NY Man Arrested for Having 9 Rounds In Gun Instead Of 7.

[R. LaCasse]

TRAVESTY

May 18th 2013

NY Man Arrested for Having 9 Rounds In Gun Instead Of 7.

By Philip Hodges, May 14, 2013

Article origin
[http://godfatherpolitics.com/10815/ny-man-arrested-for-having-9-rounds-in-gun-instead-of-7/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter]

Gregory Dean, Jr. was pulled over by a police officer in Upstate
New York because his license plate lamp wasn't working. When the
cop approached Dean's vehicle, he saw a .40-caliber pistol in the
passenger seat, partially covered by a sweatshirt. The officer
checked to make sure the handgun was legally registered and
possessed by Dean, and in fact it was. Dean was a legal gun owner.

However, upon closer inspection of the firearm, the officer found
out that there were nine rounds in the gun's magazine. This is a
violation of the incorrectly named New York SAFE Act, which places
the maximum limit at seven rounds. So, Dean was no longer the
innocent and law-abiding citizen that he thought he was (besides
the minor license plate light infraction). He was subsequently
charged
[http://www.lohud.com/article/20130513/NEWS/305130066?nclick_check=1] with
"unlawful possession of certain ammunition feeding devices"
as well as "third-degree aggravated unlicensed operation" and
arrested. He was an illegal and non-law-abiding gun owner after all.

This in only one example showing how the New York SAFE Act and gun
control in general targets otherwise law-abiding citizens. I don't
count having a broken license plate lamp as breaking the law.
That's a mere code violation. And yet, it makes more sense than the
arbitrary limit placed on gun-owners to have no more than seven
rounds in their gun magazines.

Conservatives say this all the time, but it bears repeating: what
criminal is going to care about the seven round rule? Once a
criminal decides he's going to commit a mass murder, there's no
amount of laws aiming to restrict his access to guns and/or ammo
that would prevent him from carrying his murder mission out.

He's not going to care if the law only allows seven rounds in his
magazine. He'd probably prefer at least a thirty-round magazine,
and he'd likely have several of them. And he's not going to care
that semi-automatic rifles are banned either. He's a criminal. He
doesn't care about the law.

Now, if there were plenty of gun-owning citizens, like Mr. Dean
above, they could dramatically reduce the number of victims of a
potential mass murder by taking out the criminal. They would help
to save lives, something that the SAFE Act is incapable of doing.
In fact, if it was known that there were many gun-owners in that
area and that gun ownership was legal or even encouraged, maybe the
murderer would decide against his mission altogether. It would be
more or less a suicide mission. Of course, maybe he'd just choose a
gun-free zone to shoot up. Like a school or a movie theater.

The only people who are going to be concerned with these laws are
those that aren't criminals. And if they're found in violation of
any of these gun codes, they're turned in to criminals by
gun-grabbing politicians and arrested by police who are just "doing
their job."

Check out Gun/Murder Statistics:
[http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m2/gun-murder-stats.htm ] A set of
tabulated and graphical data showing relationships between gun
numbers and murders - categorized by alphabetical countries
listing. Useful research material.

Thought for the day -- "Isn't it strange that after a bombing,
everyone blames the bomber ... but after a shooting, the problem is
the Gun ! "


Yours in Freedom, The Liberty Crew at JPFO

Protecting you by creating solutions to destroy "gun control"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--
Triad Productions-Fantalla~EZine~ParaNovel
National Association of Assault Research
(http://mypage.uniserve.com/~vampire-inter/htmlconc.html)