The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old January 22, 2012, 05:22 PM   #26
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2GunCorcoran View Post
I don't know of any federal or state law against harassing New Yorkers for speeding.

By the way, the article said the TN woman is being charged with a felony. Yet another reason felons should be allowed to buy guns.


Quote:
Originally Posted by nate45
I can't believe they are siding with the woman. She had no right to violate NYC law and ignorance of the law is no excuse.
I take it you think the law is always just. Do you agree with genocide? Acts of genocide are often totally legal at the times and places where they occur, and resistance to them is often illegal at the time and place where it would occur. How about American slavery? That had the full protection of federal and state law for nearly 100 years
.



Comparing NYC firearms laws with slavery and genocide is beyond ridiculous.

It doesn't matter what I think of NYC firearms laws. What matters is that I have a responsibility to make myself informed of the various states firearms laws before I visit them.

As a CCW holder, if in fact the woman in question is/was, she should have read NYC's gun laws before she carried a handgun there.

Furthermore, in my personal opinion, her action of trying to check her firearm was naive at best. All that it proves to me is that she was uninformed and irresponsible.

A well known tenet of the law, is that ignorance of the law is no excuse, or defense. If it were an excuse most every violator would claim it.

If she would have violated some obscure law that the vast majority had never heard of, I would have more sympathy with her. However, as a responsible and law abiding CCW holder, it is ultra important that you know each localities firearms and reciprocity laws before attempting to carry there.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is offline  
Old January 22, 2012, 06:00 PM   #27
2GunCorcoran
Member
 
Join Date: December 9, 2011
Posts: 41
Quote:
Comparing NYC firearms laws with slavery and genocide is beyond ridiculous.
The difference is only in degree, not in principle. The principle that the law can be and often is immoral and unjust holds true.

Quote:
It doesn't matter what I think of NYC firearms laws. What matters is that I have a responsibility to make myself informed of the various states firearms laws before I visit them.
You have the right to visit any state, territory, region, or country on earth with your gun. Human rights do not stop and start at borders. The legislators of New York have the responsibility to account for and allow your human rights in their law codes.

Quote:
A well known tenet of the law, is that ignorance of the law is no excuse, or defense. If it were an excuse most every violator would claim it.
Another well known tenet of the law is that unjust laws should not be enforced. That's why we have jury nullification and police discretion.
__________________
"It's a hell of thing--killing a man: You take away all he's got and all he's ever going to have."
2GunCorcoran is offline  
Old January 22, 2012, 06:58 PM   #28
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
You are very idealistic 2Gun, unfortunately your brand of idealism is not in accordance with reality, common sense and recent court rulings.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is offline  
Old January 22, 2012, 07:12 PM   #29
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by nate45 View Post
You are very idealistic 2Gun, unfortunately your brand of idealism is not in accordance with reality, common sense and recent court rulings.
Court rulings and "reality" perhaps but common sense and logic REQUIRE that truth, and by extension rights, are not relative.

Relative truth is no truth. Relative rights are no rights. They can be denied and forbidden but that does not change their existence.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 22, 2012, 07:25 PM   #30
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,799
Some folks need to dial back the heated rhetoric. Genocide and slavery analogies are not productive - TFL doesn't support junior high school debate level discussions. This is a hint.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old January 23, 2012, 02:08 PM   #31
orangello
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2009
Posts: 566
I am impressed by TN's willingness to go so far to support a TN citizen. I think their method is flawed, but i am glad to see a state stand up for one of its citizens in the face of such an unfair and poorly thought-out law.

If TN wants to pick on NY drivers in some kind of retribution, I think they would have more results if they targeted the commercial traffic. Perhaps they could start more regular inspections of commercial traffic connected with NY vendors or shippers. That would pass the fines/costs of delays along to the monied class that is obviously more in control of the firearms regulations in NY and NYC.
orangello is offline  
Old January 23, 2012, 02:31 PM   #32
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,513
Quote:
As much as I disagree with New York City's treatment of gun owners,

what appalls me most is politicians acting like kindergartners.
Not sure I agree with that, sometimes the politicians can make a difference.

A few years ago Canada had strick rules on trucks entering Canada with US farm products, much stronger then ours. It was designed to limit the importation of US products yet allow Canadian products to enter the US freely.

Several Governors grumbled but the South Dakota Governor did something. He instituted the same strict rules on trucking which effected Canadian trucks effectively barring them from the state.

It worked. Our state Dept threw a fit, but South Dakota held firm and ending up winning the battle.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old January 23, 2012, 04:33 PM   #33
heyjoe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Posts: 172
the key here at least for the police role in it is discretion. the officer who arrested her may have had his hands tied in that others such as security at the memorial already knew about it and there are many people as well as police brass nearby, or he may have chosen not to exercize due discretion ,which is more likely, and sadly is becoming all too common place today.

im from NY, have never persecuted people from Tennessee and would be ticked off if i were harassed by people in Tennessee because of this incident. Besides, do you really think Bloomberg or Kelly care if some poor working schmuck like me gets a ticket in Tennessee because of their actions?

The woman would be better served by having the charges dropped of course but if they arent she sounds like a good test case to me.
heyjoe is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 03:44 AM   #34
tyme
Staff
 
Join Date: October 13, 2001
Posts: 3,182
I thought that police and state troopers routinely cast a more critical eye on vehicles with out-of-state plates. If that's true, the only thing different about this case is that TN is explicitly giving NY a chance to reduce this discrimination if NY does the right thing and fixes their abusive gun laws.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
Definitely. Your average New Yorker isn't the instigator. Heck, he probably doesn't even realize that his state has unfair laws regarding guns.
Your average New Yorker is still part of New York's body politic. In theory, then, the average New Yorker is responsible for New York's laws. If you argue that the political process has been hijacked by campaign donations and lobbying, I'll agree with that, but fixing that would, IMO, require gutting the notion that money is speech.[1]

[1] http://bostonreview.net/BR35.5/lessig.php
__________________
“The egg hatched...” “...the egg hatched... and a hundred baby spiders came out...” (blade runner)
“Who are you?” “A friend. I'm here to prevent you from making a mistake.” “You have no idea what I'm doing here, friend.” “In specific terms, no, but I swore an oath to protect the world...” (continuum)
“It's a goal you won't understand until later. Your job is to make sure he doesn't achieve the goal.” (bsg)
tyme is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 03:46 AM   #35
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,929
Quote:
Definitely. Your average New Yorker isn't the instigator. Heck, he probably doesn't even realize that his state has unfair laws regarding guns.

This punishes the wrong people, if it does anything at all.
Punishing the wrong people is the quickest way to draw attention to the subject matter.
Besides... if they can vote, they can change it.
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 05:51 AM   #36
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,521
All in all, it looks like Tennessee is threatening a sort of legislative terrorism. Where terrorism is comprised of negative violent acts targeted at the non-military population to effect social, political/legal, or religious change (you hurt the people of the general population when you can't get the changes desired from the various forms of social, political, religious leaders or institutions and so the general population will demand the change out of fear).

So Tennessee is threatening retribution against the general population of New York state who may visit or pass through Tennessee with undue legal scrutiny in order to force New York state to change its laws, despite the fact that they people being threatened with undue legal scrutiny are not the people directly responsible for the law.

Last I checked, one state government has no business trying to run any other state's government, but if there is a conflict between the two, it can be handled through federal processes.

Quote:
Punishing the wrong people is the quickest way to draw attention to the subject matter.
Besides... if they can vote, they can change it.
Yep, punishing the wrong people to effect legislative change...legislative terrorism.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 07:04 AM   #37
SwampYankee
Registration in progress
 
Join Date: November 1, 2008
Location: I can be found on a number of other forums.
Posts: 1,333
Quote:
While this is unique in that what the state of TN is proposing is selective traffic enforcement, because of NY firearm laws,
No, they are not doing it because of the law but because of the treatment of one of their citizens. And they are not trying to change NYC law, just get one of their citizens left alone.

We do not like Iran because of the things they do. As a result, we employ sanctions. We are very careful about which Iranians we let into the country and check them thoroughly, if we let them in at all. I see some analogy to this.

Because of the Federal government, there are a lot of things states cannot do to each other or do at all. Personally, I think TN has a clever idea. Considering the legislature has no authority over the Tennessee highway patrol (unless they write a law that says all NYC cars must be pulled over- and they won'), it would be tough for anyone to bring a suit against anyone in TN. If the head of that agency publishes a memo telling officers to make anyone with a NYC plate hurt, that is a different story.

There may be some teeth to their threat but i see it as an empty threat, intended to provoke a response and draw attention to the issue.
SwampYankee is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 07:26 AM   #38
bumnote
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 13, 2008
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 368
Bottom line is the woman broke the law, either knowing or unknowingly she broke the law in NY state. The line "she tried to do the right thing" keeps coming up with this incident in various forums and news stories, but she didn't "do the right thing". The right thing is checking out local laws before you get there, not when you're about to enter a memorial that's a high security area and vistors and baggage are screened...in other words not fessing up right before you're about to get caught. I do find it extremely hard to believe she was totally ignorant of NY firearm laws, but even then it doesn't matter. I live just outside of Washington DC and Maryland in Virginia. I don't like DC's or MD's guns laws, so I don't go there. If I cross the Potomac River with my revolver and get caught it's my fault and not DC's or Maryland's. So now TN is going to enforce it's speed limit laws...well what's the problem. If they're not targeting NY'ers then what's the issue? If you speed and get caught, you earned the ticket.
The problem here is one idiot has now inadvertently gotten political idiots (the biggest kind there are) involved and the people who will suffer the most is the lady who broke the law, this might have gone away quietly instead of becoming a cause célèbre for politicos on both side of the issue who want to get re-elected and those of us w/ CCW's that obey local laws. We don't need incidents like this making us look like a group of people who ignore laws we don't agree with.
__________________
"And remember, Abraham Lincoln didn't die in vain, he died in Washington D.C." - Firesign Theatre

Last edited by bumnote; January 24, 2012 at 07:39 AM.
bumnote is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 07:56 AM   #39
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
I'm interested to see what NY does. Sympathetic defendant (a newly minted doctor, no less); likely interest by SAF and other groups and attorneys; and no legal mechanism for residents of other states to carry in New York, period.

They recently dropped charges against the tea party grand poobah, very likely because they don't want to test the inevitable challenges he'd have brought with regard to NY laws.

I think it's a matter of time before they end up getting more scrutiny than they would like from the federal judicial system. Pushing this case would be one way to do that.
MLeake is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:01 AM   #40
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by bumnote View Post
now TN is going to enforce it's speed limit laws...well what's the problem. If they're not targeting NY'ers then what's the issue?
How could this:

. . . we remind the citizens of New York, especially those residing in New York City, to drive carefully through the great State of Tennessee, paying extra attention to our speed limits.

NOT be considered "targeting New Yorkers"?!
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:06 AM   #41
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
Peetza, yup. It's bad public policy and exceedingly unlikely to assist the presumed beneficiary.
csmsss is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:26 AM   #42
vito
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2004
Posts: 641
New Yorkers have made their choices, and they keep re-electing anti-gun polititians. I grew up there and much of my extended family still lives in NYC or the surrounding suburbs, and ALL of them think of me as the "crazy uncle" who owns guns. The best we can do is vote with our dollars, and other than flying to NY every few months to visit my 97 year old mother who is in a nursing home, I don't go to or spend a nickel in NY. I live in IL, and try my best to not spend a cent in Chicago since it is the Chicago liberal, anti-gun mob that controls this state and has made it the only state without any form of legal oncealed carry. You might be surprised by how many folks here carry, even though illegal, and you can bet they do not ask where they can check their guns when they see a "No Guns Allowed" sign in a store window (some national chains post such a sign despite the fact that nowhere in the State can a gun be carried legally). I can only think that this woman from TN and the ex-Marine as well who is facing charges, lived under a rock to not know that NYC does not allow concealed carry.
vito is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:36 AM   #43
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
So, Vito, it would be fair to target you for speeding tickets too, since Chicago is actually worse than NYC and Illinois is FAR worse than New York?

You don't go to or spend a nickel in NY due to its anti-gun stance but you LIVE in Illinois?
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:39 AM   #44
Rusty35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2011
Posts: 140
Quote:
peetzakilla
Senior Member

How could this:

. . . we remind the citizens of New York, especially those residing in New York City, to drive carefully through the great State of Tennessee, paying extra attention to our speed limits.

NOT be considered "targeting New Yorkers"?!
Targeting New Yorkers for what?
If New Yorkers dont believe in leniency why should they expect any in return?

New York wants to aggressively prosecute out of staters for what they perceive as a danger to their citizens.

Tennessee is just saying "Expect to be treated with similar hospitality"
Rusty35 is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 09:19 AM   #45
vito
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2004
Posts: 641
I live in IL only because this is where my job is, and even if I retired today I can't afford the loss that I would take if I tried to sell my house. I think the selective ticketing idea in TN is ridiculous and counterproductive. The way to pressure NYC and Chicago as well is for each of us to continue to try to raise awareness of our cause, and to use our economic clout to not support those who oppress us. I routinely write to any and all of the organizations I belong to urging that we NOT select anti-2nd amendment cities for our conventions. I'll admit that so far I have not seemed to had any success, but I keep trying.
vito is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 09:24 AM   #46
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty35 View Post
Targeting New Yorkers for what?
If New Yorkers dont believe in leniency why should they expect any in return?

New York wants to aggressively prosecute out of staters for what they perceive as a danger to their citizens.

Tennessee is just saying "Expect to be treated with similar hospitality"
No, not equivalent. Whether I agree with NY City law or not it is enforced across the board.

Tennessee is saying "we will SELECT New York residents for SELECTIVE enforcement."

There's no other way to read that statement. They will specifically target residents of certain areas for special enforcement of their speed limit laws.

New York City law is unconstitutional IMO. Tennessee selectively enforcing their law is EQUALLY unconstitutional.

It's just like the one kindergartener telling the other "I'm going to punch your sister if you don't leave me alone."

It's asinine and juvenile. It does nothing to solve the problem. It punishes people who didn't create the problem. It spreads animosity where there should be none. Oh, and it's illegal and unconstitutional.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 09:38 AM   #47
Rusty35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2011
Posts: 140
Quote:
peetzakilla
Senior Member

Tennessee is saying "we will SELECT New York residents for SELECTIVE enforcement."

There's no other way to read that statement. They will specifically target residents of certain areas for special enforcement of their speed limit laws.

New York City law is unconstitutional IMO. Tennessee selectively enforcing their law is EQUALLY unconstitutional.

It's just like the one kindergartener telling the other "I'm going to punch your sister if you don't leave me alone."

It's asinine and juvenile. It does nothing to solve the problem. It punishes people who didn't create the problem. It spreads animosity where there should be none. Oh, and it's illegal and unconstitutional.
Who do you believe is responsible for this problem?
Rusty35 is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 02:04 PM   #48
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,929
Quote:
No, not equivalent. Whether I agree with NY City law or not it is enforced across the board.

Tennessee is saying "we will SELECT New York residents for SELECTIVE enforcement."

There's no other way to read that statement. They will specifically target residents of certain areas for special enforcement of their speed limit laws.
There absolutely IS another way to read that statement.
New York City is trying to make the rest of the United States aware of its firearm laws, and that leniency is not permitted. In return, Tennessee is trying to make sure New Yorkers are aware that their roadways have speed limits, and that they may differ from New York's.

They have not stated that they will target NY plates. They only provided a written warning, urging New Yorkers to be observant of TN's speed limits.

They haven't selectively enforced anything, yet. Unless they do, claiming selective enforcement is like claiming I am illegally dumping on Forest Service land, because I have a broken down lawn mower in my back yard.
Sure, I have the means, the motive, and opportunity; but I haven't done it.
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 02:52 PM   #49
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankenMauser
They have not stated that they will target NY plates. They only provided a written warning, urging New Yorkers to be observant of TN's speed limits.

They haven't selectively enforced anything, yet. Unless they do, claiming selective enforcement is like claiming I am illegally dumping on Forest Service land, because I have a broken down lawn mower in my back yard.
Sure, I have the means, the motive, and opportunity; but I haven't done it. a
Maybe they haven't done it yet but you can't claim that they don't intend to do it. That's like saying that you're going to shoot mallards ducks and then claiming that you're not targeting mallard ducks.

I don't care if they've STARTED doing it or not. They said they're going to and if they do, it's wrong. Just as wrong as New York City's gun laws.

If they said this:

. . . we remind African Americans, to drive carefully through the great State of Tennessee, paying extra attention to our speed limits.


Would that not be suggestive of selective enforcement? Why would you single out any group if you don't intend to enforce specifically against THAT group?

Would it not be reasonable to say "Wait a minute... why do African Americans in particular have to be careful?"

It's OBVIOUS. The basic rules of interpretation of written language make it obvious. It has to be read in some unusual, non-standard, illogical way to believe that it says anything else.

If I say those mallards better be extra careful in my neck of the woods, I'm hunting mallards. Might shoot other ducks too but especially mallards.

Don't matter if it's ducks or New Yorkers. The meaning is obvious.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 03:09 PM   #50
alloy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Posts: 1,931
Maybe stats show a high % of TN speeders come from NY and they figure they need an extra reminder.
Quote:
New York City is trying to make the rest of the United States aware of its firearm laws, and that leniency is not permitted. In return, Tennessee is trying to make sure New Yorkers are aware that their roadways have speed limits, and that they may differ from New York's.~Frankenmauser
Makes sense, that's why I don't break the speed limit in TN.
Or carry in NYC
__________________
Quote:
The uncomfortable question common to all who have had revolutionary changes imposed on them: are we now to accept what was done to us just because it was done?
Angelo Codevilla
alloy is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14094 seconds with 7 queries