Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Free Plaxico Buress (NYCs Gun Law is Unconstitutional)
The Wall Street Journal ^ | December 4, 2008 | David B. Kopel

Posted on 12/04/2008 5:34:20 AM PST by St. Louis Conservative

New York Giants star receiver Plaxico Burress is facing a mandatory 3½ years in prison and the end of his football career. His crime? Not having a license, which New York City never would have issued him, for the exercise of his constitutional right to bear arms.

Plaxico Burress is led to his arraignment in Manhattan. To be sure, Mr. Burress got caught because of what appears to have been stupid and irresponsible behavior connected with the handgun. But he does not face prison for shooting himself. His impending mandatory sentence highlights the unfairness and unconstitutionality of New York City's draconian gun laws.

Mr. Burress had previously had a handgun carry permit issued by Florida, for which he was required to pass a fingerprint-based background check. As a player for the Giants, he moved to Totowa, N.J., where he kept a Glock pistol. And last Friday night, he reportedly went to the Latin Quarter nightclub in midtown Manhattan carrying the loaded gun in his sweatpants. Because New York state permits to possess or carry handguns are not issued to nonresidents, Mr. Burress could not apply for a New York City permit.

At the nightclub, the handgun accidentally discharged, shooting Mr. Burress in the right thigh. He was not seriously injured, but he has been charged with criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Philosophy; US: New York
KEYWORDS: banglist; gunban; newyork; plaxicoburess; rapeofliberty; secondamendment; shallnotbeinfringed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 381-398 next last
To: Soliton
Neither you nor I know what that reason is.

It's to ensure that if we the people need to band together for common defense, that we have the tools to do so.

Read Elliot's Debates of the First Congress and you won't need to rely on Ruth Bader-Ginsberg to do your thinking for you.

221 posted on 12/04/2008 11:18:13 AM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Another moron who doesn't understand what a prefatory clause is. the fist half justifies the second, it doesn't modify it. Take a remedial English course.

I am sorry I have upset you to the point you resort to name calling, but prefatory clauses may modify the meaning of a sentence.

222 posted on 12/04/2008 11:26:36 AM PST by Soliton (This 2 shall pass)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
It's to ensure that if we the people need to band together for common defense, that we have the tools to do so.

That is my understanding too. Why does the law then restrict automatic weapons, grenades, etc.?

223 posted on 12/04/2008 11:30:25 AM PST by Soliton (This 2 shall pass)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

I know, but it isn’t being upheld. Needs to be more defined than the Heller case and supercede state regs .


224 posted on 12/04/2008 11:30:30 AM PST by Renegade (You go tell my buddies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Gun laws sure helped for Columbine, Virginia Tech, Suzanna Hupp’s parents at Luby’s in Texas...


225 posted on 12/04/2008 11:33:19 AM PST by wastedyears ("Al Gore is an apostle of arrogance." - Vaclav Klaus, Pres. of Czech Republic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Soliton

That wasn’t clearly understood by me, and probably by anybody that read it.

Explain your whole understanding and interpretation of the Second Amendment. That might paint a clearer picture.


226 posted on 12/04/2008 11:34:54 AM PST by wastedyears ("Al Gore is an apostle of arrogance." - Vaclav Klaus, Pres. of Czech Republic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus
Now you’re denying what you originally said

Not. Please cite.

227 posted on 12/04/2008 11:36:55 AM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: Soliton
Prefatory clauses don't modify. They are a "for instance". I'm upset at anyone who wants to enslave others. Your rhetoric leads in that direction.

A Primer on the Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Not that I think logic will be able to touch your hoplophobic bigotry.

228 posted on 12/04/2008 11:39:51 AM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: Soliton
Why does the law then restrict automatic weapons, grenades, etc.?

Because the law no longer follows the very document that gives it power over anything. The NFA of '34 is as illegal today as it was then when it was illegitimately passed.

229 posted on 12/04/2008 11:41:09 AM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

Or all those folks in Mumbi, or the Warsaw Ghetto, etc...


230 posted on 12/04/2008 11:41:53 AM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: E=MC2

See your own post #193. Goodbye.


231 posted on 12/04/2008 11:46:38 AM PST by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

Well then tell me how I go into a NY gun store and purchase a gun from them.


232 posted on 12/04/2008 11:48:11 AM PST by Long Island Pete (Facts are stubborn things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Assuming that you are a strict constitutionalist, particularly on the 2nd (please clarify if needed) I would like you comments on the following from you link. Thanks.

-------------------------------------------------------

Second, and much more important, the Second Amendment (and the rest of the Bill of Rights as well) originally restricted only the federal government, not the state governments. There was little need for the Framers to be concerned about the details of the inevitable tradeoffs between individual freedom and public safety because the Constitution left the states free to balance those competing goals in whatever ways they thought fit. Every state was left free by the federal Bill of Rights to establish an official religion, to require a government license in order to publish a newspaper, or to abolish the right of trial by jury. Similarly, the states were left free to regulate the private possession of weapons in whatever way seemed appropriate to them. The Framers could therefore have reasonably expected that new issues, like those raised by technological developments in weaponry, could and would be addressed by the state governments as they arose.

233 posted on 12/04/2008 11:49:36 AM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears
Explain your whole understanding and interpretation of the Second Amendment. That might paint a clearer picture.

My whole point is that my opinion doesn't matter and neither does yours. The constitution does not give us the right to legally interpret it. There is a system in place for creating, enforcing, and challenging laws--the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the government.

We elect people to the executive to appoint people to the judicial that are confirmed by the legislative branch of government. These checks and balances are the bedrock of our country.

Conservatives live within the law as a matter of principle. We don't kill abortion providers even if we are antiabortion. We work to get people elected so that the constitution can be amended to prevent abortion. We work within the system.

Plaxico broke an existing law and should pay the penalty for doing so. He has lots of money and therefore probably very good attorneys. If he wants to challenge the law on constitutional grounds and wins, he won't be punished for carrying the gun. That would then be what he deserves.

Plaxico wasn't trying to test the second amendment, he was just arrogant. He knew that the club was safe because they had metal detectors at the door. He was the only fool in the club packing heat. By shooting himself, he gave every anti-gun nut a talking point- he REALLY WAS in more danger with the gun than without it.

234 posted on 12/04/2008 11:49:44 AM PST by Soliton (This 2 shall pass)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: Long Island Pete
Well then tell me how I go into a NY gun store and purchase a gun from them.

You get one 'off the street' from the dude with the long overcoat.

235 posted on 12/04/2008 11:50:59 AM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Because the law no longer follows the very document that gives it power over anything. The NFA of '34 is as illegal today as it was then when it was illegitimately passed.

Suppose the law was that you had to buy an M4 and that was the only gun allowed. Would it be constitutional?

236 posted on 12/04/2008 11:52:36 AM PST by Soliton (This 2 shall pass)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: Long Island Pete

You probably can’t... Government agents will attempt to kill you if you don’t comply with their arbitrary edicts.


237 posted on 12/04/2008 11:52:38 AM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: E=MC2

Sorry, but I believe in being a responsible person.


238 posted on 12/04/2008 11:52:59 AM PST by Long Island Pete (Facts are stubborn things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Another quote from your source on the purpose of the 2nd.

------------------------------------------------

What the Second Amendment does is to expressly forbid one particular, and particularly extravagant, extension of Congress' authority to make laws "necessary and proper" for exercising its control over the militia. Whatever the federal government does or fails to do about the militia, the Second Amendment forbids it from disarming citizens under the pretense of regulating the militia.

239 posted on 12/04/2008 11:56:33 AM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: Soliton

I’m calling you a troll because you’re trying to make an argument out of something that doesn’t exist.


240 posted on 12/04/2008 12:03:40 PM PST by wastedyears ("Al Gore is an apostle of arrogance." - Vaclav Klaus, Pres. of Czech Republic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 381-398 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson