legal gun owner escapes anti gun extremist felony trap because of Gov. Pardon....

[2aguy]

So explain why the officer wasn't even charged with picking his nose in public asshole?

Because Velez is not wealthy and is therefore unable to hire the kind of legal representation that, whether or not a substantial damage suit and/or a criminal charge would follow, would make the cop regret choosing to initiate that intrusive nonsense.

Instead of an ordinary car, if Velez had been driving a new or late model luxury car and dressed in a way that suggested he could bring a high-caliber lawyer to bear, the weapon question would not have been asked.

Whenever a LEO is detaining anyone for any reason the first thing every LEO is trained to do is 'secure the scene'.

The issue here is Velez had harmed no one. He was a peaceful citizen, a Marine on leave who had, presumably unintentionally, committed a minor traffic offense, but because of this ambitious cossack he ended up in prison.

The Constitution does NOT allow people to "bear arms" illegally dummy!

Show us where the word "illegal" is used in the Second Amendment.

What Velez did was illegal. Ignorance of the law is no defense.[/QUOTE]


Owning and carrying the gun as a law abiding citizen without a criminal felony conviction should never endanger someone with a felony conviction.....that is what is wrong.........a 50$ fine should have been levied...not life destruction.....save that for actual criminals who actually use guns for crimes...

Glenn Reynolds: How gun laws put the innocent on trial

Cottrol noted that crimes like carrying or owning a pistol without a license are what the law has traditionally termed malum prohibitum — that is, things that are wrong only because they are prohibited. (The contrast is with the other traditional category, malum in se, those things, like rape, robbery, and murder, that are wrong in themselves.)

Traditionally, penalties for malum prohibitum acts were generally light, since the conduct that the laws governed wasn’t wrong in itself. But modern American law often treats even obscure and technical violations of gun laws as felonies and —Cottrol noted — prosecutors often go out of their way to prosecute these crimes more vigorously even than traditional crimes like rape or murder.


If it were up to me, I’d find it a violation of the due process clause to treat violation of regulatory statutes as a felony. Historically, only the most serious crimes — typically carrying the death penalty — were felonies.Nowadays, though, we designate all sorts of trivial crimes, such as possessing an eagle feather, as felonies. This has the effect of empowering police and prosecutors at the expense of citizens, since it’s easy to find a felony if you look hard enough, and few citizens have the courage of a veteran like Cort, who went to trial anyway. Most will plead to something.

Meanwhile, on the gun front, I think we need federal civil rights legislation to protect citizens who make innocent mistakes. Federal law already defines who is allowed to possess firearms. Under Congress’s civil rights powers (gun ownership and carrying, after all, are protected under the Second Amendment), I think we need federal legislation limiting the maximum penalty a state can assess for possessing or carrying a firearm on the part of someone allowed to own a gun under federal law to a $500 fine. That would let states regulate reasonably, without permitting this sort of injustice.

 

[2aguy]

Meanwhile, on the gun front, I think we need federal civil rights legislation to protect citizens who make innocent mistakes. Federal law already defines who is allowed to possess firearms. Under Congress’s civil rights powers (gun ownership and carrying, after all, are protected under the Second Amendment), I think we need federal legislation limiting the maximum penalty a state can assess for possessing or carrying a firearm on the part of someone allowed to own a gun under federal lawto a $500 fine. That would let states regulate reasonably, without permitting this sort of injustice.

 

[MikeK]

What Velez did was illegal. Ignorance of the law is no defense.

When all is said and done my position in this discussion is a good cop is one who understands that some laws are best to ignore and who knows when to look the other way.

If I were pulled over for some petty nonsense and the cop asked me if there are any weapons in my car I honestly don't know how I would respond. It would depend on my mood at the moment and the way the question was posed. I might just say no and ask what he would do if I said yes -- and engage him in cordial conversation with the intention of giving him something to think about (i.e., if he's capable of reasoned thought.)

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Wise up asshole. Know the law before running your dumb mouth.
Velez made a dumb mistake but what he did was illegal. He won't be making the same mistake again.
The Constitution does NOT allow people to "bear arms" illegally dummy!

The Constitution, as I said, is clear about the right to bear arms. It cannot be illegal to do so, for the Constitution makes it clear that this is a right that government is forbidden to infringe.

It is government that is acting illegally any time and any place that it attempts to violate this right.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

What Velez did was illegal. Ignorance of the law is no defense.

The Constitution is the highest law. Why is ignorance or disregard of it being allowed as an excuse?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

If I were pulled over for some petty nonsense and the cop asked me if there are any weapons in my car I honestly don't know how I would respond.

“Unless you have a warrant, the contents of my person and property (including my vehicle) are none of your damn business.” will do just fine.

 

[MikeK]

If I were pulled over for some petty nonsense and the cop asked me if there are any weapons in my car I honestly don't know how I would respond.

“Unless you have a warrant, the contents of my person and property (including my vehicle) are none of your damn business.” will do just fine.

But would afford the cossack sonofabitch the opportunity to put you in handcuffs, or worse.