It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Revealation
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
Of course NY cops figured out a way to enforce the 7 rd law. Just like they do with all other laws.
"They LIE" when making their arrests. Trust me...I know......I'm from NY
Originally posted by DaTroof
This thread is ridiculous. The man was breaking the law, as noted by the charges against him. Possession is 9/10 of the law, as they say. "Oh no officer, I'm not planning on selling or openly using these drugs. I'm just holding them."
Contraband is contraband, and a respectful gun owner will abide by principles in the name of safety, not rebel against them.
Originally posted by DaTroof
This thread is ridiculous. The man was breaking the law, as noted by the charges against him. Possession is 9/10 of the law, as they say. "Oh no officer, I'm not planning on selling or openly using these drugs. I'm just holding them."
Contraband is contraband, and a respectful gun owner will abide by principles in the name of safety, not rebel against them.
NEW YORK's ASSAULT WEAPON BAN - Part III
August 20, 2011
Penalties
Possession of a "Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device" is a violation of Penal Law sec 265.02 (8).
Gun Law Reform
Where the indictment charges the class D violent felony offenses of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree as defined in subdivision four of section 265.02 of the penal law and the provisions of subparagraph (iii) of this paragraph do not apply, or subdivision five, seven or eight of section 265.02 of the penal law, then a plea of guilty must include at least a plea of guilty to a class E violent felony offense.
Originally posted by Mads1987
But there are things out there, which civilians can only use to harm others. Like anthrax. A scientist might be able to learn something from it by looking at it through a microscope, but a layman can only cause harm with this, intentionally or not.
Again, heroin, morphine or similar products made from the Papaver somniferum can be used to give pain relief. But in the hands of an untrained person they are almost exclusively harmful.
So should we not try to prevent people from obtaining these things?
According to the 2003 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, which may actually underestimate illicit opiate (heroin) use, an estimated 3.7 million people had used heroin at some time in their lives, and over 119,000 of them reported using it within the month preceding the survey. An estimated 314,000 Americans used heroin in the past year, and the group that represented the highest number of those users were 26 or older. The survey reported that, from 1995 through 2002, the annual number of new heroin users ranged from 121,000 to 164,000. During this period, most new users were age 18 or older (on average, 75 percent) and most were male. In 2003, 57.4 percent of past year heroin users were classified with dependence on or abuse of heroin, and an estimated 281,000 persons received treatment for heroin abuse.
Originally posted by Mads1987
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
Where does it say the boxes were empty? And isn't the problem that these can be used as part of a weapon?edit on 06/06/12 by Mads1987 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by eleven44
reply to post by SaturnFX
Oh right, the government told me it is outlawed.
I guess that makes it intrinsically bad and everyone who disagrees is a criminal.
Originally posted by Shadowcast
Originally posted by SaturnFX
Lesson of the day
Do not break stupid laws...they may be stupid, but they are law.
Instead, elect people whom will try to remove said stupid law...
Legislation is far more preferred than a rap sheet.
Unconstitutional laws are not laws.
"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so."
-Thomas Jefferson
Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by SaturnFX
If everyone thought as you did Rosa would still be at the back of the bus.
Originally posted by SaturnFX
Carrying banned magazines is not the same as standing up against segregation.
Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Originally posted by SaturnFX
Carrying banned magazines is not the same as standing up against segregation.
It absolutely is the same. There is no harm to anyone in having the magazines. His ability to travel with his own property, harmless property, is obviously impaired.
It is exactly the same. For owning a little metal box this man is being treated worse than a second or third class citizen. He's being treated as a rapist, kidnapper or murderer.
A minor day to day issue may be 5 felonies to you but not to me and not to the man facing them.edit on 1-2-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)