on the specifics of a question before them, it increases the liklihood of their hearing oral arguments by a factor of 9.5 (of an average of 8000 cases brought, only a few hundred garner a request for government response. And 8.6% of those the court hears).
    Freerepublic says:
    The fact that the Supreme Court requested a response in all these cases does not mean the Court thinks the cases were decided correctly. It more likely suggests that the Court is interested in further clarifying the scope of Second Amendment rights after Heller and McDonald, but is searching for the right case vehicle to do it in.
    The more peaceful cases from which to choose the better. We each pick our personal battles. I'm not willing to turn my legal-eagle back on Jerome.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  13. #27
    JD
    JD is offline
    Administrator
    Array JD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    19,235
    Quote Originally Posted by Pistology View Post
    Maybe there are enough people in New York fed up with their chains to rally around this cause?
    What cause? Non-residents carrying with an unrecognized out of state permit? How many states work off a permit system that does not honor ALL out of state permits or any permits?



    This is not going to be the case that breaks the camels back.

  14. #28
    VIP Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    2,057
    Quote Originally Posted by JD View Post
    What cause? Non-residents carrying with an unrecognized out of state permit? How many states work off a permit system that does not honor ALL out of state permits or any permits?

    This is not going to be the case that breaks the camels back.
    It's not necessarily numbers or majority that decides a legal question. Most states can be wrong. Maybe it isn't a cause celebre. Maybe it is.
    But the right to bear is a cause whether the Supreme Court hears Jerome or not.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  15. #29
    VIP Member
    Array MrBuckwheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Down Incognito
    Posts
    6,358
    I would like to know what the "gunny" would say about this? (ie Did your parents have any children that lived? What is your major malfuntion........)

    I am sorry to hear that he is going thru it.

  16. #30
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,853
    Quote Originally Posted by oneshot View Post
    I think they(NYC Prosecutors) are going to make an example of him.
    Which will in turn, most likely make a martyr,{so to speak} of him in the public eye, which may turn the tide against the City, and Bloombutt.
    Make an example out of him? They offered him a deal (misdemeanor) which he turned down. From what I see in the news when that happens the DA will go after him with zeal. And really bad use of the word martyr. A martyr to me would be if he knowingly did this to bring persecution to himself to right or protest a wrong.
    Being ignorant of the law does not make you a martyr especially when you are offered a plea.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

jury nullification marine

Click on a term to search for related topics.