|
Author
|
Topic: Pity poor 4949 having to respond to this....
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted February 18, 2015 04:21 PM
and why I'm putting this topic up here, instead of the political forum.
(and Fred, you're next) I know, and I am after that. Read on~
In a case that underscores the Garden State's strict gun laws, Gordon Van Gilder, a retired English teacher and collector of historical items, has been charged with criminal possession of a handgun and faces up to 10 years in prison. If the 72-year-old is convicted, the charge carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 3.5 years and the pension Van Gilder earned as an educator could be revoked, penalties attorney Evan Nappen called "outrageous."
“It’s crazy," Nappen told FoxNews.com. "The gun was unloaded and strictly possessed as a historical relic. We’re hoping the prosecutor will exercise discretion and dismiss his case.”
Van Gilder readily acknowledged the unloaded gun was in his glove compartment and wrapped in cloth when he was pulled over for a traffic violation in Cumberland County in November 2014, according to Nappen. He had recently bought the gun and was planning to add it to his collection of antiques, which includes other old firearms, the lawyer said.
“This is a Queen Anne flintlock, which is a very pretty gun," Nappen said. "The barrel looks like a cannon and it has a single shot – you have to actually untwist the barrel to load it – it’s pretty involved to even attempt to load it. But the craftsmanship is from the 1760s, and it’s just magnificent to think that every piece of it was handmade.”
But New Jersey law does not exempt antique firearms, said Nappen, who recently defended a Pennsylvania single mother who was pulled over just across the New Jersey border with a registered gun she carried for protection. In that case, Nappen helped his client avoid a 3-year mandatory minimum sentence only after widespread publicity including extensive coverage by Fox News led the state Attorney General's Office to drop the case.
The Cumberland County Prosecutor’s Office, which charged Van Gilder, did not return a call for comment Wednesday.
If Van Gilder is ultimately convicted, Nappen said he hopes Gov. Chris Christie would consider a pardon.
But he said the case could drag on for a long time.
A Queen Anne flintlock is a prized collector's item, but not the weapon of choice for modern criminals, according to firearms experts.
“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?'"
Second Amendment advocates say the case illustrates the need to make gun laws more reasonable.
"This proves just how Draconian gun laws are in New Jersey," Alan Gottlieb, of the Second Amendment Foundation, told FoxNews.com. "Laws that are used to prosecute gun owners like this one are why the gun rights movement cannot trust gun prohibition politicians."
Gun control advocacy groups, including the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Mayors Against Illegal Guns and the Violence Policy Center, did not return requests for comment.
In an interview with NRA News, Van Gilder gave more details about his arrest.
“One of the undersheriffs said, ‘Well, let him go, it’s 250 years old,’" Van Gilder said. "But his boss, who is the sheriff, said, ‘No, we have to arrest him.’ Next morning, I am sleeping and hear pounding on the door, and four of them came and took me away with three or four sheriff’s cars -- I guess they didn’t have anything better to do with taxpayer money.”
“I was fingerprinted and I was chained by my legs to an ice cold bench. Apparently there must be a lot of drive-by flintlock shootings in North Jersey,” he quipped bitterly.
Van Gilder, who is frightened for his future, has set up a legal defense fund. He knows he could be in for a long fight.
“I’m charged with a felony," he said. "That could ruin my life. That could hurt my pension that I spent 34 years acquiring. And I couldn’t vote. It’s not right, it’s not fair. “
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
4949shooter
SECOND PLACE HIGGINS (MAGNUM P.I.) LOOK A LIKE CONTEST
Member # 3530
|
posted February 18, 2015 06:36 PM
First of all, we all know New Jersey's gun laws are terrible.
This is an educated man who admittedly knew the law (I have been following this case). Why he chose to take a chance with things being the way they are here one can only wonder.
Officer discretion? Yes, it still exists. Though....it is getting more difficult with the scrutiny law enforcement is under in this day and age (cameras, oversight, etc).
Why, after letting the man go on the traffic stop, they chose to go to his house the next day and arrest him is beyond me. Reportedly, the under sheriff had said not to bother, it is only a flintlock. Then the sheriff overrode him and said they had to arrest the man. Puzzling..
Why is the attorney Evan Nappen not requesting his client be entered into the NJ pre-trial intervention program puzzles me also (PTI the arrestee satisfies the requirements of the court and the charges go away). This is for first time offenders only. Personally, I think Evan Nappen is trying to make headlines instead of looking out for the best interests of his client, assuming the client is eligible for PTI.
That's all I got.
[ February 18, 2015, 06:37 PM: Message edited by: 4949shooter ]
Posts: 2274 | From: New Jersey | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kokopelli
SENIOR DISCOUNT & Dispenser of Sage Advice
Member # 633
|
posted February 18, 2015 08:37 PM
How is it that State's Rights trumps that whole '.......shall not be infringed' thing, anyway ??
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
And lo, the Light of the Trump shown upon the Darkness and the Darkness could not comprehend it.
Posts: 7580 | From: Under a wandering star | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aznative
FARTS ON CLUELESS LIBERALS
Member # 506
|
posted February 19, 2015 03:44 AM
The problem is a gun is a gun to most people. The stupid average American on the street doesn't know the difference between a blunderbuss and a machine gun. The same goes for the Sheriff and the prosecutor. No way would criminals opt for a muzzle stuffer.
--------------------
Never thought the devil would need a teleprompter but I could be wrong.
United State of America: RIP
Born July 4th 1776 died November 6th 2012
Posts: 1924 | From: Phoenix Az | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted February 19, 2015 08:16 AM
Well, 49 didn't address my main concern. What kind of a country is it when you get stopped for a traffic violation and the cop searches your vehicle? In the other states, there is a concept called probable cause.
I have to say, stuff like this makes New Jersey look pretty stupid.
Good hunting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
4949shooter
SECOND PLACE HIGGINS (MAGNUM P.I.) LOOK A LIKE CONTEST
Member # 3530
|
posted February 19, 2015 12:15 PM
Leonard. I wonder why they did a consent on the guy's vehicle myself. A consent isn't a search, by legal doctrine, but has the same end result.
The guy gave his consent according to the interview.
Cumberland County is 2 1/2 hours south of me. I don't know what the MO of their sheriff's department is. Did the gun owner bring negative attention upon himself? Or is the Cumberland County Sheriff's Office overzealous in its patrol practices. I just don't know.
Posts: 2274 | From: New Jersey | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted February 19, 2015 01:02 PM
Geez, that's really bizarre! Maybe the "suspect" wanted to show and tell? The problem with that is, cops have absolutely NO sense of humor when it comes to guns. Or maybe he didn't understand that he could have said: NO! Part of the problem might be this felon actually WAS asking for it. He deliberately drove with a "weapon" in his vehicle. He did not exercise due caution while driving. (apparently)? Although, I never heard what offense he committed?
Anyway, its time to pull the pants down on New Jersey and their DRACONIAN GUN LAWS. And, perhaps that was actually the motivation? But, he claims to be worried about losing his pension? At 72 years old, not concerned as much with spending 3 1/2 years in prison?
The whole thing is a little SWAK. The prosecutor should drop the charges before more harm is done to the reputation of the state and the county and the local law enforcement. That would be a win, at this point, especially after that bullshit with the young mother from Pennsylvania. Needs to be pointed out; it's a damned (uncharged) FLINTLOCK pistol, fer criminy sakes! Just about as dangerous as a fair sized rock wrapped in a towel and hidden in the glove box.
Good hunting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
booger
TOO BIG TO FAIL
Member # 3602
|
posted February 19, 2015 02:35 PM
Seems like we have had a death of common sense in this country. Sounds a lot like zero tolerance of firearms on school property. When I was in high school, I regularly had a shotgun and/or a rifle in my pickup in the school parking lot depending on what season was open. Under today’s rules, I would be suspended for 6 months.
We have a really great WWII re-enactor group here. They are called on to give school programs, but can’t bring their non-functioning Garands or Thompsons to show the kids what our troops used during that time, due to our school district's 'zero tolerance' firearms policy.
I also have to ask special permission if I end up being asked to teach a Hunter Ed course on school property. We use non-functioning firearms, but some school boards are skittish even then.
Downright deplorable.
[ February 19, 2015, 02:35 PM: Message edited by: booger ]
--------------------
If we ever forget we are one Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under--Ronald Reagan
Posts: 911 | From: Bob Dole Country | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted February 19, 2015 03:04 PM
You have hit upon one of the weaknesses of the democratic system.
Good hunting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted February 19, 2015 06:16 PM
Not just a Joisey-thing LB. My son had a breakdown at 630 in the morning in the county north of where I live. He called me to tell me his car had overheated. I told him I would send help his way and called our local dispatch and requested a wrecker for him. They dispatcher for our county sent one of our Sheriff's Deputies and the county north did so as well. He was over the line so their deputy took the call. When he got there, my son was sitting in his car with his four ways on off the roadway. The deputy asked for his license and other documents then asked him if he had any drugs or weapons in the car. My son told him "no" and then they guy asks him if he can have permission to search his car.
Now, my boy is on a first-name basis with all the local guys and judges because of a rather colorful history, but this guy didn't know him. He gives the guy consent and nothing is turned up. end of story. Right?
Not in my book. My son told me about it several days later and was surprised when I got upset. He asked me what I would have done. I told him that, first and foremost, I would have realized that the car I was driving was mine for less than two days, having bought it from someone I do not know. Had the officer found any sort of paraphernalia in their, he'd have been up shit creek trying to explain that away. I also told him that I would have nicely and respectfully asked the officer what reason he had for conducting a search of my car when it was ME that called him for help. I then would have told him "no", again - nicely, and told the officer that I wo0uld be waiting in the car where it was safe while I waited for the tow truck. Not much he cold have done to him after that.
The next day, I was delivering mail to the courthouse and encountered the Sheriff. I told him of the exchange and he bristled, then asked me, "Was this one of my guys?". When I told him it was Clay County, he visibly relaxed and said something to the effect of "if that's the low they have to stoop to to get bad guys" and the conversation moved onto the next subject.
LEO's have most people intimidated. Know your rights, be respectful in the situation, and be aware that their body cam and dash cam are on and, if either are (conveniently) not when your attorney subpoena's them as evidence, move to dismiss because of evidence tampering. They're supposed to have them on when dealing with someone, and not be cherry-picking when they do and do not activate them. Although the camera is designed to provide them with the evidence they seek, it also records (or does not record) the basis for the state's case in meeting burden of proof.
To the original story, I'm glad to see these guys in NJ taking the limelight off the Kansas Governor for being a total ass clown. Thanks, Joisey!
[ February 19, 2015, 06:17 PM: Message edited by: Cdog911 ]
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5438 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted February 19, 2015 07:48 PM
That's like the infamous tribal police on the Papago. As we were approaching the main town, Sells, I saw a cruiser top the hill about three quarters of a mile away. We NEVER speed on #86 and I made sure I was doing exactly 55MPH, the posted speed limit.
So, he went by me and as I watched him in my mirrors, he turned around and came up behind me. When we got to the top of the hill where I first saw him, he turned on his red lights and I pulled over.
"SHE" came up, (a fat squaw) and said I was doing 68MPH! This is significant, doing 13 MPH over the posted speed limit is a serious ticket.
So, no amount of objection was allowed, she took my info and went back to run my stuff and meanwhile, my son said I should ask to see the readout on the radar. And that's another thing, my detector never went off. Anyway when she came back, I asked to see the radar and she said she already reset it. People tell me they never reset it when the driver disputes it but apparently, she did. Somebody was being set up.
Bottom line, the case dragged out beyond 180 days and for that reason alone, the judge threw it out. Cost me $250 for the lawyer, and they refunded the fine, which was something like $75?
They are crooks. Even if you are doing less than the speed limit, they will find a reason. Besides that, they stop people just passing through, for absolutely no reason. At night, I think they stop every vehicle? It's border paranoia. But, tribal police are on the pavement while Border Patrol is in the weeds. No cooperation whatsoever between the two agencies. They wouldn't tell the other the time of day and I'm not exaggerating.
Good hunting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted February 20, 2015 05:51 PM
Only had to deal with tribal Po-po once, and that was enough. Was at my Uncle's in Cortez, CO and were headed to the Grand Canyon for a day trip. Three different reservations that we had to go through or by, the Navajo, Southern Ute, and Mountain Ute, if I recall. Anyway, my Uncle's advice, or better yet, insistence, was that we do 5 under the speed limit and be the hell off the res before the sun goes down. Coming back from the hole, this whacked out whitey in a pickup blew past us. Three miles down the road, res cop had him pulled over. My Uncle said that when that happens, you will sit in their jail until the Judge shows up, and he's always three days away. Get caught on the res after dark and you will die. Plain and simple. No use for whities there.
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5438 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
DanS
Scorched Earth (AZ Sector)
Member # 316
|
posted February 20, 2015 06:45 PM
LB, we have our highway bandits here also. I guess every state has them. They have a gun and they give you a ticket that you honestly do not deserve. IMO, it is the same as if a guy takes your wallet at gunpoint.
I have no ill feelings towards the honest cops who gave me tickets I deserved. I F'd up, got a ticket, pay the fine, move on.
I just can't stand the low life thieving bastards that hide behind their shield when they rob you, and the asshole cheesedicks that cover for them.
It makes me think of those black ghettos like in Ferguson, MO. When there is a crime, everyone knows what happened and who dunnit, but "nobody" saw anything. They won't testify against a brother. But don't you worry, they will handle it, right? ![[Smile]](smile.gif) Sound familiar?
--------------------
futuaris nisi irrisus ridebis
Saepe Expertus, Semper Fidelis, Fratres Aeterni:
Often Tested, Always Faithful. Brothers Forever!
Posts: 1465 | From: flyover country | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted February 21, 2015 12:06 PM
I don't want you guys thinking there is any similarity between Papago tribal police and any other reservation. They share about a hundred miles of border with Mexico and drug interdiction is a big deal and competitive with four or five other agencies. They get to keep the goodies, that's the motivation.
So, they could care less about wetbacks on foot, they want drug mules, contraband etc. And, they want to harass citizens just driving through, since they're only other source of bucks is a crummy little casino, and I mean crummy and I mean little.
They restrict access to tribal members only, on any road going south. I have always maintained, okay then, tribal members shouldn't be allowed off the res past 5 kilometers. They are a little possessive about their "sovereign nation" status.
Anyway, that's my beef. They treat Americans a little worse than most other countries, like Mexico and France. And, I have been on quite a few reservations, none are like the Papago. Or, their recent name change, which neither I nor they seem to prefer. And, I will have to google it to see how it's spelled. edit: Tohono O'odham Nation. They didn't like "Papago" when they found out why other indians called them the "bean eaters" and associated gas problems resulting.
Good hunting. El Bee
[ February 21, 2015, 12:09 PM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted February 26, 2015 08:51 PM
I would have bet against this decision, but? Might be Christi's fingerprints all over it and I'm thinking the prosecutor is having a fit.
Good huting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
4949shooter
SECOND PLACE HIGGINS (MAGNUM P.I.) LOOK A LIKE CONTEST
Member # 3530
|
posted March 07, 2015 02:37 AM
Maybe Christi....someone bowed to the pressure for sure.
Posts: 2274 | From: New Jersey | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
