Random thought of the day

If the penalty for possession of a normal capacity magazine is greater than or equal to the punishment for murder of a law enforcement officer then what should be the expected outcome when the police attempt to arrest someone with low moral standards (or a highly principled Second Amendment advocate) in possession of such a magazine? Keep in mind that if you are, say, 60 years old, a seven year sentence means your life is essentially destroyed because you will be unemployable and probably with no means of supporting yourself when you are released.

I’m reminded of Lessons of the 20th Century.

Unintended consequences can be surprisingly harsh.

11 thoughts on “Random thought of the day

  1. I can only imagine the tut-tutting of the propagandistas if they happened to interview someone who mentioned that calculus in the jailhouse interview. Doubtless that person would be considered more morally bankrupt than the convict Richard Prior spoke to who murdered the people in the house “because they were home.”

    • If I have to go to jail for something it had better be for something that is Malum in se, rather than malum prohibitum.

    • I would agree, but it is easier in some places than in others, and this guy was in New York. He’s likely SOL.
      I hope he goes to trial, gets a “not guilty,” the state appeals it all the way to the SCOTUS and loses the whole way. Not likely, perhaps, but I can dream.

      • If you get a “not guilty” result that is the end of it in a criminal trial. No appeal unless the prosecution is appealing a ruling on the entry of evidence, misconduct by the judge, juror bribery, or some such thing that would result in a mistrial. Only in a civil trial can the plaintiff appeal a “not guilty” verdict.

        No double jeopardy, remember?

        • Ah, yes, I was more wishful thinking about how to not get him convicted, but still get the law overturned. But I thought (though I’m not certain) If the jury said they were returning “not guilty” because they thought it was a BS law and they were nullifying it, that would be ground for the state to appeal…. or would that just be a “jury misconduct” mistrial, needing a retrial? If I’m not right, and the state cannot appeal that, than I hope he loses, and appeals it all the way up.

    • The prosecution and judge work very hard at detecting and removing people that would question the law. “Jury nullification” is easier said than done. The judge can remove any number of potential jurors “for cause”. And if they have to go through 1000 candidates to find 12 plus a few alternates who will follow the instructions of the judge to follow the law they will.

  2. “…what should be the expected outcome when the police attempt to arrest someone with low moral standards (or a highly principled Second Amendment advocate) in possession of such a magazine?”

    That strikes me as an odd question. Why low moral standards, particularly? What about arresting someone with high moral standards?

    Either way, the best outcome I can envision would be that the victim holds said police at gunpoint, forces them to strip naked and go out into the street, takes their ID, then calls the sheriff and makes their ID public on all the biggest forums.

    When you have a rouge government bent on violating rights on a wholesale level, there are few acceptable options.

    We have have been set up to fail. The only question that remains is; how far are we going to fall before we have a chance at turning it around?

    Meanwhile, the Republicans are stumbling over themselves like a whole herd of deer in the headlights. They are NOT our friends.

    • Except for people of low moral character people are very reluctant to injure others unless innocent life is in danger. The highly principled Second Amendment advocate may be less inhibited because they recognize the law is a gross violation of a basic human right and treat the LEO as committing a crime against humanity.

      Others are probably more likely to take their chances in court.

Comments are closed.