« Administrivia - RR hacked | Main | Christmas in 1949 »

16 December 2011

Comments

D

John, that would be a yes. Meckler has stated he had been in NYC for four days and was back at the NYC airport to fly to Detroit.

Meckler did not just land at NYC to pass through to another place, if so he would have not had a legal issue in NYC. Meckler went to NYC for "business" and had stayed there for four days before he returned to the NYC airoport to fly to Detroit...per Meckler's own statements.

D

FYI, I made the above 8:31 am post response to John. Steve Enos

D

John, please go back and read my 16 December 2011 at 05:28 PM post. You even posted a response to that post of mine.

My 16 December 2011 at 05:28 PM post covered the "four days in NYC" issue.

It's this simple... Meckler was illegally in possession of a handgun while conducting four days of business in New York City.

As I posted above, the "protected travel" interstate transport provision of the FOPA requires that the firearm must be legal in both departure and arrival points of the travel. He didn’t meet this requirement so he has no recourse via the Federal FOPA rules and we all know how tight the NYC firearms laws are so Meckler has issues with NYC.

Meckler was caught leaving NYC after a four day stay with a firearm in NYC, that's seems to be his primary "problem" with NYC.

Steve Enos

Gregory

"D", FYI, who cares who you intended your response for?

You came out swinging against Meckler and decided to label me with a mental condition. Then you complain about personal attacks!

You've made so many errors about the law you've pretty much blown any respect you might have had as a former officer of the law. I get it that you don't like Meckler and are relishing NYC courts doing him in; that may be premature.

For the record, I've never read any local official or semi-official TP blogs, never attended any TP function, and in general don't care about the TP or Meckler.

Gregory

"It's this simple... Meckler was illegally in possession of a handgun while conducting four days of business in New York City."

You know where he was those four days, also the days before, and where he was traveling from? When did he leave home, and when was he planning on returning? The lawyer'd up statement claims he was "in temporary transit through the state of New York" and determining the verity of that statement is obviously above your paygrade.

Todd Juvinall

"D" explain to us how someone is caught with a firearm they have locked and unloaded in a TSA box and declared at the counter? I think you are unhinged and your logic is totally gone.

Gregory

Or, more succinctly, when an out of state and city traveler arrives at a ticket counter with a firearm packed away according to TSA rules, how is there probable cause that they are not in transit?

The 5th amendment is pretty clear.

Paul Emery

It's actually a very simple question. Was MM in NYC during the four days in question? If he was I assume he was in possession of his firearm and ammunition or of not where could he have stashed them . That stated he would have either been in ignorance of or in defiance of the law. There's not much room for any other theories. It's that simple.

Being a celebrity has it's downside.

George Rebane

PaulE 1034am - "... where could he have stashed them?" Most hotels provide their guests with the means of storing valuables either through hotel safes or in-room safes. Were I in Mark's shoes, I would have stored my handgun in such a manner while in the city. If he stayed with friends, a similar provision could have been made.

John Galt

Steve, thanks for the info regarding Mr. Meckler's whereabouts.

However, I still don't share your view "It's this simple". Even if Meckler violated New York CITY law. If NY CITY law in itself is illegal (UN-constitutional, then Mr. Meckler did NOT do anything illegal. i.e. Violating an illegal law by definition--can NOT be illegal.

NY City has a lot of crazy laws. Only today a man was ticketed for setting his trash out 30 minutes early.

So suppose, NY City passes a different UNconstitutional law e.g. a law prohibiting the publishing of the restaurant dining information (frequency and amount) of all NY City officials. And suppose a citizen publishes that information (intentionally or accidentally) during a four-day visit to NYC. Did that person publish the information "illegally?

The answer is of course not. While NY City law may have been "violated" it can't be an ILLEGAL act because it is constitutionally protected by the 1st amendment. Do you not agree?

Re-read the 2nd amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to bear keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

It's clear that NY City's law requiring a permit to merely posses a firearm is an infringement of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

So constitutionally speaking, Mark Meckler did NOT do anything illegal!

Gregory

It's actually a simpler question... was he in temporary transit? On the face of it, standing at a ticket counter sure seems to fit. Or are possessory crimes involving firearms an exemption to 5th amendment protections?

D

John... Meckler and NYC have stated he arrived in NYC on the 11th and was there for four days until he went back to the airport to fly out of NYC.

Meckler brought the firearm into NYC, had it in his possission after leaving the airport and still had it when he went to fly out of NYC. Meckler was in possesion of the firearm while in NYC, a violation of NYC law.

NYC has firearm laws and they have been subject of court review and they still stand. We don't just get to ignore the laws we don't like, we change them.

It might very well be that NYC's law is not valid for some reason but it is still an active, on the books law and it has been upheld by the courts to date.

If and until it is over turned or changed it's still the law.

D

The 20 December 2011 at 02:21 PM post above was made by me, Steve Enos

Paul Emery

George

It's probably beyond our level of research but I'm sure there are legal ways to deal with handgun possession while traveling in and out of NYC. The question is whether MM was aware of those procedures during his travel there. Of course ignorance of the law is no defense.

I'll do a little research just for fun

Constitutional questions of the NYC laws need to be tested through the courts. If MM chose to intentionally violate the law to test it's Constitutionality then it becomes an act of civil disobedience. The protestors during the Civil Rights Movement willingly were arrested to protest the laws they felt were unjust in order to change them through legal challenge and legislation.

Gregory

"temporary transit through the state of New York" is a pretty clear legal claim.

Had he flown from SAC to NYC and then planning on a flight back to SAC, he'd have a real hard time claiming the Federal get out of jail free card. Meckler's legal statement is that his was a "temporary transit through the state of New York". He had a multistate itinerary with a short stay in New York. I don't see any requirement in the Federal law for any transit to be of a maximum length.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out given the recent SCOTUS finding that the 2nd is an individual right.

George Rebane

PaulE 259pm - It seems to me that if the current NYC laws don't allow a legally carried firearm to transit the city, either directly or with a stopover (as I described in my 1039am), then MM should have a pretty strong case in his favor and NYC should thank him for bringing such insanity to their attention.

I have no information as to MM's intentions or mindset, and will look forward to what you can find.

Paul Emery

A quick google on the subject came up with this. Check it out

http://www.queensdefense.com/guns.htm#airport

It appears that NYC airports may have created some kind of speed trap so to speak. It reminds me when I was 18 years old living in Spokane Washington. In Washington the drinking age was 21 but across the border in Idaho it was 18. We used to pile into a car and go to Coeur d'Alene Idaho for a night of fun at the local taverns then go back home to Spokane. Even with a sober driver were were subject to arrest for drinking under age even though it was legal where we drank. You'll like this The law considered it "guilty by consumption" and every night the Washington state cops would line the roads and pick off all they needed to make their quota's and fill the courts. States rights is a messy thing indeed.

George Rebane

PaulE - without shifting gears too much, I would not weaken states' rights because of such obvious 'harvesting' of fines. But I would look for ways to incorporate into federal statutes prohibitions against such egregious harvesting practices.

Paul Emery

Here's a teaser from the above link

"Is Passenger careless for not paying closer attention to the rules? Should he have been more careful about making sure that everything would be ok in New York? Absolutely. Unfortunately for Passenger, however, aside from being so careless, he is, the moment the plane lands in New York City, probably guilty of a violent felony offense in New York City (and he has NO LEGAL DEFENSE)."

Gregory

No Paul, the "passenger" would not be in violation of the city law when he landed in NYC. He'd be in violation of the city law if the airline agent in NYC delivered to him his gun within city limits. And if his intent was to rent a car and leave the city enroute to an ultimate destination where it was legal to have the gun he'd have a fine defense. As long as we're talking fairy tales, he should also get his gun back with an apology... ;)

D

Constitutional questions of the NYC gun laws need to be tested through the courts and I hope Meckler does so.

I don't like NYC's gun laws and I'm also no fan of California guns laws too. I don't live in NYC and I would never bring a firearm into NYC due to their current laws.

If folks want to help address the California guns laws check out and join "Calguns", a good group that is doing good work to address the ever growing and over reaching California gun laws. Calguns also does a wide range of valuable and fun firearms and shooting related efforts and events in Cali.

Here's the Calguns link, check it out and consider joining:

http://www.calguns.net/

Posted by Steve Enos

John Galt

Steve,

In reply to your closing comment "...until it is over turned or changed it's still the law.

That's ever more so true with the Constitution and the 2nd amendment. That is...Until the 2nd amendment is changed...the right of the people to bear keep and bear arms is STILL the Law.

We have two laws in conflict with each other. New York City law, and United States Constitutional law. And in such situations, Constitutional law takes precedence.

I could agree with you that MM violated the CITY law (but I'll wait until the facts of trial come forth--you know ...innocent until proven guilty).

But it seems clear to me that the NY CITY law violates the US Constitution...so I can NOT agree that MM did anything "Illegal".

MM's action can be no more illegal than if he published something in Tea Party Times which NY CITY law forbade.

Just as an aside, I think responsible gun owners have accepted some regulations as prudent. But this NYC law is just plain impractical and unreasonable (in addition to being unconstitutional.) My guess is that NY City will incur a lot of tax dollars in litigation over this incident and ultimately lose.

D

Here's a link to an NRA site that provides some info on NYC gun laws.

http://www.nraila.org/gunlaws/nyc.aspx

One thing that looks to have an impact on the "passing throught NYC" clause is:

"New York City licenses are valid throughout New York State. However, a New York State license to carry or possess will be valid in New York City in the absence of a New York City license provided that the handguns are transported by the licensee in a locked container and the trip through New York City is continuous and uninterrupted".

The "continuous and uninterrupted" part is the likely issue with Meckler as he was in NYC for four days.

John Galt

Paul,

That was very interesting link ( http://www.queensdefense.com/guns.htm#airport ) --thanks for sharing it.

And it sort of supports my sense of entrapment with this NY CITY law and enforcement.

Gregory

The superseding Federal law does not contain the "continuous and uninterrupted" language, and neither the existing NY, NYC or Federal laws have been interpreted since the 2nd joined the rest of the Bill of Rights as recognizing an individual right.

D

The "protected travel" interstate transport provision of the Federal FOPA requires that the firearm must be legal in both departure and arrival points of the travel.

Steve Enos

Gregory

D, again trying to make a point of law as a former law enforcer, writes "The "continuous and uninterrupted" part is the likely issue with Meckler as he was in NYC for four days."

Since "continuous and uninterrupted" is in the city law regarding the validity for a NY State license to possess while in transit, it does not cover Meckler at all, since he never claimed to have a NY state license. This is regarding interstate travel. It might even be interstate commerce and interstate political actions.

Gregory

Steve Enos, it was legal in the state he came from and legal in the next state he was visiting. That makes the NY stay as part of interstate travel.

D

NYC law states "Handgun licenses issued elsewhere in New York State are not valid in New York City".

The same holds true in NYC for out of state licenses and out of NYC handguns. Current NYC law does not recognize out of NYC handgun licenses.

As I have said, the constitutional questions of the NYC gun laws need to be tested through the courts and I hope Meckler does so.

I don't like NYC's gun laws or California gun laws too. I don't live in NYC and I would never bring a firearm into NYC due to their current laws.

Gregory


Once again, the Federal law does not specify a time limit. It is nice that "Enos" has dropped all the carry concealed nonsense he started with, but he's still flailing.

There's no requirement I can see in the Federal law to not stop in a jurisdiction that forbids the possession of the goodies, only that it be between two points that allow it.

Gregory

"D" wrote "NYC law states "Handgun licenses issued elsewhere in New York State are not valid in New York City".

The same holds true in NYC for out of state licenses and out of NYC handguns. Current NYC law does not recognize out of NYC handgun licenses."

Yes, but that wasn't the issue you were trying to make out of it the last time. You were trying to apply the NYC treatment of transport by NU state permitees, and it has nothing at all to do with Meckler's issue which supercedes the state and local laws *BECAUSE* interstate travel is involved.

Nancy Garcia

Mr. Keachie, I would like to assure you that I do understand the distinction between a gun lockbox and a suitcase. Having spent thirty five years traveling the world in our family business I have hauled my share of suitcases. They are always checked in as opposed to "carry-ons" which frequently travel with you in the cabin.

George, would it be a CCW infraction in NYC if, upon check-in, an empty gun in a lock box is immediately put in the safe deposit box in the hotel room and is not removed until it is placed in your suitcase upon departure? And would a trip involving three other airport stops after NYC have any bearing on the rules?

Also, it would seem possible to declare a standardized rule for all airports since they are frequently hosts to out of state or out of country visitors. You may be carrying a gun and have a legal permit for another stop you are making. If guns are not legal at a particular stop, the owner could then pay the existing authority a storage fee when picking up the gun upon departure. That may be a much better way of handling this situation. Any other ideas that might be workable?

Bonnie McGuire

Mark Meckler did everything he thought was right. I think New York will have to change the way it treats people. Legal common sense. I think George, Russ, John and Todd are right. It'll be interesting. Also disgusting was our local Sheriff suspending the permit. That doesn't appear legal. I remember when we were in the trucking business that some lawmen and judges broke the laws and we had to stand up to them, sometimes with the help of the Governor, or other elected representatives. Most people don't realize this stuff goes on all the time.

Todd Juvinall

I too am troubled by the "guilty" until proven innocent on Meckler's local permit. It doesn't sound legal or right to me. Where is the due process?

George Rebane

Before we come down too hard on Sheriff Royal, consider the situation he finds himself in as the arbiter and issuer of Nevada County's CCW permits one of which is held by Mark Meckler. Another jurisdiction across the country arrests one of his permit holders, and alleges a felony firearms violation. Keith has neither the resources to investigate nor the legal precedent to challenge the charges made by a sister law enforcement agency. As reported, he took the prudent course of 'suspending' and not 'revoking' Mark's CCW permit while the case was being resolved. If there was more involved about the issue of Mark's permit status, then I'm not aware of it.

For the record, we know Mark Meckler and his family as friends and fellow TPP members. And as I've stated here before, of what I know of it, I believe that NYC's CCW law is insane (in the formal logical sense), and very well unconstitutional.

John Galt

Sheriff Royal was NOT compelled to revoke Mark Meckler's CCW permit.

As some of you know, County Sheriffs have great legal authority within their county. (e.g. Recall the Sheriff of Elkhart County, Indiana who prevailed against the FDA earlier this month.)

Though Sheriff Royal is within his authority to revoke the CCW permit, it flies in the face of common sense. The permit was requested and issued for good cause (which was a requirement for Mr. Meckler to originally obtain the permit.) The threats facing Mark Meckler are unlikely to cease now.

So will Sheriff Royal now provide dedicated protection to Mark Meckler using his diminished budget? I think not.

I know many readers here like our congenial Sheriff...but he's as much a politician as he is a Sheriff. He knows what to do and say to keep the votes happy. But on this one he may have miscalculated.

I expect a little more "Joe Arpaio-like" back-bone from our Sheriff.


Gregory

I don't have the link handy but I recall reading a CA state law on CCW permits and they are not valid if under indictment for a felony. Or something like that.

This isn't a wobbler, it isn't a dump on Meckler event or a backbone issue for Royal. It's just the way it is.

Gregory

"George, would it be a CCW infraction in NYC if, upon check-in, an empty gun in a lock box is immediately put in the safe deposit box in the hotel room and is not removed until it is placed in your suitcase upon departure?"

This whole NYC thing has nothing to do with the California CCW, it's entirely an issue of 1) possession of a firearm in NYC and 2)superceding Federal law on interstate movements with a firearm.

"And would a trip involving three other airport stops after NYC have any bearing on the rules?"

That is the essence of 2), and the reason Meckler's lawyer'd up statement claims his NYC stop was a "temporary transit".

Todd Juvinall

If that is the law in California then Royal is simply doing the legal thing. It still is a guilty before innocent though.

John Galt

My reading of the Calif Dept of Justice CCW application and rules is that an applicantcan be denied if if under indictment for a felony (or certain misdemeanors). In my reading, such a situation does not automatically require the withdrawal of a CCW permit already issued. But perhaps I'm wrong.

John Galt

Gregory,

Your are correct. This has nothing to do with CCW laws as Mark Meckler was not carrying a concealed weapon at the time. (And there's no evidence that he every carried a concealed weapon in public while in NY City.)

The issue is the over-reaching and unconstitutional NY City law that prohibits possession of any firearm within city limits without a citypermit (one that is difficult to obtain...especially if the applicant is not a resident.)

NY City believes there law trumps NY State law, Federal laws (FOPA, etc.), and the US Constitution.

The comments to this entry are closed.