Dad who pluggedprowler spurns deal

New York Daily News ^ | 4/08/03 | NANCIE L. KATZ

[kattracks]

A Navy veteran who shot an intruder in his toddler's bedroom decided against pleading guilty to a gun charge yesterday. Ronald Dixon rejected a deal that would have spared him from having to do jail time because he does not want a criminal record, his new attorney said.

Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes initially charged Dixon, 27, with possessing an illegal weapon - an unregistered pistol - after he shot a career burglar he found prowling in his Canarsie home on Dec. 14.

Last month, Hynes reduced the charges to misdemeanor attempted weapon possession, which carries a maximum 90-day jail term. Hynes said he would only ask Dixon to serve four weekends in jail in exchange for a guilty plea.

Criminal Court Judge Alvin Yearwood changed that deal to a year's probation.

"After the people reduced the charges, this was put on for possible disposition," Yearwood told Dixon and his new attorney, Joseph Mure, yesterday. But the Jamaican immigrant declined the deal and left the courtroom without comment yesterday.

"That means he would have a criminal conviction, and that is a big concern to us," Mure said afterward.

Dixon gained widespread sympathy after he was charged with a crime. In a tearful interview, Dixon told the Daily News he could not afford to spend any time in jail because he was working seven days a week to support his family and pay his mortgage.

Originally published on April 8, 2003

[em2vn]

You seem more concerned with a law abiding citizen shooting a career criminal who was found in his daughters bedroom than the fact that a weapon, registered or otherwise is needed in most of NYC. You can spin this any way you wish, however, his primary responsibility is to provide for and protect his family.Obtaining registration for a piece comes a very distant second to his primary responsibilities. Would you be satisfied if he had died attempting to protect his daughter with his bare hands. You sound like the type who wouldn't shoot a man to keep him from raping his wife or daughter, since what is a simple act of rape when compared to a human life.

[G Larry]

"Unregistered" my a$$!!
I've got a safe full of weapons that will NEVER be registered!
That's why there are no "legally" held, privately owned rifles in NYC, because ~25 years ago someone convinced JQ Public that 'registering' them was no threat to their right to own them.
And now they've been confiscated because the city new who to go after.....the law abiding public!!!

[mywholebodyisaweapon]

The scenario you outlined about flying to Massachusetts is precisely why I have decided to never fly again. The airlines can all go to New York or California for all I care.

I think the U.S. Constitution was basically predicated on the concept that somebody who minds his own business should be left the hell alone.

Amen.

[meyer]

For enforcing the law? Are you asking me why the DA and his family shouldn't be run out of town because he enforced the law?

I beleive that what people are telling you is that the DA ought to be run out of town for failing to defend the Constitution of the United States.

[WhiskeyPapa]

Dixon was under no more moral or legal obligation to obey the illegitimate edicts of New York than Rosa Parks was when she refused to sit in the back of an Alabama bus.

Hear, hear.

Walt

[GovernmentShrinker]

He did not break any valid law. The 2nd Amendment renders the law in question null and void, and it's high time people started standing up for that concept. The New York City laws make it extremely difficult and expensive for any citizen to get a permit just to keep a gun in thier home or workplace; carry permits are exclusively the privilege of celebrities and politicians and their entourages, and retired LEOs.

A friend of mine was a lawyer with a major NYC firm, working as a defense attorney for Remington and other gun/ammo companies. It took her six months and several thousand doolars to meet the requirements and receive approve to keep a gun in her own apartment for self-defense. These "laws" render it absolutely impossible, financially and bureaucratically, for most working class people to obtain a permit, and that's the whole purpose of them. The gangsters and lunatics ignore the laws and have all the guns they want and carry them wherever they want.

[Nov3]

One hopes for Jury Nullification in this case.

Oh no! Jury nullification is evil. Just ask the lockstep Nazi RINOs here on this site. You should always follow the law even when the law is blatantly wrong. The jury system is meant to be a rubber stamp for the state's views. That is what our founders envisioned, don't you know? Don't think for yourself denizen uh I mean citizen.

[calvin sun]

Quite literally, they create problems where none exist. They're sick in that they chose to frighten people and foist false despair on them and do that to collect their unearned paychecks. Their job security is predicated on deceiving as many people as possible.

Sounds like consultants as well LOL

[WhiskeyPapa]

Look for a jury to throw this one out.

Not if the prosecutor can find 12 nincompoops like 'Allsmiles'.

Walt

[GovernmentShrinker]

You're missing the point. There is often no way to obtain a permit legally. This is not a "shall issue" city. If the local anti-gun LEOs decide you haven't proved that you "need" one, they just say no and that's that -- and many of them are of the opinion that no ordinary citizen needs one, and that they should all rely exclusive on the police for protection.

[time4good]

I remember when this was first reported that it was clearly stated that he was in the process of getting the gun registered, had applied, etc, since he just moved to New York. How is one supposed to register a gun they own when they move to New York without having 'broken the law' as you state?

[Jack Black]

I've never lived in a state that has gun registration, so I'm not real familiar with the concept. Nor do I like it on the face. Was he a felon? No. So how could the gun be illegal? I don't get it. Here in Oregon I can keep whatever type of gun I like in my house and don't have to go begging politicians for permission. This is what used to be known as a right. Either you have them or you don't. Obviously you prefer a system where you don't. That's too bad. Please stay in NY or California and don't come to Oregon. We don't need more people who think like you, we have too many already.

[nobdysfool]

This fellow broke the law. He made a conscious decision to do so. Now it's time to pay the piper. Pay like a man. It was worth shooting the intruder, wasn't it?

Isn't there any provision for mitigating circumstances? No law can be so perfect that there aren't circumstances where the law can be seen to be an impediment to true justice. Of course, it could be argued that the man in question could have subdued the intruder with a baseball bat or stabbed him with a butcher knife, but I'd bet the DA would still try to find some way to charge him with a crime.

[Nov3]

I'm all for the right to bear arms, but I also don't want unregistered guns in the hands of gang members and lunatics...

You don't have a clue do you? Find out what the constitution is.

My 2 cents, worth what you paid for it.

Not even worth that.

[supercat]

This fellow broke the law. He made a conscious decision to do so. Now it's time to pay the piper. Pay like a man. It was worth shooting the intruder, wasn't it?

Had he not violated New York's unconstitutional firearms statutes, as you suggest he should have done, he would have been killed. Why do you want him dead?

[pepperdog]

"I'm all for the right to bear arms"

No, you are not!

[MortMan]

By the way: There ARE NO exorbatant fees. The fee he paid is charged by private agencies that fill out the paperwork for people who are too stupid to fill out the forms themselves.

Bravo-Sierra. Not only are the fees exhorbitant, the judges who decide (most on the recommendation of the local sheriff or police chief) tend to decide arbitrarily. In NYC, handgun permits are almost unheard of, unless one has "connections".

And before you complain that I don't have direct knowledge - I'm in Binghamton, and its only marginally better here.

[ninenot]

A jury nullification of the particular law would not, in itself, produce the results you want.

We agree that certain regulations are a patent violation of the 2nd Amendment--this one is among them.

That being said, the possibility of jury nullification is very interesting. Here's a guy who is like most Americans--military vet, hardworking, wife and child. He uses a weapon ONLY when it is obvious that such use is the ONLY way to stop the intrusion---and he had reason to believe that the intrusion could present a deadly threat to his family and himself.

PERFECT!!

The case will get national attention (Hannity, Rush, and OReilly are already on it.) We now have a great setup: a stupid DA enforcing a stupid law vs. a sympathetic defendant.

Not all bad...

[Protagoras]

Easy choice. Dismiss it! But then again, there is no rightousness in NY, is there?

He should insist on a jury trial.

[Protagoras]

I have always had a hard time understanding the mindset of Yankees when it comes to self-defense.

You have yankees confused with liberals.