[grg3d]

Watertown Daily Times | Injured veteran arrested in weapons investigation

The story so far.....

A former Fort Drum soldier who was injured in special forces training was arrested Sunday night when he was found with prohibited rounds of ammunition, the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department said.

Nathan H. Haddad, 32, of 25240 Waddingham Road, town of LeRay, faces five felony counts of third-degree criminal possession of a weapon. He was released without bail before town of Watertown Justice Andrew N. Capone, and is ordered to appear Wednesday in town of LeRay Court.

Deputies made the arrest shortly before 7:30 p.m. Sunday on Steinhilber Road in the town of LeRay, where Mr. Haddad is accused of possessing five 30-round AR-15 magazines of ammunition. He is cited under a state penal law statute that prohibits possession of “a large capacity ammunition feeding device.” The ammunition was found in his vehicle during a traffic stop, according to the sheriff’s office.

Mr. Haddad was deployed four times during his decade in the Army, the Times reported in a story featuring him in September 2009. At that time, he was a staff sergeant with the 3rd Battalion, 85th Infantry, Warrior in Transition Unit at Fort Drum, undergoing aquatic physical therapy for an injury he suffered in South Korea during special forces training. He was discharged from the Army in October 2010, according to Fort Drum.

[Dennis in MA]

I thought everyone had a year to dispose of them.

[Patchman]

I thought I read on GT that the law kicks in in April of 2013, and then you had one year after that to get rid of them.

Guess now we know some LE agency in NY don't follow GT

[philipk]

The old law is what he violated.

The old law had a limit of 10. I believe there was a grandfather clause?

The new law has a limit of 7.

This man had 30 round magazines that he (probably) imported into the state.

BAD LAW that makes criminals of honest people!

[frank4570]

I guess this settles that question about whether police officers will enforce an anti Second Amendment law or not.

[G36's Rule]

Originally Posted by frank4570

I guess this settles that question about whether police officers will enforce an anti Second Amendment law or not.

Was there ever any doubt?

[Gallium]

Originally Posted by frank4570

I guess this settles that question about whether police officers will enforce an anti Second Amendment law or not.

Extrapolating from the cops I know here. most cops in NY see stuff like this as looking good in their jacket.

[John_NJ]

New York is the worst.............

[pizza_pablo]

This just in.......
Veteran goes to jail for having pieces of plastic.
Car thieves set free.

[BlisteringSilence]

Originally Posted by frank4570

I guess this settles that question about whether police officers will enforce an anti Second Amendment law or not.

I don't get this. The law they enforced is a long-standing one. Until the law is challenged by someone, and overturned, it's a law.

Cops don't get to pick and choose which laws they enforce. If you allow that, you get anarchy.

NY has banned magazines over 10 rounds for a LONG time.

The fluff about his service in the military is nice, but has nothing to do with the fact that he possessed magazines that were illegal under state law.

I would suggest that he fight it, and use himself as the case to have the law overturned. But, that's easy for me to say, I'm not the one looking at the criminal penalties associated with the violation.

[frank4570]

Originally Posted by BlisteringSilence

I don't get this. The law they enforced is a long-standing one. Until the law is challenged by someone, and overturned, it's a law.

Cops don't get to pick and choose which laws they enforce. If you allow that, you get anarchy.

NY has banned magazines over 10 rounds for a LONG time.

The fluff about his service in the military is nice, but has nothing to do with the fact that he possessed magazines that were illegal under state law.

I would suggest that he fight it, and use himself as the case to have the law overturned. But, that's easy for me to say, I'm not the one looking at the criminal penalties associated with the violation.

some people have suggested police officers won't enforce laws which are unconstitutional.I think that's nonsense.

[philipk]

Originally Posted by frank4570

some people have suggested police officers won't enforce laws which THEY THINK are unconstitutional.I think that's nonsense.

Fixed it for you.

It takes a court to declare a law unconstitutional.

Yes, you are right to think that the vast majority of police will enforce laws until such a ruling takes place.

[pizza_pablo]

Originally Posted by philipk

Fixed it for you.

It takes a court to declare a law unconstitutional.

Yes, you are right to think that the vast majority of police will enforce laws until such a ruling takes place.

So much, for all those posts, starting that police won't seize guns, from formerly law abiding citizens.

[BlisteringSilence]

Originally Posted by pizza_pablo

So much, for all those posts, starting that police won't seize guns, from formerly law abiding citizens.

A door to door seizure is a very different animal than a guy that got caught in a traffic stop.

Look up curtilage, and read up on the laws controlling searches and seizures, and the differences between a home and a vehicle.

In the 2 or 3 years that will take, I'll be here. Let me know what you find out.

[oldman11]

From what I've heard, most of the cops in NYC could care less about the 2nd amendment.

[DaleGribble]

Originally Posted by BlisteringSilence

Cops don't get to pick and choose which laws they enforce. If you allow that, you get anarchy.

You're wrong.

Every single cop, every single day, chooses to overlook violations of the law. If they didn't, every single adult in America would eventually be found guilty of a crime.

[Glock20 10mm]

Originally Posted by G36's Rule

Was there ever any doubt?

Nope...

[BlisteringSilence]

Originally Posted by DaleGribble

You're wrong.

Every single cop, every single day, chooses to overlook violations of the law. If they didn't, every single adult in America would eventually be found guilty of a crime.

Because obviously 3 mph over the posted limit is the same as a class D felony.

*disclaimer* I am a cop *disclaimer*

What you're referring to is called discretion. The amount of discretion you get to exercise is wholly dependent on the nature of the violation or the crime.

While you can overlook a C misdemeanor, doing the same for a D felony is a no-go.

Then, there are certain categories of crimes that don't allow for discretion.

To redirect, the dude broke a long-standing law. He has the opportunity to be the court case that overturns it.

[Rustin]

Originally Posted by pizza_pablo

This just in.......
Veteran goes to jail for having pieces of plastic.
Car thieves set free.

Murderer's and crack heads overlooked in the "bad part" of town.

5 year old girl called terrorist and interrogated for hello Kitty bubble gun.

Man arrested for having a 2 liter in NY.

Bow down to your government and to criminals. If you defend yourself, or are otherwise prepared to be responsible for your own families welfare, you are the enemy! Stateists and collectivists only!

They want to turn every city into Chicagoland/ NYorth Korea where Mob don's like Rahm Emmanuel will dictate what is acceptable and what isn't.

Get your RFID chip to get into disneyland. Get groped by the TSA if you want Superowl action.

Use scissors to defend yourself against mass murderers.

How in the hell did this become Bizzaro world?

[G36's Rule]

I was under the impression that 30 round mags were legal in NY so long as they were pre-ban/94. Maybe he has a defense?

[kensb2]

I just looked through the NY State Constitution, and no where in there could I find anything even remotely resembling the 2A of the COTUS. If it's not in there, then there's not a chance in hell of this getting overturned at the state supreme court level. Also, even if we disagree with it, this is constitutional IN NYS. Can anyone post the RKBA text if I missed it?

[clancy]

How does one prove an AR mag is pre-ban? A lot of this is up to the discretion, political leanings and knowledge of the individual cops.

I know several guys who have been caught with 30 round AR mags. In one instance the cop took the mags, in the other 2 instances the cops told the guys to be careful where they take them. A few months ago another guy was arrested and is now in prison because he got caught with several AR mags.

Same "crime", 4 different cops, 4 different outcomes.

[Bruce M]

Who decides who decides what is Constitutional and what is not?

[EdTracker]

Originally Posted by BlisteringSilence

...
What you're referring to is called discretion. The amount of discretion you get to exercise is wholly dependent on the nature of the violation or the crime.

While you can overlook a C misdemeanor, doing the same for a D felony is a no-go. ...

Would you overlook it if he were an olde buddy? How about your brother in law? Or the handyman whom always helps your grandmother when you are out of town?

PC,APCA

[SMOKEin]

Originally Posted by clancy

How does one prove an AR mag is pre-ban? A lot of this is up to the discretion, political leanings and knowledge of the individual cops.

I know several guys who have been caught with 30 round AR mags. In one instance the cop took the mags, in the other 2 instances the cops told the guys to be careful where they take them. A few months ago another guy was arrested and is now in prison because he got caught with several AR mags.

Same "crime", 4 different cops, 4 different outcomes.

I think a better question is, how does the state prove they are post-ban? Unfortunately, it's still expensive to hire a lawyer.

Also, you need new friends.