Prison for driving with flintlock pistol?

[Cleon]

Really, though, I think the chances of this guy actually going to prison for this are really, really small.

Either the DA's going to start backpedaling, or Christie will step in.

 

[Crossbow]

Wow! That law sounds terribly unconstitutional.

In the couple of accounts that I have read on this story, I get the impression that in New Jersy one needs a concealed weapons permit just to transport a weapon.

And if that is the case, then I would say that such a requirement places an undue burden on the part of weapon owners since it would require them to get a concealed weapons permit so that they transport their weapons for the purpose of selling the weapons, buying additional weapons, selling the weapons that they already own, getting their weapons repaired, using their weapons at a shooting range, and so on.

Unless, of course, the State were to make it very easy to get a concealed weapons permit; but, if the State does make it very easy to get a concealed weapons permit, then there is really no point in the State even issuing concealed weapons permits to begin with.

This is one of those weird cases that just keeps getting weirder every time that I think about it.

 

[Babbylonian]

Really, though, I think the chances of this guy actually going to prison for this are really, really small.

Either the DA's going to start backpedaling, or Christie will step in.

Of course. Why would anyone want to put a white man in prison for a crime that carries such a penalty? These kinds of laws are intended to deal with thugs, not nice old gun collectors...who one would think would be in a position to know the laws governing their hobby.

Yup. We just need to enforce the gun laws already on the books, unless the person who commits the crime is a nice old white man who didn't mean to break the law.

 

[casebro]

In California felons are allowed to buy front stuffers, including cap & ball revolvers. But I don't know whether they fit the definition of concealed/able weapons.

 

[Cleon]

Of course. Why would anyone want to put a white man in prison for a crime that carries such a penalty? These kinds of laws are intended to deal with thugs, not nice old gun collectors...who one would think would be in a position to know the laws governing their hobby.

Yup. We just need to enforce the gun laws already on the books, unless the person who commits the crime is a nice old white man who didn't mean to break the law.

Forget that "the law is the law" crap. Do you think it's just to throw this guy in prison?

 

[Ranb]

.... white man who didn't mean to break the law.

Heck we already knew that! http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2013/jan/11/miller-david-gregory-gets-scott-free/

Oh wait, David Gregory intentionally broke the law. Plenty of free publicity for him.

Ranb

 

[Ziggurat]

Of course. Why would anyone want to put a white man in prison for a crime that carries such a penalty?

Good question.

We just need to enforce the gun laws already on the books, unless the person who commits the crime is a nice old white man who didn't mean to break the law.

Are you familiar with the concept of malum in se versus malum prohibitum? This violation is a crime of the latter sort, not the former. Justice is not served by prosecution.

 

[Babbylonian]

Forget that "the law is the law" crap. Do you think it's just to throw this guy in prison?

Yup...and "the law is the law" seems to suffice for every other *********** crime discussed on this forum; I'm certainly not inclined to endorse exceptions when it comes to gun laws. Either the law is worthwhile or it's not. If it is, then applying it equally is vital. If it isn't, then maybe they should have changed it. He's retired and has the free time to do a couple months in prison (which would be about all he would spend there if they gave him "1 year").

Heck we already knew that! http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2013/jan/11/miller-david-gregory-gets-scott-free/

Oh wait, David Gregory intentionally broke the law. Plenty of free publicity for him.

Ranb

I'd be fine with him going to jail, too. **** everybody and their goddamned handguns.

 

[Ladewig]

My first question was why was the cop poking around in the glove compartment? The only reasons I can think of are (a) the cop saw something that gave him probable cause, (b) the driver voluntarily consented to the search, (c) the driver responded in the affirmative when the officer asked if there were weapons in the car.

...............
From linked story

I called the prosecutor to see what we could do on this, and the prosecutor told me that they were waiting for ballistics," Nappen said incredulously. "And I’m thinking, ‘What? Ballistics on a flintlock?'"​

..........

Please excuse my ignorance, but Do smooth bore handguns have ballistic signatures?

Also, would firing an antique handgun that hasn't been fired in over 200 years reduce the value of the artifact?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Wow! That law sounds terribly unconstitutional.

In the couple of accounts that I have read on this story, I get the impression that in New Jersy one needs a concealed weapons permit just to transport a weapon.

And if that is the case, then I would say that such a requirement places an undue burden on the part of weapon owners since it would require them to get a concealed weapons permit so that they transport their weapons for the purpose of selling the weapons, buying additional weapons, selling the weapons that they already own, getting their weapons repaired, using their weapons at a shooting range, and so on.

Unless, of course, the State were to make it very easy to get a concealed weapons permit; but, if the State does make it very easy to get a concealed weapons permit, then there is really no point in the State even issuing concealed weapons permits to begin with.

This is one of those weird cases that just keeps getting weirder every time that I think about it.

But is any of this hypothosis true, or would he need to transport it in a gun case or the trunk, and not in a cloth in the glove compartment? From what Rand has shown if it was in the trunk this wouldn't have been an issue. But as it was in the glove compartment and then he got out his papers and flashed it at the cop it seems pretty clear what the problem might have been.

 

[bruto]

I just checked to see if New York law has changed in the last 50 years or so, and it appears it has not. Despite a fair amount of gun control, it has long been legal in New York State to own and trade in muzzle loading antique guns, as well as those for which ammunition is no longer made. Muzzle loaders are considered antiques unless they are loaded or carried with the components needed to load them. I still have, and have had since I was a kid, a percussion cap muzzle loading pepperpot, and a pinfire revolver (ammo no longer made), both quite legally purchased in NY.

If a muzzle loader is not loaded, it's presumed antique. If it's loaded, it's presumed a weapon whether antique or not. Unless someone decides to make pinfire cartridges again, my pinfire revolver stays an antique. If they do, it's not any more. It seems pretty simple.

I would have imagined that if New York could figure this out, New Jersey could too.

 

[Dr. Keith]

My first question was why was the cop poking around in the glove compartment? The only reasons I can think of are (a) the cop saw something that gave him probable cause, (b) the driver voluntarily consented to the search, (c) the driver responded in the affirmative when the officer asked if there were weapons in the car.

...............
From linked story

I called the prosecutor to see what we could do on this, and the prosecutor told me that they were waiting for ballistics," Nappen said incredulously. "And I’m thinking, ‘What? Ballistics on a flintlock?'"​

..........

Please excuse my ignorance, but Do smooth bore handguns have ballistic signatures?

Also, would firing an antique handgun that hasn't been fired in over 200 years reduce the value of the artifact?

"Ballistics" may be the department that will be telling them that this thing is not in operable condition and is better classified as "paperweight" than "firearm".

 

[Cleon]

Yup...and "the law is the law" seems to suffice for every other *********** crime discussed on this forum; I'm certainly not inclined to endorse exceptions when it comes to gun laws. Either the law is worthwhile or it's not. If it is, then applying it equally is vital. If it isn't, then maybe they should have changed it. He's retired and has the free time to do a couple months in prison (which would be about all he would spend there if they gave him "1 year").

What a wonderful use of taxpayer money.

I'd be fine with him going to jail, too. **** everybody and their goddamned handguns.

So it's really just about you wanting to lock up gun owners.

I'll be over here hiding my shock and disbelief.

 

[madurobob]

My first question was why was the cop poking around in the glove compartment? The only reasons I can think of are (a) the cop saw something that gave him probable cause, (b) the driver voluntarily consented to the search, (c) the driver responded in the affirmative when the officer asked if there were weapons in the car.

He told them it was there.

ETA: I've done this before, too. They ask for license and registration, registration is in glove box. "I'm getting my registration out of the glove box, I need you to know there is a handgun in there and I have all the required paperwork for it."

 

[ponderingturtle]

I just checked to see if New York law has changed in the last 50 years or so, and it appears it has not. Despite a fair amount of gun control, it has long been legal in New York State to own and trade in muzzle loading antique guns, as well as those for which ammunition is no longer made. Muzzle loaders are considered antiques unless they are loaded or carried with the components needed to load them. I still have, and have had since I was a kid, a percussion cap muzzle loading pepperpot, and a pinfire revolver (ammo no longer made), both quite legally purchased in NY.

If a muzzle loader is not loaded, it's presumed antique. If it's loaded, it's presumed a weapon whether antique or not. Unless someone decides to make pinfire cartridges again, my pinfire revolver stays an antique. If they do, it's not any more. It seems pretty simple.

I would have imagined that if New York could figure this out, New Jersey could too.

I am pretty sure you can buy mail order black powder pistols with out a licence in NY. Hell it is entirely possible that you can in New Jersey as well, as it doesn't seem to be owning the gun that he was charged with but improper transport.

 

[Ranb]

I am pretty sure you can buy mail order black powder pistols with out a licence in NY. Hell it is entirely possible that you can in New Jersey as well, as it doesn't seem to be owning the gun that he was charged with but improper transport.

NJ treats that muzzle loading black powder handgun like any other for the most part if I understand what I read of their statutes. Even Cabela's will not ship those types of guns to NJ.

•APO/FPO addresses
•International addresses
•P.O. Box when shipping to the United States (a physical address is required)
•United States addresses that have a zip code that starts with 606
•United States addresses that have a zip code that starts with 607
•United States addresses that have a zip code that starts with 608
•United States Territories
• New Jersey

Not sure why parts of KY, NY and WI are SOL though.

Ranb

 

[ponderingturtle]

NJ treats that muzzle loading black powder handgun like any other for the most part if I understand what I read of their statutes. Even Cabela's will not ship those types of guns to NJ.


Not sure why parts of KY, NY and WI are SOL though.

Ranb

Probably local laws, instead of state level ones.

 

[The Norseman]

My first question was why was the cop poking around in the glove compartment? The only reasons I can think of are (a) the cop saw something that gave him probable cause, (b) the driver voluntarily consented to the search, (c) the driver responded in the affirmative when the officer asked if there were weapons in the car.

Exactly. I'm sure it's arguable, but I would be perfectly honest in saying "no" to the question, "are there any weapons in the car". But still, this to me just shows more evidence that you do not consent to searches, nor do you store a firearm anywhere near where you keep your registration/insurance.

...............
From linked story

I called the prosecutor to see what we could do on this, and the prosecutor told me that they were waiting for ballistics," Nappen said incredulously. "And I’m thinking, ‘What? Ballistics on a flintlock?'"​

..........

Please excuse my ignorance, but Do smooth bore handguns have ballistic signatures?

No, they do not. Shotguns are the usual example of a smoothbore firearm that has no ballistic signature.

Also, would firing an antique handgun that hasn't been fired in over 200 years reduce the value of the artifact?

I would think so, yes. Could possibly crack the barrel or damage the firearm in some similar way.

 

[madurobob]

... nor do you store a firearm anywhere near where you keep your registration/insurance.

I would defy you to find *any* other practical place than the glovebox to store either in my little '97 MX-5.

(ETA: to be fair, the hand gun is typically in my overnight bag in the trunk. But, sometimes its in the glovebox and I see no problem with that. Nor have the few cops I've encountered. Tho, I'm sure that'd be a different story had I not warned them first)

 

[dudalb]

Heh, just saw the story this morning and thought "Ranb will have something to say about this."

I have visions of the NJ State Police making a raid for illegal flintlock arms on a Revolutionary War reenactors camp at Monmouth or Princton.....