Plaxico how did he shoot himself ?

[SA Friday]

Before we see the back and forth arguments (which nobody is going to win, I hope you all understand?)...

A question for the members of the bar...

Any chance of the NY or NYC laws getting put to the test here (Heller or similar) ? I am doubting it just based on it not being the proper vehicle.

A HAH! Finally, someone got there. DC vs Heller ruling + 14th Ammendment + CCW from another state = ???? Now spice it up with the sexy media angle of a football star and all the recent acts of violence of other football fugures. I would not be suprised if some lobbying org assisted in some form or fashion in the defense. What an opportunity to make some "baggage along the way" as Kennedy put it. It's not the standard clean-cut average joe that the NRA likes to get involved in, but it's an opportunity.

[mdstihl]

I didn't like laxico even when he played for the Steelers, so I'm biased. He's been a problem child pretty much is whole career. I'm not surprised that 1, he was carrying in a nightclub and 2, that he's not smart enough to unload a Glock without shooting himself.

While I agree we all have the right to self-defense, I don't think firearms and alcohol mix too well, especially in a club scene. Since I'm a private citizen instead of LE, I believe that even though I'm carrying, it's my responsibility to not deliberately put myself in bad situations, such as stopping for gas in the ghetto instead of driving 10 more blocks to the nice section; just simple stuff like that.

All that being said, I can understand pro athletes feeling the need to be "strapped in" with recent events. But aren't they usually traveling with their posse?

[bbbean]

Before we see the back and forth arguments (which nobody is going to win, I hope you all understand?)...

A question for the members of the bar...

Any chance of the NY or NYC laws getting put to the test here (Heller or similar) ? I am doubting it just based on it not being the proper vehicle.

I'm not a member of the bar, but I belly up to one on a regular basis. I did, however, just see charges of Possesion of a Loaded Firearm While Intoxicated (a felony in MO) dropped based on Heller. The pleas and ruling made for some interesting reading.

Of course, I suspect there's a vastly different legal culture in NYC than there is here in Southeast Missouri.

drunkwgun.pdf

[racerba]

Any chance of the NY or NYC laws getting put to the test here (Heller or similar) ?

I was thinking the same thing. Will the NRA/ILA use this as a test case? Yes, Heller to be specific.

[chp5]

This is going to be the most ridiculous example of media-driven "punishment completely out of proportion to the crime" that we've seen yet.

You watch, they'll stick stupid Plaxico in jail for a year or two, and it will wind up costing him his career. All for an act of stupidity that was committed with no intent to cause harm to anybody.

Meanwhile, true criminal behavior is ignored by various authorities all over the place.

+1. Worth reading again fellas . . . The most important part being " All for an act of stupidity that was committed with no intent to cause harm to anybody. Meanwhile, true criminal behavior is ignored by various authorities all over the place."

This is the NY [or substitute _______] gov't at work . . .

FLEX - The 2A applies to the Fed Govt and DC. There is not yet a case applying it against the states. The SCOTUS has ruled that some of the other rights set forth in the Bill of Rights do apply to the states, but no 2A case yet.

Side notes:

1. The NY mandatory sentencing and felony status of a victimless crime is cruel and unusual IMO. My opinion and $0.25 will only get you a lollipop, however.

2. Some states, like my beloved Georgia, have the 2A language in the state constitution. As a practical matter, the Heller decision and the 2A will then apply in those states without the need for a Fed court ruling that the 2A applies to the states at large. This is an over-simplification, but still valid at a high level IMO.

3. Plexico is a coddled, over-paid, ego-maniac pimp who is hardly a sympathetic character or a poster-boy for civil rights. However, that is less important than the issue - that a man who did not threaten anyone and is only guilty of stupidity may be convicted of a felony with excessive mandatory sentencing - while, [as Carmoney writes] "true criminal behavior is ignored by various authorities all over the place."

Ernesto Miranda (who's name is used in the well-know Miranda Warning ("you have the right to remain silent . . . )) was a complete piece of sh*t - a vagrant, drunk, and multiple time loser who was arrested for robbery and rape. Plexico ain't that bad . . .

While I am a member of the Bar, I'm a corporate attorney representing software companies in business transactions. I don't even know where the courthouse is . . .

Maybe some of the real attorneys here will chime in.

Edited December 4, 2008 by chp5

[CDRODA396]

-He chose to carry despite the local laws that denied him the right to do so...MANY PEOPLE DO.

-He failed to maintain the proper "No Vis" posture that most of the "Many" from the above statement do, unless faced with greivous bodily harm or death, then they make the Judged by 12 decision...

-If he, based on his "celebrity" was at a higher risk than the average citizen, or just felt the need, then based on his overinflated salary for what he does (and that is a WHOLE other discussion) he should have hired an armed personal security detachment...

-Unfortunately, now that he acted the fool that I believe him to be, he will use that same overinflated salary to hire a lawyer, for well over what the PSD would have originally cost, and walk away from a crime that anyone else would already be convicted of and serving out time.

-He should pay, and not with his checkbook for being an idiot, and bringing attention to him being an idiot, and possibly having a negative impact on my life long passion (firearms), because he doesnt really care about anything or one but himself.

-My 7 Kuwaiti Dinars (KD) worth

Edited December 4, 2008 by CDRODA396

[Flexmoney]

FLEX - The 2A applies to the Fed Govt and DC. There is not yet a case applying it against the states. The SCOTUS has ruled that some of the other rights set forth in the Bill of Rights do apply to the states, but no 2A case yet.

Right... A case like this one would likely be the next step?

[Sac Law Man]

From the CA penal code

12025. (a) A person is guilty of carrying a concealed firearm when

he or she does any of the following:

(1) Carries concealed within any vehicle which is under his or her

control or direction any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable

of being concealed upon the person.

(2) Carries concealed upon his or her person any pistol, revolver,

or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.

(3) Causes to be carried concealed within any vehicle in which he

or she is an occupant any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable

of being concealed upon the person.

( Carrying a concealed firearm in violation of this section is

punishable, as follows:

(1) Where the person previously has been convicted of any felony,

or of any crime made punishable by this chapter, as a felony.

(2) Where the firearm is stolen and the person knew or had

reasonable cause to believe that it was stolen, as a felony.

(3) Where the person is an active participant in a criminal street

gang, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 186.22, under the

Street Terrorism Enforcement and Prevention Act (Chapter 11

(commencing with Section 186.20) of Title 7 of Part 1), as a felony.

(4) Where the person is not in lawful possession of the firearm,

as defined in this section, or the person is within a class of

persons prohibited from possessing or acquiring a firearm pursuant to

Section 12021 or 12021.1 of this code or Section 8100 or 8103 of the

Welfare and Institutions Code, as a felony.

(5) Where the person has been convicted of a crime against a

person or property, or of a narcotics or dangerous drug violation, by

imprisonment in the state prison, or by imprisonment in a county

jail not to exceed one year, by a fine not to exceed one thousand

dollars ($1,000), or by both that imprisonment and fine.

(6) By imprisonment in the state prison, or by imprisonment in a

county jail not to exceed one year, by a fine not to exceed one

thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment if

both of the following conditions are met:

(A) Both the pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being

concealed upon the person and the unexpended ammunition capable of

being discharged from that firearm are either in the immediate

possession of the person or readily accessible to that person, or the

pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon

the person is loaded as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 12031.

( The person is not listed with the Department of Justice

pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision © of Section 11106, as the

registered owner of that pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable

of being concealed upon the person.

[GentlemanJim]

FLEX - The 2A applies to the Fed Govt and DC. There is not yet a case applying it against the states. The SCOTUS has ruled that some of the other rights set forth in the Bill of Rights do apply to the states, but no 2A case yet.

Right... A case like this one would likely be the next step?

I would prefer that a case used would not include criminal violations in its content.

These are not the Droids we are looking for

Jim

[el pres]

FLEX - The 2A applies to the Fed Govt and DC. There is not yet a case applying it against the states. The SCOTUS has ruled that some of the other rights set forth in the Bill of Rights do apply to the states, but no 2A case yet.

Right... A case like this one would likely be the next step?

I would prefer that a case used would not include criminal violations in its content.

These are not the Droids we are looking for

Jim

Nothing is perfect, I like where you guys are going with this ...

As for California, I stand well corrected, appearently the story I heard had some parts missing ??

Edited to add:found out that the story I had mentioned did have something missing, the individual was under

21 which made his possesion illegal ...

So from what I'm reading, in California you could have an empty gun in the waistband, an empty mag in your right front pocket, and an unopened box of whitebox in your left front pocket and your carrying a loaded weapon ??

Edited December 4, 2008 by DIRTY CHAMBER

[Flexmoney]

FLEX - The 2A applies to the Fed Govt and DC. There is not yet a case applying it against the states. The SCOTUS has ruled that some of the other rights set forth in the Bill of Rights do apply to the states, but no 2A case yet.

Right... A case like this one would likely be the next step?

I would prefer that a case used would not include criminal violations in its content.

These are not the Droids we are looking for

Jim

Immaterial, I believe. For example:

Ernesto Arturo Miranda (March 9, 1941 – January 31, 1976) was a laborer whose conviction on kidnapping, rape, and armed robbery charges based on his confession under police interrogation resulted in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case (Miranda v. Arizona), which ruled that criminal suspects must be informed of their right against self-incrimination and their right to consult with an attorney prior to questioning by police. This warning is known as a Miranda warning.

[Flexmoney]

The Chicago gun case seems like it could have some legs?

Seems well written, but what do I know...

http://www.chicagoguncase.com/wp-content/u...gment_brief.pdf

[ffl]

Before we see the back and forth arguments (which nobody is going to win, I hope you all understand?)...

A question for the members of the bar...

Any chance of the NY or NYC laws getting put to the test here (Heller or similar) ? I am doubting it just based on it not being the proper vehicle.

is this an OK to get on the 2nd bandwagon/soapbox???

[Flexmoney]

Before we see the back and forth arguments (which nobody is going to win, I hope you all understand?)...

A question for the members of the bar...

Any chance of the NY or NYC laws getting put to the test here (Heller or similar) ? I am doubting it just based on it not being the proper vehicle.

is this an OK to get on the 2nd bandwagon/soapbox???

You know what? Every so often I'd like the opportunity to participate and share in a legit discussion. Instead, I am often tasked with shepherding those that come on here and can't find the strength (or respect) to bite their tongues and follow the forum rules. Lord knows that the volunteer moderating team here had to go above and beyond to get us through the presidential election and keep the forum civil...and focused on it's reason for being here...the shooting. (and they aren't complaining...I'm just sounding their horn)

So, no... this isn't (nor has the forum ever been) a place to soapbox. Besides, where is the logic in preaching to the choir.

We have before us an issue that might be nice to discuss. It's not about soapboxes, pass receptions, pants or posses. If a person can't grasp those ideas...then they are missing the point of the discussion...and probably ought to sit this one out.

[ffl]

darn the bad luck,

well said and i will respect that.

for what it is worth "he was stupid to throw away a great paying job for some bling protecting" can you say "ear biter"

[ShaunH]

His right to self defense went out the window when he intentionally broke the law...

I would be incline to agree if the law that was broken was a law that deals with the perp violating someone else's rights. In this case, the law that was broken was a feel good law that violate ones right to self defense.

“All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.”

Marbury vs. Madison 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)

I think if we want to attack his intelligence or lack thereof, it should be based on how he was carrying his weapon.

[tightloop]

This is going to be the most ridiculous example of media-driven "punishment completely out of proportion to the crime" that we've seen yet. Even more so than the Michael Vick deal. You watch, they'll stick stupid Plaxico in jail for a year or two, and it will wind up costing him his career. All for an act of stupidity that was committed with no intent to cause harm to anybody. Meanwhile, true criminal behavior is ignored by various authorities all over the place.

don't give him a pass or even a pertial pass because he is a sports celeb...the guyis an over paid pimp who wants to play the big man by carrying a pistol...ignorance of the law is NO excuse...guilty on several counts...a stint in jail or the pen would probably do wonders for his attitude and his appreciation of what he ONCE had...

[bbbean]

This is going to be the most ridiculous example of media-driven "punishment completely out of proportion to the crime" that we've seen yet. Even more so than the Michael Vick deal. You watch, they'll stick stupid Plaxico in jail for a year or two, and it will wind up costing him his career. All for an act of stupidity that was committed with no intent to cause harm to anybody. Meanwhile, true criminal behavior is ignored by various authorities all over the place.

don't give him a pass or even a pertial pass because he is a sports celeb...the guyis an over paid pimp who wants to play the big man by carrying a pistol...ignorance of the law is NO excuse...guilty on several counts...a stint in jail or the pen would probably do wonders for his attitude and his appreciation of what he ONCE had...

If acting like a "big man" or being a jerk was a crime, I bet most of us would have a few prison tattoos of our own. He doesn't deserve a pass, but he doesn't deserve 3.5 yrs, huge fines, and the loss of a career for being a stupid jerk.

Consider - if he'd been driving on an expired license and ran into a tree, he would have committed the same crime as far as public safety is concerned, but he'd be looking at a reasonable fine in traffic court and higher insurance rates.

[Jake Di Vita]

I don't think a single person here believes he should get a pass because he's a "sports celeb." This could just as easily have been some average joe that made a few mistakes.

Just because he's a high paid athlete does NOT mean he should fry - regardless of how horrible and lawless you assume he is.

Bottom line is, it's too damn easy to judge someone looking from the outside in - ESPECIALLY when you have already made up your mind the instant you catch wind of it....No one here knows the real reason why he did what he did. Saying he's a overpaid pimp who wants to play big man is more than just an ignorant statement...unless of course you personally know him and have talked with him on the matter. But somehow I doubt you have.

Why don't we try and keep this to facts as much as possible.

[Miranda]

allow me to predict the future.

NY city will drop all weapon charges.

they might give our famous and wealthy man the equivalent of a traffic ticket.

end of prediction.

There is no way anyone who wants the current gun laws in NY to be tossed out.

edit...

there is no way anyone who wants the current gun laws in NY will do anything

that might cause them to be tossed out.

...end edit

They are very much like the laws in DC and will likely be found

to not pass constitutional muster for many of the same reasons.

Given that a lot of money is at stake, it will be fought.

a question of who blinks first.

Edited December 5, 2008 by Miranda

[Neomet]

Agghhh... can't sit on sidelines anymore.....

Just my .02

I think a fair number of gun laws are unfairly restrictive at a minimum and at worse unconstitutional. I also believe however that we all must live by the rule of law. Not just the ones that we like, or believe in, think are constitutional or suit our purpose at the moment. You are so rich or wear so much bling that you feel you are exempt from the law? Really? I'm sorry, can you point me to the gross income level or carat weight I need to have to score the "get out of jail free card" ? Hate the gun laws in your state so you choose to ignore them? Fine, do it but understand that your are violating the law. Be comfortable with that and don't start crying if you get cuffed. Personally, I know you are a nice guy and are only violating the law because you need to, but the courts probably won't share my insight into your fine character.

Lets pretend for a moment that the person in question here was not a wanna-be badboy who in reality is, as others have pointed out, simply a candyass overpaid celebrity. Lets say instead it was a real conviction free tough guy with no license to carry, a loaded Glock and an attitude. Would we all be so quick to defend his right to illegally carry a loaded gun into a nightclub because he was worried that other thugs might be looking for him and he had a lot of cash? No flipping way, and the law applies (or should) equally to the tough guy and the pretender, the poor schmuck from Taco Bell and the rich media darling.

Descends soapbox.....

edited because I couldn't spell Glock. How messed up is that??

Edited December 5, 2008 by Neomet

[chp5]

Saying he's a overpaid pimp who wants to play big man is more than just an ignorant statement...unless of course you personally know him and have talked with him on the matter. But somehow I doubt you have.

Why don't we try and keep this to facts as much as possible.

Well, there are facts and relevant facts. His public behavior on multiple occasions demonstrate the behavior of a self-absorbed jerk. He and many pro athletes are overpaid IMO. I don't have to personally know him to have a valid opinion on that. However, IMO those are not relevant facts to his arrest.

What matters to me is that the NY law he is charged with breaking [without any intent to threaten or hurt anyone else] is punitive, over-reaching and possibly unconstitutional.

It bothers me that - like him or not (which I don't) - the government can take away a man's freedom, livelihood and career when he had no intent to and did not hurt another man. Those are the relevant facts IMO. YMMV.

[JKSNIPER]

He brought an illegally posessed weapon into a crowded club where he commenced to have an accidental discharge (fortunately) into his own leg.

He could have just as easily shot and killed/injured someone else.

Minimum he should be charged with is :

1. Illegal Posession of a handgun

2. Reckless Endangerment

3. Hindering prosecution

4. Tampering with evidence

5. Conspiracy

Not because hes a spoiled overpaid sports star (those "facts" are irrelavent to what he did) but because he posessed an illegal handgun in a crowded club and accidntally fired it and then gave the weapon to a friend to "hide" it. Once he involved his friend in tampering with evidence it became a conspiracy and hindered prosecution.

I AGREE with the majority of opinions here that NY weapons laws are less than admirable.

I live under them and do not like them any more than anyone else here.

As an LE officer I find myself frequently defending the 2nd amendment to my fellow officers as well as supervisors....however...I FIRMLY believe in the law.

If one has an issue with the law there are socially acceptable means to express ones displeasure with the law through petition, assembly, protest, etc....

Do NOT break the law to express your displeasure in it.

Rather get involved with the various organizations that fight for our rights under the second amendment.

Its hard to defend the 2nd amend when a less than intelligent person commits an act like thisone.

Those that support the bans on firearms ownership will use this as "proof" that you are more likely to be injured with your own weapon than by a criminals action. Also there will almost certainly be a push for a complete ban to "make us all safe".

I will still support the 2nd amend with all the fervor I can but things like this make it hard to prevail in arguements.

JK

[Miranda]

hi JKSNIPER,

Two things

crimes comitted

and

defending 2nd amendment

I don't see the two are in contention.

Allow me to point out that the _first_ crime you list

is the starting point for the rest. That is to say if the first one is not a crime

the rest can't be crimes. nothing to cover up....

I know Martha Stewart(sp) proves otherwise.... and I think that was wrong also.

I decided the reckless one is very much a judgement call and so I am ignoring it

for this thread.

So the only real question to worry about is whether or not the second

amendment right is being violated by the NY firearms laws.

If you feel those laws are within the meaning of that right,

then the man at the NY Club with a firearm should be punished.

being a dumass is not a crime by itself.

Otherwise we'd all have done some time.

miranda

[Sac Law Man]

Dirty Chamber..

Unloaded gun, not concealed on person (in plain view). gun registered to person carrying it, no prior convictions.. no problem.. Some will argue that if the ammo is in close proximity and readily accessible it could be construed as loaded.

If the gun is carried in public not concealed but loaded..Misdemeanor..

Get caught carrying a switch blade, butterfly knife and a host of other weapons defined in section PC 12020, (the section somoene else mentioned)..is a Felony... go figure

Edited December 5, 2008 by Sac Law Man