A Liberal Gets Caught With A Gun In A N.y. School And Guess What Happens?

[M14 Shooter]

And apple pie.
Don't forget apple pie.

I carry a slice in my pocket at ALL TIMES in case anyone DARES to question my patriotism!!!

Oh look... another meaningless post from Captain Inconsequential.

 

[TheOldSchool]

And apple pie.
Don't forget apple pie.

I carry a slice in my pocket at ALL TIMES in case anyone DARES to question my patriotism!!!

Oh look... another meaningless post from Captain Inconsequential.

He said, making his lack of sense of humor and, really, any understanding at all of what the hell is going on in this thread blatantly obvious. Again.

 

[martybegan]

I gotta admit I don't really track on you guys and I think it's because you detect some favoritism to this guy cause "he's a lib." I assume he is, but what I don't understand is why you'd want to jail a guy who apparently made an innocent mistake. Nothing indicates he INTENDED to bring a weapon to a school. If that's the case he didn't INTEND to commit a crime, and INTENT is a necessary element to convict a person of anything. So regardless of his political leanings, I fail to see what good it would do society to spend the money to lock up this guy, be he dem or gop, nor do I see that a CRIME occurred.

Wrong, some laws are statutory, where intent or consent don't matter. You bang a 14 year old that told you she was 20? Your intent was to have sex with someone of age, but you didn't, and now you are guilty of statutory rape.

Same as in this case, intent doesn't matter, the ACT of bringing the gun into the school, even if you have a permit, is illegal. Normally it would be at most a violation or a misdemeanor, but guys like this are the ones who MADE it into a felony, and then decide to be careless enough to break said law.

 

[bendog]

I gotta admit I don't really track on you guys and I think it's because you detect some favoritism to this guy cause "he's a lib." I assume he is, but what I don't understand is why you'd want to jail a guy who apparently made an innocent mistake. Nothing indicates he INTENDED to bring a weapon to a school. If that's the case he didn't INTEND to commit a crime, and INTENT is a necessary element to convict a person of anything. So regardless of his political leanings, I fail to see what good it would do society to spend the money to lock up this guy, be he dem or gop, nor do I see that a CRIME occurred.

He knew the law very well. He helped pass it. He wanted other people to go to jail for taking a gun into a school. That is why I want him in jail, convicted with a felony, and unable to ever legally possess a firearm again. Because that is what he wanted for other people.

And yet, the guy who is in jail in Mexico for trying to take guns BACK into Mexico AGAIN was just making an innocent mistake.

Well, there you have a for govt. So, I don't see a comparison. But as for Billy's point, I think the law is designed to prohibit adults from knowingly bringing guns onto schools. He apparently did not break that law. There are very few laws that don't require the state to prove intent, e.g. statutory rape is a crime where it's rape regardless of whether the victim consented.

 

[OriginalShroom]

I gotta admit I don't really track on you guys and I think it's because you detect some favoritism to this guy cause "he's a lib." I assume he is, but what I don't understand is why you'd want to jail a guy who apparently made an innocent mistake. Nothing indicates he INTENDED to bring a weapon to a school. If that's the case he didn't INTEND to commit a crime, and INTENT is a necessary element to convict a person of anything. So regardless of his political leanings, I fail to see what good it would do society to spend the money to lock up this guy, be he dem or gop, nor do I see that a CRIME occurred.

He knew the law very well. He helped pass it. He wanted other people to go to jail for taking a gun into a school. That is why I want him in jail, convicted with a felony, and unable to ever legally possess a firearm again. Because that is what he wanted for other people.

And yet, the guy who is in jail in Mexico for trying to take guns BACK into Mexico AGAIN was just making an innocent mistake.

Well, there you have a for govt. So, I don't see a comparison. But as for Billy's point, I think the law is designed to prohibit adults from knowingly bringing guns onto schools. He apparently did not break that law. There are very few laws that don't require the state to prove intent, e.g. statutory rape is a crime where it's rape regardless of whether the victim consented.

You "think" that the law wasn't meant for those who "forgot" they had a firearm and walked into a school with it?? Really?? Can you show me where the exemption is in the law for those that "forgot"?

Can you list me the laws that the courts have upheld that not knowing about the law or forgetting that the laws were there was a legal excuse because I can only think of one and it's going to be heading to the SCotUS, and that is were a Cop didn't know the laws of his State and illegally pulled a guy over who had drugs in his car.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Well, there you have a for govt. So, I don't see a comparison. But as for Billy's point, I think the law is designed to prohibit adults from knowingly bringing guns onto schools. He apparently did not break that law. There are very few laws that don't require the state to prove intent, e.g. statutory rape is a crime where it's rape regardless of whether the victim consented.

Um.... How do you NOT know you're carrying a gun?
How do you forget?

 

[bendog]

Intent is indeed a requirement of the law

McKinney's Penal Law Sec. 265.01-a

 

[bendog]

Well, there you have a for govt. So, I don't see a comparison. But as for Billy's point, I think the law is designed to prohibit adults from knowingly bringing guns onto schools. He apparently did not break that law. There are very few laws that don't require the state to prove intent, e.g. statutory rape is a crime where it's rape regardless of whether the victim consented.

Um.... How do you NOT know you're carrying a gun?
How do you forget?

Well, you have big guns, no doubt (-:

Seriously, I don't know. One of those 22 revolvers. A derringer? One of the zz top guys had one go off in his boot. A .38 scandium?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Well, there you have a for govt. So, I don't see a comparison. But as for Billy's point, I think the law is designed to prohibit adults from knowingly bringing guns onto schools. He apparently did not break that law. There are very few laws that don't require the state to prove intent, e.g. statutory rape is a crime where it's rape regardless of whether the victim consented.

Um.... How do you NOT know you're carrying a gun?
How do you forget?

Well, you have big guns, no doubt (-:
Seriously, I don't know. One of those 22 revolvers. A derringer? One of the zz top guys had one go off in his boot. A .38 scandium?

More importantly... aren't you supposed to be MORE aware of your gun when carrying it? Isn't that part of the responisbility you take on when exercising your privileges granted by your carry permit?

 

[bendog]

Well, there you have a for govt. So, I don't see a comparison. But as for Billy's point, I think the law is designed to prohibit adults from knowingly bringing guns onto schools. He apparently did not break that law. There are very few laws that don't require the state to prove intent, e.g. statutory rape is a crime where it's rape regardless of whether the victim consented.

Um.... How do you NOT know you're carrying a gun?
How do you forget?

Well, you have big guns, no doubt (-:
Seriously, I don't know. One of those 22 revolvers. A derringer? One of the zz top guys had one go off in his boot. A .38 scandium?

More importantly... aren't you supposed to be MORE aware of your gun when carrying it? Isn't that part of the responisbility you take on when exercising your privileges granted by your carry permit?

Well, that's irrelevant to the crime he was charged with, which was then reduced to a misdemeanor, which should have occurred with any other person under the same facts.

jmo, but what really has you guys going is the law itself.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Intent is indeed a requirement of the law

McKinney's Penal Law Sec. 265.01-a

So all you have to do is say that you "Forgot" that you had the gun with you and then you wouldn't be "KNOWINGLY" bringing a gun onto school property?

Let's see how many times that stands up in court.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Intent is indeed a requirement of the law

McKinney's Penal Law Sec. 265.01-a

So all you have to do is say that you "Forgot" that you had the gun with you and then you wouldn't be "KNOWINGLY" bringing a gun onto school property?
Let's see how many times that stands up in court.

If that's your defense, you then have to prove to a jury that you did not know.
The prosecutor should have fun with that.

 

[bendog]

Intent is indeed a requirement of the law

McKinney's Penal Law Sec. 265.01-a

So all you have to do is say that you "Forgot" that you had the gun with you and then you wouldn't be "KNOWINGLY" bringing a gun onto school property?
Let's see how many times that stands up in court.

If that's your defense, you then have to prove to a jury that you did not know.
The prosecutor should have fun with that.

No, the State must prove all elements, and intent is one.

Shroom, imo, has a point. I mean how many juries will find the excuse of "oops I forgot" to be believable? This guy apparently had hundreds of people write the court (and maybe the DA) saying "let him go." That probably had an affect. Then there was also the fact that he was regularly at the school, and it'd never have happened before, even though he regularly carried whatever handgun he has. I didn't see anything as to what particular firearm he had. He had a holster. Personally I find it hard to believe he forgot it, but again, he removed his gun consistenty other times. So, the authorities may have decided they'd get a jury predisposed to acquit and the facts could be hard to prove, so they bailed to a lesser charge.

A guy who doesn't have lots of letter writers, and who doesn't have a history of taking off his handgun before coming into the school .... maybe his claim to "oops" doesn't help him much

 

[M14 Shooter]

Intent is indeed a requirement of the law

McKinney's Penal Law Sec. 265.01-a

So all you have to do is say that you "Forgot" that you had the gun with you and then you wouldn't be "KNOWINGLY" bringing a gun onto school property?
Let's see how many times that stands up in court.

If that's your defense, you then have to prove to a jury that you did not know.
The prosecutor should have fun with that.

No, the State must prove all elements, and intent is one.

The statute doesn't mention intent - the statute specifies knowledge, and he claimed he did not know.

 

[bendog]

Intent is indeed a requirement of the law

McKinney's Penal Law Sec. 265.01-a

So all you have to do is say that you "Forgot" that you had the gun with you and then you wouldn't be "KNOWINGLY" bringing a gun onto school property?
Let's see how many times that stands up in court.

If that's your defense, you then have to prove to a jury that you did not know.
The prosecutor should have fun with that.

No, the State must prove all elements, and intent is one.

The statute doesn't mention intent - the statute specifies knowledge, and he claimed he did not know.

If he didn't KNOW the gun was in the holster, or he still had the holster, then he didn't knowingly have a hand gun, and thus he lacked the INTENT to commit the crime.

What is CRIMINAL INTENT definition of CRIMINAL INTENT Black s Law Dictionary

The statute could simply say its a crime to have a gun. Some crimes don't mention intent. DUI doesn't have intent. The State doesn't have to prove a guy KNEW he had a specific blood alc content. Property crimes often don't require intent. For example, if one passes a bad check, the State doesn't typically have to prove there was any intent to get money. I'm honestly not sure that constitutionally you can punish a person with a felony (a possible year or more) on a gun crime without intent.

But again, I don't think the lack of intent story would work in most instances of having a gun at a school.

 

[2aguy]

nor do I see that a CRIME occurred.

A crime occurred primarily because this guy wanted this activity to be a crime...I know I don't want it to be a crime and I vote for people more likely to make it not a crime...this guy...he voted for and pushed for this act to be not only a crime...but a felony...which very likely would have cost anyone else jail time and a huge cash fine...as well as being a convicted felon from that day forward....

Any law abiding citizen should be able to carry their weapon onto school grounds...without fear of legal consequences...as long as they commit no crime with it...

Guns make us safer...

 

[bendog]

nor do I see that a CRIME occurred.

A crime occurred primarily because this guy wanted this activity to be a crime...I know I don't want it to be a crime and I vote for people more likely to make it not a crime...this guy...he voted for and pushed for this act to be not only a crime...but a felony...which very likely would have cost anyone else jail time and a huge cash fine...as well as being a convicted felon from that day forward....

Any law abiding citizen should be able to carry their weapon onto school grounds...without fear of legal consequences...as long as they commit no crime with it...

Guns make us safer...

That I believe is our actual difference of opinion. I don't want pistol packing daddys at school. I'm all for having guns. But not in schools or courts.