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

[Nov3]

I've spent more than 50 years in NYC.

It is obvious from your replies. When you have experience living in a free country call us.

[from occupied ga]

What I was getting at is if I were to move to Brooklyn, or even NY state, with my pistol, bought legally in another state, am I required to register it? If I didn't, is it an illegal weapon?

In a word, Yes.

[mywholebodyisaweapon]

AHA! The smoking gun! Seniority, age, experience, position, IQ, etc. determine whether or not a person is qualified to evaluate the law. A sad consistency emerges . . .

[unixfox]

Allsmiles...give up, your OUTGUNNED.

[toothless]

"Why? In your idea of a free country does everyone just do whatever they want to do whenever they want to do it?"

In a free country people don't have to get permission to own a pistol.

[demosthenes the elder]

I have long felt that people with IQs below 130 should be put down for the general good.

How revealingly Stalinist of you. You do realize that almost all of the productive work done anywhere on Earth - including New York - is done by folks with IQs lower than 130, don't you?

(And, before you ask: 165. Not that it is important, of itself, in real life.)

[Dead Corpse]

Why? In your idea of a free country does everyone just do whatever they want to do whenever they want to do it?

Um... what would be your definition of "freedom"?

Your village called, they want you back as a replacement idiot cannot be found.

[Dead Corpse]

Look how much shorter this thread would be.

Yes... without your posts it'd be much shorter.

[Joe Hadenuf]

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.

Hynes ought to be thrown in jail for suggesting this bull shit. I can't imagine throwing this citizen in jail among real criminals. The locals ought to storm the freaking court and demand the resignation of Mr. *FN* Hynes.

Some local freeper ought to do a thread to Freep the Mayor or DA in this area.....

[demosthenes the elder]

I decided to bring neither morality nor the glorious poetry of the Declaration of Independence into this, because NEITHER are the US Constitution (though they are without doubt both the foundations of that document), and NEITHER are useful points of reference for determining if a law is "stupid" (ie: needless, fruitless, silly, irrelevant, fee-good-political-hay, counterproductive, etc...)

[Critter]

It IS legitimate to make your position felt in unconventional ways.

Hmmmmmmmmmm.... I have been pondering the idea of reviving tarring and feathering for some of these types. hehehe

But seeing how that could land me in jail, I have been trying to come up with a legal alternative.

I do think it is time to target individual members of the 5th column assault on freedom, rather than the government as a whole. I think we keep making the same dumb mistakes over and over, and we keep getting the same result, a slide toward tyranny.

There is the safety in numbers that our legislators feel when we protest them at their workplace, that they will not necessarily enjoy if we protest them at their homes. Add to that, the fact that 20 people (the usual pro-gun turnout) outside a state capitol with signs goes almost unseen, but 20 people outside this pinhead's house would cause quite a stir.

I say that it is high time we target the individuals, and hound them at home, until they decide to do something productive, and freedom loving with their lives. Let's call it something of an affirmative action program for the aspirationally challenged?

And though it's probably dangerous to state this publicly, I'm still pondering the tarring and feathering. It just may be worth the risk. Naturally, I would use cold tar... don't want to hurt anything but the buggers pride for now... hehehehe

[Nov3]

Why? In your idea of a free country does everyone just do whatever they want to do whenever they want to do it?

I don't know if you need a permit to obtain one in NY, but the Constitution pretty well covers it. It is obviously something you either never read or did not grasp.

[demosthenes the elder]

yes, and yes.

[Nov3]

I have long felt that people with IQs below 130 should be put down for the general good.

This is consistent with your gun control postion.

[WhiskeyPapa]

I've spent more than 50 years in NYC...

It shows. You are matching every stereotype.

Walt

[Critter]

The DA has a choice. Do his job and enforce the law; or ignore the law.

I don't think anyone is under any obligation to prosecute illegal laws, so his choices are actually: Do his job and drop the charges, or prosecute an illegal law. The Constitution being the supreme law of the land, and any law being repugnant to the Constitution being void, his job IS to drop the charges.

[Flint]

Actually it's easier for a crook to get a gun in NYS than it is a law abiding citizen.

Actually that is true any where in the USA. Think about it, the average citizen in Baghdad,right now, has more firearm rights than anyone in our country.