LaGuardia Cops Fail to Arrest Gun Owner

tsa27n-1-web

Gun control is an insidious business. Despite the large number of states that have restored firearms freedom post-Newtown, gun control business is good. Several states have passed “assault weapons” and “high capacity” ammunition magazine bans. Expanded background checks (a.k.a., gun registration) are expanding; Mayor Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety has allocated a million dollars for a ballot initiative in Nevada. The funny thing is . . .

The majority of these unconstitutional gun control laws remain unenforced.

We still don’t know how many Empire State residents failed to register their modern sporting rifles with the state police, in defiance of New York’s ironically named SAFE Act. There are thousands. And none of them have been visited by the po-po. Same deal in Maryland.

In Colorado, there hasn’t been a single arrest for [now] illegal 15+ round ammunition magazines. Well, not on its own. In the Rocky Mountain state as elsewhere, cops add newfangled firearms charges to arrests for other offenses. But they’re not going to gun ranges or knocking on doors to check mag capacity.

Why would they? The government knows that enforcing dumb-ass gun control laws (to use the legal term) on otherwise law-abiding citizens would be a public relations disaster. If enforcement goes wrong, it could start a backlash of Biblical proportions.

So cops ignore the gun control laws they’ve sworn to uphold and prosecutors exercise Obamian prosecutorial discretion. Check this from New York:

A 94-year-old Brooklyn man was nabbed at La Guardia Airport with a loaded gun strapped to his belt, the TSA said Wednesday.

The unidentified man had a permit for the weapon and was not arrested, a Port Authority source told the Daily News.

He walked through security with the gun, which set off the metal detector. He was allowed to board his flight to West Palm Beach, Fla., but not before PA officials confiscated the weapon. The gun was loaded with six bullets, the TSA said.

The man will have to appear at a hearing when he returns.

Presuming you’re not a nonagenarian, you can bet your bottom dollar you’d be arrested, jailed, prosecuted and convicted for the same offense. Your gun rights would be gone. As would a significant chunk of your time and money. But because the airport gun schlepper in question was in his 90’s he gets a pass. Ish.

On one hand, it’s a good thing that many gun control laws resemble blue laws in blue states. On the other hand, they’re a unreliably dormant cancer on residents’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. Remember: German gun registration laws were not abused until the Nazis assumed power. And then by God they were.

Godwin’s Law be damned; the same thing will happen here.

comments

  1. avatar Bob Wall says:

    Ninety-four year old Empire Stater going to Florida – That hearing must be scheduled for June…

    Other than that, someone call Bloomie a “Wa-a-a-ambulance”!

    1. avatar Bob says:

      Godwin’s law is bullshit. Anyone who uses it as an argument is a fool who really has no argument. Sure, many threads go south in that way, but just mentioning you-know-what doesn’t necessarily make the poster’s argument flawed.

      1. Yeah, and what if the original topic is actually about the Nazis?

  2. avatar Leadbelly says:

    One of the very few advantages to becoming an old fart is the willingness of most people to let our little peculiarities slide.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Yup — except when one of those little peculiarities is walking around with our fly unzipped.

      1. avatar Jay-El says:

        I don’t call mine a little peculiarity. But to each his own.

  3. avatar jwm says:

    Why did they hassle him? That aint a gun. It don’t have a hi-cap clipazine or a shoulder thingy that goes up. No lights, bells or whistles. How dangerous can it be?

  4. avatar Don says:

    Mebbe a little slow on the draw, but he can have the aisle seat next to me on any filght…..

  5. avatar Piet Padkos says:

    94 years old and going to Florida…

    He ain’t coming back.

  6. avatar viper2actual says:

    One crucial fact about the idiotic 15 round magazine limit in Colorado – all of your 30+ round magazines are grandfathered in if you owned them prior to 01 July 2013. Two salient points:

    1. Most county sheriffs in CO (those elected, not appointed) have made it clear that they will ignore the stupid law.

    2. The burden of proof is on the STATE to prove that you did NOT own your “high capacity” magazine prior to the cutoff date – a virtual impossibility.

    Disassembled 30 round AK and AR mags are readily available over the counter in some smaller shops. I’m sometimes at the range with LEOs around, who never say a peep about my 30 round mags.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      It same in California, but I think the cut-off date is 2001. OTOH, police have been known to confiscate them anyway as a “nuisance.” And rebuild kits have recently been banned, and charges filed against the importers.

      1. avatar styrgwillidar says:

        I know some folks in law enforcement in a major metropolitan CA city. They won’t enforce the restricted capacity mag or bullet button laws, unless it involves a gang-banger. Than it’s one more thing to throw on the pile of charges…

        1. avatar Drew says:

          That is iMovie not a good thing and may in fact be part of “the plan” on the part of the grabbers. Most of these nonsense laws are only used to pile on charges against criminals or to bust them on something when the real crime can’t be prosecuted. Ten for possession when 25-life can’t be reliably had May sound like a win but from all angles it is a loss for us. They are bogus distortions of the law where the supposed intent of the law and the application are not remotely related, every thug locked up validates these laws in the public eye and even casts the bill of rights they bypass in a negative light. And lastly it creates a nearly tangible relation between the weapons them selves and the criminality of those possessing them. As the imperative shifts from locking up someone we “know” is a killer we can’t convict for that crime to using the law to crush the POTG one at a time using minor crimes and infractions as cover the general population will tend to see the prosecuted in the same light as the thug. It is a setup for misdirection and even if mass convictions never materialize such laws are ideal for targeting and destroying political enemies activist leaders or anyone deemed troublesome.

        2. avatar Drew says:

          Have no clue where ‘iMovie’ came from :/

      2. avatar IdahoPete says:

        I was in the PRCa in 1991, when they passed their first “assault weapons ban”. The state estimated there were 300,000 firearms that met the ban criteria. Guess how many were registered? 30,000. I bet that 10% figure is pretty close for most of these new state bans. And this doesn’t include the “assault weapons” that could be made legal by removing the flash hider, such as the Mini-14.

    2. avatar Jake Tallman says:

      Yep. I live in Durango (Southwest Colorado), and I’ve seen plenty of Magpul 30 rounders for sale at the many local gun shops around here, and nobody even bats an eye.

  7. avatar Tomer1962 says:

    dddddddddddddddddddddd

  8. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    Understand too that the folks that haven’t registered or disposed of their modern sporting rifles and know that they’re breaking the law are most likely going to keep quiet about it. They’ll keep quiet about other issues as well so as to not attract attention to themselves. Thus they become subservient in their exercise of other rights so as not to be thrown in jail at the whim of the tyrants. Whether the guns are turned in or not, the tyrants win.

  9. avatar Ralph says:

    “Gun? Oh, geez, I thought it was my urostomy bag.”

    Works every time.

  10. avatar Hannibal says:

    He “had a permit”? Did he have a regular NYS permit (which has no legal weight in NYC) or a special NYPD Commish-approved permit?

    If the latter, I guarantee you this guy is connected up the whazoo and that’s why he got away unscathed.

    1. avatar Rick says:

      Egg-zactly.

      1. avatar DJ9 says:

        I was thinking retired cop. I’ll be interesting to see if it ever does come to trial.

    2. avatar John M. says:

      Bingo. They didn’t let him off because he’s 94. They let him off because he’s Bloomberg’s or Giuliani’s uncle or something. I’m sure the hearing will be cancelled before it’s held. Worst-case, the judge will give him a stern talking-to, he’ll promise not to do it again as long as he lives, and then they’ll go out for cocktails afterwards.

      This is one of the reasons why most shall-issue states have lots of restrictive laws about where you can carry a gun, and most may-issue states have very few. (In my own constitutional carry state, it’s criminal trespass to carry a gun into an establishment where management has given “reasonable notice” that guns aren’t permitted. What’s reasonable notice? I’m sure the jury will let you know their verdict.) In may-issue states, the only people who “may” carry guns are the elite and the glitterati, and nobody wants to be the guy who accidentally arrested Bobby DeNiro for carrying his 1911 while voting or something.

  11. avatar Cliff H says:

    Not sure who Godwin is/was, or who gave him the authority to pass a law that suppresses the rest of us, but fvck him.

    If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, call it a damn Nazi and Godwin be damned.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Godwin’s law (or Godwin’s Rule of Nazi Analogies)is an Internet adage asserting that “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1″—​ that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism. So you have followed Godwin’s law to the T.

      1. avatar Rick says:

        And by common agreement the first person to mention either Hitler or Nazism is considered to have lost the argument.

      2. avatar Southerner says:

        The term “assault rifle” is a translation of the German word sturmgewehr. Indeed, the name was coined by none other than Adolf Hitler! Therefore, any political use of the term “assault rifle” to promote gun control is a defacto Nazi analogy under Godwin’s Rule.

    2. avatar jwm says:

      Wow, that was random.

    3. avatar ThomasR says:

      Yep; it’s just the liberal/progressive/statists attempt to stop us from pointing out the “obviousness of truth”.

      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        The truth being, of course, that every topic on the internet is the same as murdering literally millions in an attempt at genocide.

        1. avatar ThomasR says:

          Umm,yeah. There already has been over 50 million murdered in this country. It is called abortions.

          If you can rationalize the murder of the most helpless among us( an unborn child) it is a very small step to rationalize the mass murder of those of us that have survived the womb.

          These same people routinely call for the mass round up and imprisonment of gun owners. Some even call for the mass murder of POTG.

          That is very much Nazi like.

        2. avatar Grindstone says:

          I’m going to come up with a new “Godwin’s Law” except instead of Nazi’s, the topic is abortion:

          “As an online discussion with a conservative grows longer, the probability of a mention of abortion approaches 1″

        3. avatar Glenn says:

          Grindstone’s law sounds good to me.

        4. avatar Hannibal says:

          @Thomas

          Maybe for you; speak for yourself.

        5. avatar SteveInCO says:

          “As an online discussion with a conservative grows longer, the probability of a mention of abortion approaches 1″

          Especially when it’s utterly, completely irrelevant.

        6. avatar Rick says:

          ^
          +10

          Although their desperate attempts to tie it to the present thread are sometimes amusing.

        7. avatar DonHo says:

          As an ardent gun owner and proponent of the second amendment I find it laughable that you all can be so easily swayed into irrelevant topics of discussion. That being said I do find some merit to the jackwagons standpoint on abortion. If you do not want them, do not breed them. All life is sacred and should be protected as such until such time as it has reached an age of independence, IMHO. After that all bets are off. There are too many people in this world, but everyone of them deserves to die on their feet. Preferably armed.

  12. avatar John S says:

    The SAFE act, like the Affordable Care Act, are not ironically named, they are Orwellian named.

    1. avatar Rick says:

      Or Kafkaesque.

  13. avatar Steve says:

    He should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If the legislature wants to amend the law to exempt those over a certain age from it, so be it. Until they do, let justice be blind.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      You’re just jelly because you’re only 93.

    2. avatar Rick says:

      B-b-b-but the gun only had 6 “bullets”!

      1. avatar Piet Padkos says:

        That’s why he got off so easy, no gunpowder or casings.

  14. avatar Tom says:

    Godwin`s Law has been suspended for the simple reason that our government is exercising power (NSA surveillance, ACA, executive orders, IRS and other agency abuse) that in some aspects Hitler could only wish.

  15. avatar Mediocrates says:

    In other words, they will only enforce them when they want to grind you under their heels. Got tyranny?

  16. avatar Roymond says:

    So what we need is a national law that says state laws restricting firearms only apply to people who used one to commit a crime — and by “used”, I don’t mean made visible, but actually fired in an act of aggression.

    Really, we need a new Militia Act, one that would allow totally constitutional carry by anyone who’s a member of an organized militia. Proof of membership would consist of a picture ID issued by either a state, county, or the militia. Such militias would have to be registered with the state of jurisdiction, with the only information given to the state being the names of the officers and proof that training in safety and use was made available to members at least once a year — no membership lists, no firearms lists, no address, no location where shooting gets done.
    Pass that one, and I bet we’d see ten thousand organized militias spring up before a month had passed — every local NRA group, Blue Steel Democrats group, shooting club, Pink Pistols chapter, JPFO groups, SAF, GOA, etc. would jump at it.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      ” Such militias would have to be registered with the state of jurisdiction…”

      Let me tell you some of the mischief governments get up to when you try to register something they don’t want (we can start with the Machinegun registry)…

      1. avatar Rick says:

        Governments cannot be trusted with such information.

    2. avatar Drew says:

      Nope, that’s unconstitutional. The 2nd states that the need for a militia is the justification for there being no restriction on the people’s armament. The militia being directed by the government is a threat to the people and so to mitigate that threat the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It is not as often asserted meant to allow the people to be armed so they may serve in the militia. It is also not impacted whatsoever by the current standing army or other assertions that the traditional militia is obsolete, the right to keep and bear arms was intended to protect against the aggression of the government. The fact that the government is far better armed than the founders imagined only makes the wholly unregulated right to bear arms that much more imperative.

  17. avatar janklow says:

    “We still don’t know how many Empire State residents failed to register their modern sporting rifles with the state police, in defiance of New York’s ironically named SAFE Act. There are thousands. And none of them have been visited by the po-po. Same deal in Maryland.”

    …Maryland’s new AWB did not mandate a new level of registration, so what are we talking about here?

  18. avatar GS650G says:

    94 years old and he probably shoots better than anyone in the NYPD

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email