Gun Banners Shooting Themselves In The Foot

I got this story from the BLNN.

New York lawmakers are reportedly asking the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office to show mercy to a Tennessee tourist who was arrested for bringing a gun to the 9/11 Memorial…“By prosecuting this woman and seeking 3 1/2 years of jail, we are shooting our own [gun-control] efforts in the foot and giving the rest of the country ammunition,” Vallone said…“Clearly, the laws are too strict here, but that’s something we need to work out for ourselves without honoring licenses to carry guns in states where felons can carry them,” he said.

Ummm, the place where Felons carry guns is NEW YORK CITY! Peter Vallone, is an idiot, given that it doesn’t take much research to know that felons are prohibited to OWNING or USING firearms under FEDERAL law. That means you can’t CARRY a gun no matter what permits you have. I have no idea if some states actually DO issue permits to felons (I’m suspecting that is a total myth, given that even places like New Hampshire with VERY lax carry laws and requirements still run a background check on the applicant before issuing the permit) a felon can not own, or use a firearm, which would include carry, and would NOT be preempted by the state permit.

Certainly if charges are filed against this woman, who indeed was carrying illegally, she would be the poster child for HR 822. She’s licensed to carry in her home state, and has done so in good standing, also the only “Crime” that was committed was bringing a scary Kel-Tec P32 into a gun-free zone. No “Blood in the Streets”, no threats, no violence, just a little .32 in a woman’s purse in a dangerous city known for its street crimes.

Really if they convict her it will be the proverbial bloody shirt we can waive for the the cause of national reciprocity. That being said she WAS charged, and the law is, as the dimwitted Councillor stated, too strict. The bottom line New York is bordered by Pennsylvania and Vermont who have no issue with allowing lawful citizens to carry for their own protection, and that line between the states doesn’t convey much but the stupidity of the law. Furthermore New York STATE doesn’t have too much problem letting its own residents (tho as a non-resident there is no way to carry a gun in-state legally) carry arms, with the exception of New York city (thanks to the work of a brutal Criminalwhere have we heard that before) where carry is a privilege of the wealthy and the connected.

These laws are foolish, ineffective, and punitive, not to mention well-known. This is why we must pass HR822. Somebody who can legally carry in Tennessee, Texas, Connecticut, Vermont, or Pennsylvania is perfectly safe to carry around the World Trade Center, and it is pure foolishness to think why that might not be the case.

This entry was posted in Freedom, Guns, Politics, Safety, Self Defense. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Gun Banners Shooting Themselves In The Foot

  1. I just travelled through 7 states with various different laws on if I could carry or not and it was such a nightmare. I did not “carry” my gun anywhere that was illegal, what a pain!! It was funny that in the states that honor my permit is where I felt more comfortable not carrying and in the places where I couldn’t, were down right scary.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Yep, My permits are valid in North Carolina but I never carry when I go there because there are just so many gun free zones and wonky laws it isn’t worth the risk, which is a shame given the “risk” is the same as this woman experience, bringing an icky-gun into a gun-free zone.

      No harm, no foul, just a stupid law with bad people enforcing it.

  2. Pingback: Is today backwards day? : Newbie Shooter

  3. Pingback: Another Gun Control Sucess Story | Weer'd World

  4. AuricTech says:

    Given that she has no way to deny carrying a concealed pistol in NYC, I can think of two options for Ms. Graves:

    1. Try to plea-bargain down to some sort of misdemeanor (“creating a disturbance” or some such). This would avoid a felony conviction on her record, thus keeping her from becoming a prohibited person. Of course, the downside is that she still would have to endure some sort of unjust punishment at the hands of the NY judiciary.

    2. Stand trial (and be convicted), with the intent of becoming a test case all the way to the US Supreme Court. This has obvious potential downsides for Ms. Graves, but potential game-changing upsides for liberty in general.

    IANAL, but the first course of action strikes this layman as the best one to try. After all, should it fail, it still leaves open the second course of action….

Leave a Reply

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