Latest NYC Gun Law Casualty: Navy SEAL

Shaun Day made the mistake of running a red at 12:30 a.m. in the city that never sleeps. When pulled over by the cops, they found a 9mm and three mags in his truck. Day told the cops he was a Navy SEAL but didn’t have any proof. As a result, he spent a day in Bellevue under psychiatric care. Until, that is, the Navy sent people to confirm he actually is a SEAL and got him the hell out of there. . .

According to nypost.com he was rambling incoherently during the traffic stop. Translation: he told the cops he was a SEAL, they didn’t believe him, figured he’s just a coked up wacko and dumped him at Bellevue. Charges against Day have been “deferred.” Translation: New York’s had enough bad publicity concerning their laughably restrictive firearms laws in the last month and they’d rather not charge an active duty SEAL with possession and suffer even more embarrassment. Look for the case to be quietly dropped.

[h/t Allen V.]

45 Responses to Latest NYC Gun Law Casualty: Navy SEAL

  1. avatarST says:

    The police arrest a serving member of the U.S. military for being armed and they book HIM for psych evaluation?

    This story should make for an interesting debrief when he gets back to base.

  2. avatarRalph says:

    According to nypost.com he was rambling incoherently.

    Sure, and according to Hizzoner, Da Douchebag, Goody’s headache powder is cocaine.

    • avatarGreg in Allston says:

      Hizzoner? I fully get the ironic historical point. But, seeing that I’m in a particularly pissy mood tonight, please allow me to interject the following regarding honor.

      My wife and I named our daughter Nora, because we both had Irish aunts and great aunts named Honora; from the Latin for honor. Both my wife and I have had numerous, long discussions with our daughter about the derivation and history of her name. Nora fully understands what her name is all about, and she takes it deeply to heart. And it is of no small point of pride to us that she does so.

      Like the Scout oath beginning with “On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country,”, our daughter embodies that ideal and that frame of mind. Honor is one of the keystones of Western Civilization.

      Bloomberg, Menino, Helmke, all of the other self appointed members of the felonious monks that is MAIG, et al, have no sense of honor that would pass muster with any sensible and educated citizen of this county. They are frauds and hucksters. They wouldn’t know honor if it came up and bit them on their collectivist asses.

  3. avatarCoyote Gray says:

    Unfortunately, my neighbor state to south, Massachusetts is just as bad.

    They probably would have still thrown the book at the kid. It’s exhausting dealing with the stupid. How do they all get elected to office?

    That said, this serviceman should be carrying his CAC (Military ID) at ALL times. So he is at least partially to blame.

    • avatarwaif says:

      Correct me if I’m wrong because I’ve never seen a SEAL’s ID card, but I doubt there’s anything on the ID the police could use to verify his story–it’s all on a chip. Oh well, minor point. I agree with you otherwise.

      • avatarTim says:

        SEAL’s are a unit (job, NEC, etc..) in the Navy, ID (CAC) card or not, it would not be something they “carry” with them generally. Perhaps a challenge coin – IDK. I find it odd that the SEAL in question would say that as a way of identifying himself, frankly.

        His CAC “may” have a sticker of the command he belongs to, maybe (not sure if they do that anymore or not).

        There is no “ID” for being a SEAL as far as I know… but they know each other, which is all that matters.

        • avatarHSR47 says:

          Among the military personnel I’ve talked with, challenge coins seem to be firmly in the realm of things that only REMF bother with.

        • avatarLeo Atrox says:

          Not necessarily true. But a challenge coin would never be accepted as unit identification either way.

    • avatar"Dr."Dave says:

      Even if he was, no way to tell if hes a SEAL or a POG.

  4. avatarRopingdown says:

    And when Hizzoner’s crowd ramble incoherently it’s just a typical Friday Night. Manhattan is driven by the politics of money, by people who’s greatest danger is making the wrong tax-method choices when they start a new off-shore fund. They dislike guns in the hands of anyone but cops and private security because they’re terribly concerned to make sure only the right people, generally poor, get shot. Steal funds from my commodity trading account? “We’ll look into it….no, really, we will.”

  5. avatarJSIII says:

    Trying to press charges against a SEAL, the group of people who killed OBL in NYC would be a political disaster, no doubt the charges were “deferred”. I agree with previous assertions it would be my bet the “I am a navy SEAL” claim is what got this guy into the loonie bin. I hope this SEALS military career is not damaged by this.

  6. avatarMatt Gregg says:

    Was this his navy issue m9 or a personal weapon? Assuming he was off duty, why was he carrying it around if it was his duty weapon?

    I’m a big fan of the SEALs and their service but does being an active military member excuse them from the various NY/NYC gun bans?

    • avatarJSIII says:

      I thought the SEALS used the P226(also 9mm)?

    • avatarAccur81 says:

      The SEALS can use whatever weapons they want because they shoot better and PT better than anyone else in the world. They carry weapons because they are always on someone’s sh!tlist, and even a SEAL can defend himself better with a gun than with a knife. Perhaps he should have taken them to the range, or a fire and movement course, and schooled them that way. This retarded NYC gun law clearly needs to go, and this SEAL is a hero yet again if he helps cause that to happen.

  7. avatarSilver says:

    If Al Qaeda attacked NYC again, would they be guilty of friendly fire?

  8. avatarTam 212 says:

    Well, he wasn’t a member of Bloomberg’s “private army”, was he?

  9. avatarGS650G says:

    I’m beginning to question if NYC deserves the service of the armed forces. They brag about having their own army, no need to use the federal stuff.

  10. avatarTam 212 says:

    Committing a moving traffic violation notwithstandinng, what’s the story on the vehicle search? Or did he disclose that he was armed when questioned?

    • avatarRick Boatright says:

      No officer, I do not consent to a search of my car. I will not do anything to interfere with anything you chose to do, but you do not have my permission to search my self or my car.

      I’m very sorry officer, but I’m afraid I can’t answer any further questions beyond my identification, which you have there, and that I was minding my own business driving. No, really, I can’t answer anything else without the advice of council.

    • avatarJustin says:

      +1

      I don’t see any PC there and I would hope it wasn’t in plain view.

      Maybe he consented?

  11. avatarspacecadetzoom says:

    As a soldier myself, I have a problem with this. But probably not in the way one may assume. What does being a navy seal have to do with breaking gun laws? True, the psych detention is unjust, but I’d he was takenin for gun law violations, why would w be exempt from them just because e was in the military? We’re not special, and I would hate to live in some banana republic where the military had additional rights over civilians. I feel a greater case of injustice in “special status” exemptions than I am in “sailor goes to jail for breaking the law.” This is from someone who’s not terribly deferent to the authority of cops, mind you (read: I hate pigs). Besides that huge issue, have you been to a gun store or gun show before? If I had a nickel for everyone who’s claimed to be a navy seal….

    • avatarHenry Bowman says:

      You forget that, to the gun grabbers, the military, along with police, are members of the sanctified class of “Only Ones” who should be allowed to carry weapons.

    • avatarTotenglocke says:

      “This is from someone who’s not terribly deferent to the authority of cops, mind you (read: I hate pigs).”

      Remind me, other than handing out traffic tickets, what’s the difference between a cop and a soldier?

      • avatarspacecadetzoom says:

        “Remind me, other than handing out traffic tickets, what’s the difference between a cop and a soldier?”
        A soldier has no authority over you. A soldier fights the enemy of the state. Police, ideally, serve and protect local citizens, but IMHO have to much “authority” given to them and often act as prison guards.

        • avatarTotenglocke says:

          Really? I think the times that US soldiers have been used to oppress US citizens suggests that they do have legal authority over citizens. As for “enemy of the state”, that’s anyone that a politician or the Department of Homeland Terrorism says is an enemy – so not really any different from how police can just fabricate a reason to attack / imprison anyone they please.

        • avatarAK says:

          A soldier takes an oath “to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.”

          So, when given an order that violates the Constitution, a soldier is required by law to disobey that order and is trained to do so.

          You don’t have to like soldiers, but I took an oath to serve sniveling punks like you and I would gladly give up my life for you to keep your freedoms. Have a nice day.

        • avatarTotenglocke says:

          “So, when given an order that violates the Constitution, a soldier is required by law to disobey that order and is trained to do so.”

          HAHAHAHAHA! Oh man, THAT was funny. I’ll believe that the day that Obama magically turns white in front of my eyes. We have a documented history of US troops being used to oppress and even murder US citizens by government command, and they did it gladly because that’s their job – to do kill anyone they’re told to kill. They’re like mercenaries, but without the morality to say “no” to a mission that’s doing something unjust.

          Tell me, how has raping and murdering some brown people that posed no threat to me all while racking up trillions of dollars of debt that I have to pay off (remember, your money is taken from my paycheck, so it’s impossible for you to pay taxes when your paycheck is provided from taxes) “serving” me or protecting my freedoms? Anyone who can read a history book can see that in the history of the US, only on a few occasions has the military been used to defend the US – the rest were all wars of aggression to try and grow the power of bureaucrats. Have you read the Constitution? If so, remember that pesky clause about how there shall be no standing army in a time of peace without explicit Congressional approval? Now, think about how our government has always manufactured a war since the end of WWII to justify keeping a large army around…..

        • avatarspacecadetzoom says:

          I like your vague “times.” What, Kent state? Bonus Army? THat’s two instances off the top of my head where the use of the military was wrong (go ahead cite some examples of your oppressive military, we have all day). Not the Army’s fault YOUR government used them. Besides, I think you’re missing my point. The military is used against the enemies of state. The police is to serve and protect. THe problem is the militarization of the police, and the power an individual cop wields over “mere” citizens–these two things are new inventions. A soldier, by legal definition and IN PRACTICE, does not have any authority over anyone not in the military. Posse Comitatus and all that jazz. You missed my point on “enemies of the state.” The military is used solely on those enemies–which is the very reason why they shouldn’t be used on american citizens! There has to be a difference between the police and military because of this. THe more authority we give police, the more we fund SWAT teams and armored cars, the more we are okay with the idea of doing anything a cop tells us to do, the more this line is blurred. THe more we have de facto military used on citizens. The further away we get from a policeman being a servant he was supposed to be. Slippery slope. No one has a problem with firefighters, public servants the same as cops. Perhaps it’s because inspecting your fire extinguishers isn’t the same as searching your private property. Only on one hand do you have public servants who have no ostensible authority over you while they serve and protect.

          I’ll use Kent State again. THose guardsmen were called by the governor, yet none had any authority over any student protestor. THe elected governor and the appointed police did. The Ohio National Guard was used as a faceless tool at the governor’s disposal, for manpower–no different than when the guard is called to put out forest fires. But here, wouldn’t you know, idiot soldiers, utilized in something they weren’t trained or prepared for, screwed up royally. I blame the idiot soldiers and the wrongheaded state gov. But the military as an institution? Being used in something it isn’t designed for?

          As for your ideas of “supporting and defending the constitution” and the ability of a soldier to choose to obey legal orders: You’ve shown you haven’t ever been anywhere near a soldier in the last 20 years. If you only knew the “barracks lawyer” shenanigans of joe, you would laugh at yourself, realizing just how empowered the individual soldier is. And you certainly haven’t figured out the difference between the Oath of Office and the Oath of Enlistment. It’s okay, many don’t. But a little academic study on your part will clear up why the oaths are different and what it has to do with defending the constitution vs obeying superiors.

          And I do love it when Americans wipe thier hands at the polcies of thier elected government. Yeah, I’m sure it was your district’s representative that opposed Iraq. Afghanistan. Funding the last 10 years. Right, it’s not you, you voted differently, sure, you’re hands are clean! Your Army goes where you tell it. It’s not generals that decide that.

          “only on a few occasions has the military been used to defend the US.” You are absolutely correct. It was always an Orwellian twist when the DEpartment of War became the Department of Defense. What many would like to sugar coat is the simple fact I’ve been emphasizing all along: the military is used to fight and win wars. That’s it. It’s used in policy to destroy the enemies of the state. Which is why there’s a problem with its usage on American citizens.

        • avatarTotenglocke says:

          “Not the Army’s fault YOUR government used them.”

          Priceless. You now backtrack on your claim of soldiers refusing to follow unjust orders and now say “Well, the government told us to!!”

          “You’ve shown you haven’t ever been anywhere near a soldier in the last 20 years. ”

          Actually, I have – hence my dislike of them. They think that they’re superior because they get paid to rape, pillage, and plunder and that us peasants should grovel at their feet.

          “But a little academic study on your part will clear up why the oaths are different and what it has to do with defending the constitution vs obeying superiors.”

          I never said they were the same. The other person mentioned how soldiers take an oath to kill anyone their told to blah blah and pretend that it has something to do with the Constitution. Regarding obeying superiors? That’s the very point I’m trying to make – you claim that soldiers won’t commit an unjust act because “they have a duty” not to, yet that’s been proven false time and again as soldiers hide behind the “just following orders” defense every time they’re caught.

          “And I do love it when Americans wipe thier hands at the polcies of thier elected government. Yeah, I’m sure it was your district’s representative that opposed Iraq. Afghanistan. Funding the last 10 years. Right, it’s not you, you voted differently, sure, you’re hands are clean! Your Army goes where you tell it. It’s not generals that decide that.”

          Right, because the fact that people like you join up to get paid to commit crimes has NOTHING to do with it. You were absolutely forced into this. *rolls eyes* If you think that people in the US have the slightest control over the government, than you’re horribly blind. We wouldn’t have the majority of the laws that we do that so many despise if citizens actually had any control over the government. You know who could exert control over the government? YOU. If the military simply refused to follow orders that were unjust or refused to serve a leader who pushes policies that are against the Constitution, things would change really quick. You wouldn’t even have to lift that heavy five pound rifle and pull the trigger – simply say “No”.

          “It’s used in policy to destroy the enemies of the state. Which is why there’s a problem with its usage on American citizens.”

          Except that the horribly corrupt government that YOU support (yes, the fact that you use a gun to defend them means that you support them – you can claim all day that you disagree with them, but you’re the force that provides them with a means to push their will on people) can simply declare anyone to be an enemy of the state for no reason.

        • avatarTSgt B says:

          Gosh, Toten, I only served for 20 years, so what would I know about it. And now you have me all depressed; I never got to “rape and pillage”. Guess I missed out on the fun by obeying lawful orders, and contesting unlawful ones. And doing humanitarian things to help out the local communities where I was stationed. And treating the locals in foreign countries, of whom we were invited guets, as I would like to be treated, and making many, many friends in foreign lands.

          I went to South Korea as a civilian contractor several years ago, and once our hosts learned I was retired U. S. military, they treated me like a king. And by showing them proper human decency and courtesy, I showed them that we are alla member of the same race; that would be human.

          Whatever your reasons for hating soldiers, thank God you live in a country that hass such fine people who will lay down their very lives to guarantee your right to be a jerk.

        • avatarTotenglocke says:

          “Whatever your reasons for hating soldiers, thank God you live in a country that hass such fine people who will lay down their very lives to guarantee your right to be a jerk.”

          And that arrogance is exactly one of those reasons. In the last 150 years, outside of fighting the Japanese in WWII, our wars have had fuck all to do with our freedoms and are all about pushing a political agenda, which you gladly go along with for a chance to kill some of those evil brown / yellow / non-Christian people. You then have the arrogance to come back and demand you be worshiped for your crimes. It’s utterly absurd.

  12. avatargreat unknown says:

    Just thinking that not only was the guy not irrational, but he was supremely rational and in control of himself. Otherwise, he might have left some broken police officers on the ground as he drove merrily off.

    Did the “rational” officers bother checking his claim by calling in his name and asking their Duty Officer to contact the navy? Or would that go against the shoot-first [or tase-first] approach of the NYPD? Based on the story, apparently somebody at Bellevue thought of doing that, at long last. But then, a high IQ is not a disqualifying factor for hospital staff like it is for police.

  13. avatarUS Paratroop-Mil Pol says:

    Ok.. let’s clear some of the smoke here… #1 If the individual was a Operator with a Seal team/detachment that is normally close hold information not something they go around bragging about and trying to use to get preferential treatment, as a matter of fact in the Army it is part of the Officer and NCO code… not to seek or accept favor due to position or rank. I have served most of my career along side the “Quiet Professionals” of the US Army and I have never heard any of them try to use “I’m a Green Beret, or I’m Delta” to get out of a ticket and I have pulled over a few.. #2 I understand that he was stopped for running a red light… what else was he doing that gave the Police Officer “probable cause” to search his vehicle? Did he ask the “Seal” for a consent search?, if so why did the dummy give premission, a simple “No” would have meant that the cop would have had to get a Search Warrant and show PC to get it.. I’ve served 20 yrs as a Military Policeman and Paratrooper and if I get pulled on my way home and the Officer asks to search my vehicle …. I will say NO, and ask what his Probable Cause is? Mind you there is nothing illegal in my truck.. I have a CCW and have for well over a decade, but I am not allowing a search of my property willingly. That’s my two cents on this dummy. PS<<<<< If he was a "SEAL" I bet he's not anymore…not for running a Red Light but for running his mouth and the weapons charge.

    • avatarTotenglocke says:

      “as a matter of fact in the Army it is part of the Officer and NCO code… not to seek or accept favor due to position or rank. ”

      What the official rules are and what the actual conduct are have little relation to each other (this applies in pretty much everything in life – just look at politicians taking an oath to uphold the Constitution).

      As for the search? Who said he consented? This is NYC – when you have half a dozen high school dropouts pointing guns at you, you really don’t have the option of refusing a search.

      • avatarRalph says:

        When it comes to jackbooted thuggery, ATF has nothing on the NYPD. I don’t remember any of the charming ATF agents ramming a plunger handle up anyone’s a$$ recently. The “Seal” is lucky to be alive and still have his, uh, manhood.

    • avatargreat unknown says:

      I suspect this is how it went down, especially after noting that he was not accused of having a loaded gun, rather a gun a 3 magazines. He was driving through NY, legally carrying an empty weapon with the magazines in a separate compartment, as per federal law. However, this is only an affirmative defense – meaning that in NY especially, the arrest you, indict you, and then you have to defend yourself using that law. You will get off, but it costs you.

      Why he mentioned he’s a SEAL: because the cops asked him what he was doing with a weapon.

      Suggestion: make the law on unimpeded carry through a state subject to a section 1983 federal suit. NYC has plenty of spare cash to pay out for that.

      As for the red-light violation: I suspect he made a right turn on red, which is legal in all civilized parts of the US.

      In short, I suspect he did nothing wrong, and there’s no reason to call him an idiot. I would give the SEAL the benefit of the doubt of the NYPD any day. In fact, after being forced to live there for ten years, I would give Al Franken the benefit of the doubt over them – barely.

      The PTSD – possibly from the treatment during the arrest. And to set up a lawsuit against the city. I hope.

  14. avatarmichael says:

    I just wanted to thank the men and woman taking that OATH and taking it to the upmost honor….. THANK U…. FOR UR SERVICE. to help keep my right. I will stand with u ….. S high school drop didn’t allow me to serve my country. But the need to work and provided for my family reason I drop out. Did stop ne from learning… I stand for the US Constitution 2nd amendment. And have a mosin nagant 91/30…. I am 33 and been n trouble with the law a few times. Nothing real bad., but when I was 18 got a damestic assault first time. Never had another D.A. PI once and a seatbelt ticket……. Still today I am not allow to buy a weapon… Rifle gun ect.

    • avatarPatrick says:

      Huh?

    • avatarBCM MIDDY says:

      So your “Still today I am not allow to buy a weapon… Rifle gun ect’”

      and then publicly state you have a Mosin?

      Maybe take some night classes? Basic spelling and grammar….

      God help you if your found with that Mosin, thats pretty much a instant 10 years in a Federal Pen

  15. avatarbontai Joe says:

    I read the New York Post report and they say the Navy took Mr. Day to be evaluated for PTSD. That indicates to me that more was going on than just a running a red light.

  16. avatarJohn says:

    It is also a good reason to get d/c from the psych ward, i.e. we will have our specialists evaluate him. Save the taxpayers of NY some money.

  17. avatarJ. Sanchez says:

    Little do they realize, this guy really is a wacko and has been rambling some off the wall stuff since the return from his last deployment. He has been a danger to himself, and those around him. Bellevue never should have released him. Just because he is a SEAL, does NOT make him a “hero”. Thanks America for the patriotism, but in this case, might want to save it.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.