US ARMY COMBAT VETERAN ARRESTED for Violating NY Magazine Ban!!


How do you get arrested for a law that hasn't gone into effect yet? Something is fishy here.

Edit

He was arrested before the new law was signed for supposedly violating the limit of 10 rounds. Still a travesty but you should know the truth about the issue.
 
The article that article links to says "that he believed were legal..." and then seeks donations for attorney fees "to get the charges reduced...."

Why did he think they were legal? How did the state police discover them in his trunk?
 
New York, a state in the USA, even Obama's USA, has checkpoints to randomly search your vehicle without probable cause? This sounds like a scam.
 
At the Albany Gun Show a vender was selling High Capacity Mags. Right in front of NYS Police. The Gun show was last weekend.
 
Stories like this are always from unreliable sources that are extremely biased and not very factual.

If this guy was breaking a law that limits magazine capacity, it's his fault. New title for the article: Criminal Gets Arrested.
 
Deserteagle said:
Stories like this are always from unreliable sources that are extremely biased and not very factual.
If this guy was breaking a law that limits magazine capacity, it's his fault. New title for the article: Criminal Gets Arrested.
Click to expand...

Not sure why he was arrested. Here is another link. Link Removed.
The only way he could be charged is if the police had reason to believe that these were not pre-ban from the first assault weapons ban. He can't be charged under the new law until April. Regardless, you will see a lot more like this in the future as there will be massive non-compliance with this new law. Civil disobedience doesn't make them criminals.
 
I wonder how many people here would be themselves considered criminals if they were unfortunate enough to live in a state like NY. Or would you just give in and turn in your now illegal guns and magazines. In NY the first inclination is to arrest and make the accused prove innocence. The magazines may have been pre-ban and grandfathered, but he had better be able to prove it. Otherwise he will be out a shitload of money defending himself.
 
Last edited:
cgiven1 said:
Not sure why he was arrested. The only way he could be charged is if the police had reason to believe that these were not pre-ban from the first assault weapons ban. He can't be charged under the new law until April.
Click to expand...

He was arrested because New Yorkers are not allowed to own 30 round magazines unless they were manufactured more than 50 years ago. He was in possession of 30 round magazines for an AR-15, which was designed just over 50 years ago, so it is highly unlikely that the magazines he had were some of the originals made when the AR-15 was designed around 1959. So he was simply not allowed to own them, and they were most likely not more than 50 years old to qualify as antiques. That is my understanding of it according to your link and this website: (Link Removed)

cgiven1 said:
Regardless, you will see a lot more like this in the future as there will be massive non-compliance with this new law. Civil disobedience doesn't make them criminals.
Click to expand...

You need to be careful in how the term "civil disobedience" is used. I do not call his actions civil disobedience.

Civil disobedience is an illegal public protest of something. 10,000 people gathering in a public place to openly use illegal drugs is an act of civil disobedience against drug laws. But a person smoking meth in their house is simply breaking the law for self gratification.

This guy was not protesting anything, and he was not making it public. He was breaking the law, by himself, privately, and secretly until he was caught, which was most likely not his goal.
 
Deserteagle said:
He was arrested because New Yorkers are not allowed to own 30 round magazines unless they were manufactured more than 50 years ago. He was in possession of 30 round magazines for an AR-15, which was designed just over 50 years ago, so it is highly unlikely that the magazines he had were some of the originals made when the AR-15 was designed around 1959. So he was simply not allowed to own them, and they were most likely not more than 50 years old to qualify as antiques. That is my understanding of it according to your link and this website: (Link Removed)



You need to be careful in how the term "civil disobedience" is used. I do not call his actions civil disobedience.

Civil disobedience is an illegal public protest of something. 10,000 people gathering in a public place to openly use illegal drugs is an act of civil disobedience against drug laws. But a person smoking meth in their house is simply breaking the law for self gratification.

This guy was not protesting anything, and he was not making it public. He was breaking the law, by himself, privately, and secretly until he was caught, which was most likely not his goal.
Click to expand...


It's only under the new law that these magazines are illegal. Under the new law they have until January 0f 2014 to get rid of them. So he wasn't arrested under that law. The old law against magazines allowed those owned prior to enactment to be grandfathered in. That is why the new law makes them prohibited, because they couldn't determine if it was in fact a grandfathered magazine. The difference between your dope smokers analogy and NY gun owners is pretty obvious. The gun owners would be disobeying a law that was in violation of their civil, constitutionally guaranteed and god given rights. Thus civil disobedience. Smoking dope doesn't rise to the same level of protection. You can willing give in and submit by given up your rights. I stand by those who refuse to do so.
 
The tradition of civil disobedience applies to all laws - not just those a certain segment of the population thinks are "god given." And it does require an open and notorious display of the disobedience. Hiding the supposed contraband is not a display of civil disobediance. It is merely someone breaking the law.
 
I hope he has a really good lawyer. A lot will depend on the precise reason for the search of his vehicle at the "vehicle check point," and whether he consented to the search or not. If these truly were pre-ban magazines, or if this search falls outside the protections of the 4th amendment, I hope for his sake he fights this all the way and doesn't cop a plea. Otherwise he's going down as a gun criminal.
 
cgiven1 said:
It's only under the new law that these magazines are illegal. Under the new law they have until January 0f 2014 to get rid of them. So he wasn't arrested under that law. The old law against magazines allowed those owned prior to enactment to be grandfathered in. That is why the new law makes them prohibited, because they couldn't determine if it was in fact a grandfathered magazine. The difference between your dope smokers analogy and NY gun owners is pretty obvious. The gun owners would be disobeying a law that was in violation of their civil, constitutionally guaranteed and god given rights. Thus civil disobedience. Smoking dope doesn't rise to the same level of protection. You can willing give in and submit by given up your rights. I stand by those who refuse to do so.
Click to expand...

This is not civil disobedience. This guy was trying to slip by with illegal magazines and got caught. Now the extremely biased blog writers are trying to turn this guy into a hero. If his intentions were civil disobedience, he wouldnt have been hiding magazines in his car, which is far from making a statement about an unjust law/government. Secretly breaking the law and trying to avoid getting caught is called being a criminal, and is not civil disobedience.

nogods said:
The tradition of civil disobedience applies to all laws - not just those a certain segment of the population thinks are "god given." And it does require an open and notorious display of the disobedience. Hiding the supposed contraband is not a display of civil disobediance. It is merely someone breaking the law.
Click to expand...

Exactly what cgiven1 does not understand.
 
He wasn't hiding anything. He had them in his trunk. A logical place to carry them in your car. He consented to the search because he didn't have any reason to suspect he had anything to hide. He believed them to be grandfathered in under NY's old assault weapons ban which was signed in 2000 and grandfathered in 30 round mags. He bought them from an army surplus store as they were marked "law enforcement/military use only" which became legal after the Federal ban sunset. Only state law would have made the transfer of them, under the state ban, illegal. He wasn't doing anything in secret he just misunderstood how the law applied. Nathan Haddad is a decorated war veteran who was discharged after 12 years of service due to wounds received in combat. He is now a disabled veteran caught up in the asinine laws passed in NY. He would not knowingly violate any laws. I never said that he was engaging in civil disobedience, only that there will be a lot more arrested like he was as they will engage in civil disobedience. I said he wasn't arrested under the new law, that it would have to be under the old law if the cops thought that they weren't pre-ban.
 
cgiven1 said:
Regardless, you will see a lot more like this in the future as there will be massive non-compliance with this new law. Civil disobedience doesn't make them criminals.
Click to expand...

cgiven1 said:
He wasn't hiding anything. He had them in his trunk. A logical place to carry them in your car. He wasn't doing anything in secret he just misunderstood how the law applied. He would not knowingly violate any laws. I never said that he was engaging in civil disobedience, only that there will be a lot more arrested like he was as they will engage in civil disobedience.
Click to expand...

In response to me calling him a criminal, you said him and people like him are not criminals for being civilly disobedient. And now here you are saying the exact opposite.

Civil disobedience doesn't include breaking the law by hiding illegal magazines in your trunk. Civil disobedience is a willful, public display of non-compliance with laws as a form of protest.

cgiven1 said:
He wasn't doing anything in secret he just misunderstood how the law applied.
Click to expand...

Misunderstanding the law has never been a legitimate defense to breaking the law.
 
It's easy to run afoul of the law and not all violations make you a criminal. There are many forms of civil disobedience and not all of them require public display.

From Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" - "It is not a man's duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even to most enormous, wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support."

That is the form of disobedience you will see. Those that give it no thought and just ignore it.
 
cgiven1 said:
It's easy to run afoul of the law and not all violations make you a criminal. There are many forms of civil disobedience and not all of them require public display.

From Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" - "It is not a man's duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even to most enormous, wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support."

That is the form of disobedience you will see. Those that give it no thought and just ignore it.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day the consequence is the same. Civil disobedience can enter the realm of criminal violation very easily and quickly. It just becomes semantics.
 
I would like to know what gave the Officer the right to go in the trunk. And I also would like to know why he was charged if they were the only thing in the trunk. Were they loaded mags ?
Bill
 
Whatever he was arrested for it surely wasn't because of his mag capacity. The law takes affect April 15, 2013.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 126 (members: 0, guests: 126)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,544
Messages
611,262
Members
74,964
Latest member
sigsag1

Share this page

Back
Top