arma virumque cano (et alia)
Mikeb criticizing someone for making "extreme generalizations"--now I've seen everything.As for Mr. Noir's "exaggerated outrage," what is the appropriate degree of outrage over a prosecutor letting a violent, misogynist thug go nearly scot-free, while the same prosecutor sentences a single working mother to three years in a cage (and a felony conviction to follow her around for life, crippling her ability to provide for her kids) for the "crime" of taking responsibility for the security of herself and her children?I wonder how this "pre-trial intervention" program works--will it mean that Rice won't be forcibly disarmed? Think you could muster some outrage over that, Mikeb? If so, would it be "exaggerated"?
"I wonder how this "pre-trial intervention" program works" I'm guessing Mike will be bummed because the program suggests that his favorite consequence will not apply. Namely lifetime loss of gun rights. Though I imagine that during her time on probation, she loss of gun rights will likely be a condition. Considering that she got her permit because she had been robbed twice previously, just imagine the PR nightmare if she is robbed a third time after being disarmed. I doubt the prosecutor will lose any sleep over it though."What Are The Benefits of the Pretrial Intervention Program (PTI)?◾If PTI is successfully completed, there is no record of conviction and the defendant avoids the stigma of a criminal record. ◾Early intervention allows rehabilitative services to be provided soon after the alleged offense, in an attempt to correct the behavior that led to the offense. ◾Many of the costs associated with the formal court process are eliminated through acceptance into PTI. ◾PTI provides early resolution of a case which serves the interests of the victim, the public and the defendant. ◾PTI reduces the burden on the court and allows resources to be devoted to more serious criminals." http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/criminal/crpti.htm
Kurt,Just to answer your curiosity in the last paragraph: when someone goes into one of these programs--called pre-trial diversion in some states--they make a guilty plea, as Rice did, and they do lose the ability to own guns during the court prescribed period. Since it's temporary, they often give the guns into the custody of someone else who will return them once the period is over, the crime is wiped from their record, and they are again able to own firearms.Usually, these programs have a probationary element to them where the court may assign some type of counseling or education program and the person must keep their nose clean during the prescribed period. If the person does not meet the court's terms or commits another crime during the period, the agreement is void. If they do meet all requirements, the conviction is wiped from their record at the end, though documents are maintained to show that they've already gotten this lenience once so that they can't take advantage of it again a couple months/years down the road.As for Colion, I think he hits the tone right on the head.
Kurt, I'm not surprised you questioned my criticism of Colion. You yourself are another one who feigns extreme outrage. You use the most exaggerated language you can muster to describe your opinions. Actually, you're much better at this than poor Colion, who's transparently obvious.
SSG, Anon, thanks very much for filling me in on the consequences of Rice's pre-trial intervention. I'm guessing that temporary disarmament is not going to be enough for Mikeb, given his predilection for life sentences, although in this case, he may have painted himself into a corner with regard to how much outrage he can comfortably express.Mikeb, again I ask: just how much outrage do you think is appropriate over the ruination of this black woman's life, and the lives of her two black children (hey--you're not the only one who gets to play the race card), for the victimless "crime" of taking responsibility for her own security, and that of her children, while the guy who beats a black woman unconscious gets a slap on the wrist? What part of Mr. Noir's calm, articulate description of this atrocity was excessive in its outrage?
"the ruination of this black woman's life"It sure didn't take long for another example of the Kurt Hofmann way of being one who uses feigned outrage and exaggerated language for effect.Actually Kurt, no outrage at all is appropriate in the case of the poor persecuted mother-of-the-year and newest NRA poster child. None. The only appropriate thing is the demand that she he held accountable for her actions. No honest or reasonable person truly believes she had no idea that carrying in NJ was a no no. Only guys like you, who sacrifice honesty and integrity for the sake of the holy fight CLAIM to believe that.The outrage which is appropriate is - not the superficially exaggerated pretense of Colion, and absolutely not the glib nonsense you come up with ("the ruination of this black woman's life"), but simple and clear denunciation of the disparity of the McClain handling of the two cases in question.
"the ruination of this black woman's life"Which part of that do you dispute? That she's black, that she's a woman, or that 3 years in a cage, and a felony conviction following her around for the rest of her days will ruin her life?Do you dispute that her kids' lives are being devastated, and will likely continue to be devastated, for years, very possibly poisoning any chance they would otherwise have had at growing up to be successful, productive members of society?Are you going to try to tell me that society benefits from doing this to the three of them?No honest or reasonable person truly believes she had no idea that carrying in NJ was a no no.Wrong, obviously, since I am clearly both honest and reasonable, and I truly believe that she was unaware of New Jersey's mandated defenselessness. Granted, she should have known, but I can say with at least 95% confidence that she must not have, else she would not have told the cop who pulled her over that she was carrying a gun and a permit.By the way, "newest NRA poster child"? The once popular (among liars) notion that the NRA (and gun rights advocates in general) is only for middle-aged and older fat white men, is taking something of a beating, wouldn't you say?
A felony record messes up that person's life. Don't be so dismissive like felonies aren't a big deal.If she knew about NJ's law, why did she volunteer that she was carrying? You think she wanted to go through all this, because she desired to be the next NRA poster child (despite them being racist)?
By the way, word on the street is that the misogynistic persecutor (and no--that's not a typo) seeking to destroy Ms. Allen and her two black children might back off from his initial plan to destroy them.Think that would be happening without some public outrage? I don't--I think the outrage--perhaps to some degree Mr. Noir's outrage specifically--might contribute to a reduction of harm in this case. The reduction will almost certainly be grotesquely inadequate, but would still be a net benefit for Ms. Allen and her kids, and for society as a whole.
Kurt at his best: "the NRA (and gun rights advocates in general) is only for middle-aged and older fat white men, is taking something of a beating, wouldn't you say?"Yeah, both Colion and Shaneen are black. I guess that beats the shit out of the long-standing stereotype.
Kurt at his best . . . My best? You really think so? I stand by it, of course, but I don't see it as being any better than my average. I'd like to think my best is rather a lot harder hitting than that. If I were applying for a writing job, I could find thousands of examples of my work that I would point to first.I guess that beats the shit out of the long-standing stereotype.Now that's funny. In the same discussion in which you criticize someone for his ostensible "extreme generalizations," you also defend what you acknowledge to be "long-standing stereotype." Tell me, Mikeb, how familiar are you with the definition of "stereotype" (my bold emphasis added)?to believe unfairly that all people or things with a particular characteristic are the sameSounds rather a lot like "extreme generalizing," doesn't it? Don't like that one? Let's try another (my bold emphasis added):A conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image.My own definition of "stereotype" would be something like this:The mechanism by which the intellectually lazy avoid dealing with the fact that every individual is different.I'm guessing you don't much like that one, either, though.
"If she knew about NJ's law, why did she volunteer that she was carrying? You think she wanted to go through all this, because she desired to be the next NRA poster child (despite them being racist)?""Granted, she should have known, but I can say with at least 95% confidence that she must not have, else she would not have told the cop who pulled her over that she was carrying a gun and a permit."Both TS and Kurt have made an interesting point and I may have to rethink my skepticism in regards to her not knowing how extreme the gun laws of New Jersey are. Another thing that is making me take another look is actually part of a comment I posted here,"Former Prosecutor Ted Housel liberally applied a normally rare exception in these cases, which allows for parole or pretrial intervention. Housel said in a 2012 memorandum that Atlantic County is unique since tourists who legally own guns often bring them into the state not realizing their permits do not cross state lines." So of course, this quote begs the question, how many people inadvertently brought firearms into the state? Obviously, Allen's defense team is hoping to show that for some reason, their client isn't being afforded the same opportunity as others have received. Maybe the prosecutor's newfound interest in considering Ms. Allen for PTI is the hope that this information isn't released to the public. I of course hope we will get the opportunity to find out.
Kurt, your comment is nothing but obfuscation and diversion. That's what you do when backed into a corner and your slick and eloquent use of the language often makes it a pretty good attempt.Except I don't buy it. I accused you with sarcasm of having said something truly stupid, that two blacks don't do much to dispel the longstanding idea (stereotype) that the NRA is comprised of mainly old fat white men.
ss, from the beginning I've been suggesting that Ms. Shaneen took a gamble with the cop who stopped her, a gamble that didn't work. In that moment she figured if she didn't mention the gun and for some reason the NJ cop ended up searching her or the car, which they are known to do, it would have gone very badly for her. She took a shot and told him voluntarily. It didn't help.
I accused you with sarcasm of having said something truly stupid, that two blacks don't do much to dispel the longstanding idea (stereotype) that the NRA is comprised of mainly old fat white men.In other words, ya' got nuthin'. Thanks for clearing that up (although it's hardly a surprise).In that moment she figured if she didn't mention the gun and for some reason the NJ cop ended up searching her or the car, which they are known to do, it would have gone very badly for her.That's the best you can come up with, eh? Damn--must be rough.
So if it ends up being true that the persecutor (again, that's no typo) decides not to take the heat that his former abominable course would bring down on him, and instead decides to allow Ms. Allen into the pre-trial intervention program after all, she would not permanently lose the ability to own firearms, either, correct?I don't imagine there's much chance that the New Jersey fascists will ever return the gun she was carrying the day the state victimized her, but at least she wouldn't be disarmed for life. Maybe Mikeb would manage to muster some outrage over that.
"Mostly white" does not equal "racists". Your movement is mostly white too. In fact the whole damn country is mostly white. That's what ethnic majority means.
TS, I didn't bring up the idea of race, that was Kurt. Kurt, don't you think a PA gun owner has the responsibility to know the laws in the neighboring states if she's going to travel there?
As I said:Granted, she should have known . . . Obviously, it's far better for one to know which laws one is breaking than to find out to one's surprise that one faces the destruction of one's family at the hands of the state. I understand that by long legal tradition ignorance of even idiotic, evil, unjust laws is no excuse, but I've still yet to see an explanation of how destroying Ms. Allen's life, and those of her children, benefits society in any way. She made a big mistake, with no nefarious intent, and the only harm being done is that done by her persecution (and yet again, that's not a typo).But if we are now arguing about whether or not she should have known, I take it we are no longer arguing whether or not anyone who suggests she did not is unreasonable and/or a liar:No honest or reasonable person truly believes she had no idea that carrying in NJ was a no no. Only guys like you, who sacrifice honesty and integrity for the sake of the holy fight CLAIM to believe that.That's progress, Mikeb--congratulations.Oh, and yes, this time it was I who did "bring up the idea of race," as compared to the gazillions of time you have, but the point still stands that for Ms. Allen to have become an "NRA poster child" (your term), the idea that the NRA has no place for ethnic minorities and women must clearly be bullshit.
Wrong. Putting Shaneen on the martyr's pedestal does not dispel the obvious fact that the NRA is mainly comprised of racist fat white men any more than making Colion Noir an official spokesman, or whatever the hell he is, does.And, how dare you continually complain about others referring to race and then doing so yourself. Why, that's the very definition of hypocrisy, am I right?
Putting Shaneen on the martyr's pedestal does not dispel the obvious fact that the NRA is mainly comprised of racist fat white men any more than making Colion Noir an official spokesman, or whatever the hell he is, does.Ah--proof by vigorous and repeated assertion. No facts or logic required! No wonder you're such a fan of that "debate" technique.And, how dare you continually complain about others referring to race and then doing so yourself.How dare you ask me how I dare? My reference to race in this instance was recognition of the fact that you so enjoy stating: your blog, your rules. By your rules, obviously, the race card is always a legitimate play. If it helps demonstrate to you that the race card actually is massively overplayed, then so much the better.So nope--I gotta reject the "hypocrisy" charge. Oh, and speaking of "the very definition of hypocrisy," how about screeching "Racism!" incessantly, and then throwing a hissy fit when someone else introduces the subject of race into a debate? And then mewling about "hypocrisy." That's hypocrisy squared.
Now, Mikeb, if you want to talk about some gross abuse of the race card, remember arguing that if a black kid living in a southern state is hurt or killed in an unintentional shooting and the black parent/gun owner is arrested, that's "racism," and if the black parent/gun owner is not arrested, that's also "racism," because it shows, to quote you in all your typical charm, "when a little black kid gets shot in LA [Louisiana, rather than Los Angeles], they just don' give a f**k"?The cops have two choices--arrest the person in question, or don't--and it doesn't matter, because both choices are "racist." So you need to back the hell off with your whining about me "bring[ing] up the idea of race," and your ridiculous charges of hypocrisy.
Kurt, among gun-rights fanatics, you're one of the best at utilizing this tactic. Always accuse your opponent of that which you yourself are guilty of. Anyone reading this thread can see I'm not the one throwing "a hissy fit." I guess my pointing out the blatant hypocrisy you demonstrated really pushed your buttons, huh?
No, Mikeb. My buttons remain unpushed.
Just curious, Mikeb, are we allowed any outrage over this triumph of the New Jersey "justice" system?Hubbard was in a car with three other Salem County men that was pulled over for running a red light in Trenton, authorities said. Police saw a handgun in a seatback pocket and everyone was ordered out of the car, authorities said.Police seized a 9mm handgun, which was found to have been stolen out of Anchorage, Alaska, and a prescription bottle of codeine. None of the four men admitted to having the gun or codeine, and as a result, all four men were charged under "constructive possession laws."Mr. Hubbard has no use of his arms, but has spent four months in jail on the suspicion that perhaps he was the one guilty of illegally possessing the gun, rather than any of the other three occupants of the car (you know--the ones with usable arms).That's keeping New Jersey safe.
Yes, indeed, that one is outrageous.
Yes, indeed, that one is outrageous.It's New Jersey--outrageous (racially motivated?) injustice is to be expected.
This is but a video editorial and Mr. Noir is perfectly free to show outrage. Though his outrage is much more civil and polite than say, the on-air abuse of guests by Piers Morgan when he had a job. And his generalizations are no worse than say, some of the gun control ads or statements that are out there. The prosecutor's treatment of preferential treatment of a professional athlete also managed to highlight his willingness to send a person who seems to have had no intent to harm anyone to prison for several years. You normally don't see such an extreme example of disregard for what could be considered reasonable discretion in regards to the prosecution and the use of offender diversion programs. I honestly hadn't been following the Ray Rice thing to the extent of knowing that the same prosecutor was handling both cases and had to go elsewhere to confirm it. Exaggerated and extreme his comments may be, but the same could be said of the prosecutor's handling of both cases, so I'm going to call it quite fitting. In another post, Mike mentioned that the prosecutor is now talking about putting Ms. Allen in the pre-trial intervention and my first thought was that the Ray Rice thing being brought up was the reason. However, it looks to be possibly more than just Rice.“I am presently in the process of reviewing our office’s position on the appropriate resolution of this matter,” McClain wrote in a letter sent last week to Superior Court Judge Michael Donio.He asked that the case be adjourned for three weeks to allow the review. Donio granted the request.A trial set for Oct. 6 has now been moved to Oct. 20. A conference to discuss motions and jury selection set for this week has been moved to Sept. 25.Donio previously became the first judge in the state to open up the Graves Act waivers, which record decisions on pretrial intervention concerning these cases. The records are meant to be kept for the attorney general’s review to make sure the law is being applied uniformly.Local attorney Michael Schreiber argued that if the state can see the records, the defense should be granted the same access. Donio agreed, and opened up three years of decisions. They show that not only do other prosecutors allow for PTI or probation in these cases, McClain’s predecessor also allowed them.Former Prosecutor Ted Housel liberally applied a normally rare exception in these cases, which allows for parole or pretrial intervention. Housel said in a 2012 memorandum that Atlantic County is unique since tourists who legally own guns often bring them into the state not realizing their permits do not cross state lines."http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/09/18/shaneen-allens-prosecutor-might-be-having-second-thoughts/
And oh, Mikeb--aren't you the little self-appointed Arbiter of What Shall be Deemed Appropriate Level of Outrage? First, SSG isn't outraged enough, and now Mr. Noir's outrage is "exaggerated."Is there any aspect of other people's behavior--and even attitudes--you don't demand control over? How sad for you.
"LITTLE self-appointed arbiter?" Give me more credit than that.
Not knowing you are breaking a law (ignorance of the law) is not an excuse to escape prosecution and punishment.
That's a good reason to have preemption laws and strict scrutiny applied to the right. We don't want a patchwork of different laws all over the place with legal pitfalls everywhere you go.
It's the gun owner's responsibility to know the laws.
So TS, you are against State by State gun laws and think all gun laws should be federal and the same throughout the country?
Not willing to respond and give us your position on that question TS? Figures.
Here's an update that just popped up. Is clarification the legal term for someone telling you your decision sucked and you need to fix it?"Atlantic County Prosecutor Jim McClain today recommended that Shaneen Allen of Philadelphia, who was arrested last year for carrying a firearm into the State of New Jersey, be offered pre-trial intervention.McClain’s decision comes after a clarification issued by the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office regarding a 2008 Grave’s Act directive, which deals with how to handle out-of-state residents who hold valid permits to carry a firearm and are charged in New Jersey with illegal possession."“In applying the factors set out in the clarification, I determined that the defendant in this case should be offered the opportunity to be admitted into the Atlantic County PTI Program and I have communicated that determination to the Court and to defense counsel,” McClain said in a statement issued on Wednesday, Sept. 24""The directive issued by Acting Attorney General John J. Hoffman noted that “in most cases, imprisonment is neither necessary not appropriate to serve the interests of justice and protect public safety.”McClain said he would review similar pending cases and make “appropriate decisions” after applying the factors outlined in the clarification."http://www.ammoland.com/2014/09/shaneen-allen-admitted-into-pti/#axzz3EH4cYM1R
McClain’s decision comes after a clarification issued by the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office regarding a 2008 Grave’s Act directive . . . Someone needs to tell McClain that "ignorance of the directive is no excuse."Get it? I crack myself up sometimes.Seriously, though--another big feather in Evan Nappen's cap. He represented Brian Aitken, and saved him from the New Jersey hatemongers, too.
I'm glad you mentioned the former poster boy, Brian Aitken. When he got himself in trouble, which you of course blamed on New Jersey and NOT the person responsible, he rocketed to the top of gun-rights stardom. He was a true martyr, enjoying thousands of posts and comments on gun blogs. The inundation of New Jersey bashing and Brian Aitken support was like a tsunami. But then, when Governor Christie pardoned him and had him released from jail the silence was universal. He dropped from the headlines of gun blogs like a hot potato. You must have forgotten that you're not supposed to mention the happy ending, it damages the overall agenda of victimism and persecution.
But then, when Governor Christie pardoned him [wrong--Christie commuted his sentence--a big difference, and one to Aitken's grave disadvantage] and had him released from jail the silence was universal. He dropped from the headlines of gun blogs like a hot potato. You must have forgotten that you're not supposed to mention the happy ending, it damages the overall agenda of victimism and persecution.That's bizarre, even by your standards, Mikeb. Gun rights advocates are no more shy about trumpeting our victories than anyone else, and there was plenty of discussion on our part when Christie commuted his sentence.So what are you talking about? The fact that such talk soon died down? Well, what, specifically, would there be to say--"Aitken's sentence continues to be commuted"?If we gun control advocates deserve chastisement for anything regarding the discontinuance of discussion of Aitken's plight, it's for the fact that our outrage should still burn hot, because he should have been pardoned, rather than his sentence merely commuted, and that even after the most serious charge was overturned on appeal (after the commutation), on the grounds that the judges found his claim to have been in the process of moving plausible, they for whatever bizarre reason didn't apply that to Aitken's supposed violation of New Jersey's obscene hollowpoint ammo laws. If I remember correctly, the hollowpoint law is a felony, meaning that even now, and even in other states, he faces a life sentence of forcible disarmament.So, yeah--I'll plead guilty to shutting up too soon about Aitken--but the reason that's wrong is exactly opposite the bizarre theory you put forward.By the way, speaking of NJ's abominable law regarding hollowpoint ammo, does anyone know if this Lehigh Defense "Xtreme Penetrator" ammo is anything more than just hype? If not (and I acknowledge that this is a very big "if," given ammo manufacturers' well knon penchant for over-hyping the terminal effects of their products)--if it really does penetrate that well, and create that wide a wound channel, via an ingenious new approach to harnessing the hydrostatic forces, it would be worth the cost, especially in NJ, where hollowpoints carry so much unjustified legal jeopardy.
"Seriously, though--another big feather in Evan Nappen's cap. He represented Brian Aitken, and saved him from the New Jersey hatemongers, too." Kurt, I have good news for you, and more so for the citizens of New Jersey. The good news is that I've discovered there are TWO Nappens, Evan and Louis, and both seem to be involved in legal issues regarding gun rights, or lack thereof in the state."The New Jersey Appellate Division decided two cases this week in support of fair treatment for those who received mental health care, but who no longer suffer from such disabilities in such a manner that would handicap them in the safe handling of firearms.The law firm of Evan F. Nappen, Attorney at Law PC of Eatontown, New Jersey, (www.evannappen.com) represented both of these appellants.Both cases were partially funded by the NRA’s Civil Rights Defense Fund.""When asked about the A.S. and M.L. appeals, Attorney Nappen commented, “These victories do not just support firearm rights, but also civil rights for those who face unfair treatment by the courts or by the state as a result of seeking mental health treatment. The Appellate decisions send a message that judges should stop discouraging people from seeking mental health counseling at the fear of losing their personal reputations and firearm rights.”http://www.ammoland.com/2012/02/new-jerseys-nappen-firm-wins-two-firearm-appeals/#axzz3EXQN2KKg Their website is quite interesting, especially a quote from a famous person on the top of their profile page,"Aggressive fighting for the right is the noblest sport the world affords." - Theodore Roosevelthttp://www.evannappen.com/about.html
That is indeed good news, SSG--thanks. I had not been aware of Louis Nappen.I look forward to watching the gun owner persecution culture of New Jersey continue to get the "Nappen Slappin'."
But then, when Governor Christie pardoned [Brian AItken] and had him released from jail the silence was universal. He dropped from the headlines of gun blogs like a hot potato. You must have forgotten that you're not supposed to mention the happy ending, it damages the overall agenda of victimism and persecution.Just wondering, Mikeb--according to this weird theory of yours, when are gun rights advocates supposed to shut up about Shaneen Allen, because discussion of her victory over injustice and evil "damages the overall agenda of victimism and persecution"?I ask, because it clearly hasn't happened yet:Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs ( ANJRPC ) is pleased to announce that Shaneen Allen will be the featured speaker at the ANJRPC annual meeting banquet on Saturday evening, October 18 2014 in Edison, New JerseyIt appears that gun rights advocates are not trying to keep Ms. Allen's triumph over racist, misogynist tyranny secret. Weird, huh?