• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Family: New Jersey man serving 7 years for guns he owned legally

Absolutely ridiculous. I do wonder why he also had high capacity clips and hollow point bullets but the guns were locked and unloaded! Maybe a hefty fine would serve him right but 7 years in prison!
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
read the article, the judge refused to allow certain facts into the case.
Click to expand...

As I read it, because they did not try and present those facts till closing arguments. I again point out that you are only getting one side of the story from your article, so it really is impossible to judge. Trying to make a big deal out of this, with disputed facts and only one side of a story presented is not a good idea.
 
This story appeared today on DRUDGE REPORT so its the conservative cause celebre of the day. Something will come along tomorrow to replace it. What we have here is on story which may involve some sloppy courtroom work that resulted in an injustice. And time will tell on that count.

But much like Porky Pig used to say at the end of the Warner Brothers cartoons, "thats all folks". Which will not prevent some for trying to take this molehill and turn it into a mountain.
 
Insane. Absolutely insane. I hope someone can get this man's sentence overturned and the charges dismissed.
 
haymarket said:
This story appeared today on DRUDGE REPORT so its the conservative cause celebre of the day.
Click to expand...

Either that or I live in New Jersey, and am a life long GOA member, Friends with Evan Nappen and am on top of all 2nd amendment freedom issues in my home state.


But don't let that stop you from tolling. :shrug:


Something will come along tomorrow to replace it. What we have here is on story which may involve some sloppy courtroom work that resulted in an injustice. And time will tell on that count.

But much like Porky Pig used to say at the end of the Warner Brothers cartoons, "thats all folks". Which will not prevent some for trying to take this molehill and turn it into a mountain.
Click to expand...



I'm sure Brian Aitken would be happy to know that his struggle for freedom is nothing but a mole hill for you. It's statists such as yourself that are destroying this country.
 
Redress said:
As I read it, because they did not try and present those facts till closing arguments. I again point out that you are only getting one side of the story from your article, so it really is impossible to judge. Trying to make a big deal out of this, with disputed facts and only one side of a story presented is not a good idea.
Click to expand...



Let's say you are 100% right.


In what society do we sentence a man such as Brian Aitken to a 7 year sentence for the "crime" of having legal bullets and a magazine that holds 13 round?

a sick society.


That said, I don't agree. hollow points are legal.
 
from the Rev

But don't let that stop you from tolling
Click to expand...

You have me confused with a bell for some reason.

I'm sure Brian Aitken would be happy to know that his struggle for freedom is nothing but a mole hill for you. It's statists such as yourself that are destroying this country.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling that Aitken could give less than a good bowel movement about how I feel about it. And the last time I looked, he had a lawyer in court and us "statists" did not have a damn thing to do with this case. But do not let facts get in the way of your vitriolic attacks on those who disagree with you simply because you failed to provide any additional evidence to substantiate your wild charges of a governmental problem in the entire state of New Jersey.
 
haymarket said:
from the Rev
Click to expand...


I guess it takes talent and intellect to figure out the quote system. Don't let me down.


You have me confused with a bell for some reason.
Click to expand...


No confused with one who lives not under a bridge.



I have a feeling that Aitken could give less than a good bowel movement about how I feel about it. And the last time I looked, he had a lawyer in court and us "statists" did not have a damn thing to do with this case. But do not let facts get in the way of your vitriolic attacks on those who disagree with you simply because you failed to provide any additional evidence to substantiate your wild charges of a governmental problem in the entire state of New Jersey.
Click to expand...



Anything on the topic or are you just attempting to derail. I provided you with law, you lied and stated i provided no evidence, I provided you with links. you lied and said I had no evidence.


Post an honest reply and I might respond to you again my statist friend.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Let's say you are 100% right.


In what society do we sentence a man such as Brian Aitken to a 7 year sentence for the "crime" of having legal bullets and a magazine that holds 13 round?

a sick society.


That said, I don't agree. hollow points are legal.
Click to expand...

In what society do we hold as person responsible for breaking the law? See how easy it is to spin this like you did?

I would note that I am not making any real statements about this, except that with the facts presented I don't think we can reach any conclusions. We can and do get alot of questions from the story. Why did his lawyer not bring up moving till closing arguments is probably the biggest question, and I suspect is the crux of it. Could it be that the reason is because the argument would not hold up well to being examined? Dunno, but that would explain things without being some miscarriage of justice.
 
Redress said:
In what society do we hold as person responsible for breaking the law? See how easy it is to spin this like you did?
Click to expand...

1. hollow poitns are legal in NJ as per my link I provided.

2. A fine and confiscation for the magazine that holds 3 more bullets than the state government approved magazine, sure. Community service, sure. 7 years in prison. CRUEL AND UNUSUAL..... It's sick.

the AWB in NJ is unconstitutional, and this man is being punished beyond cruel and unusual for it.



I would note that I am not making any real statements about this, except that with the facts presented I don't think we can reach any conclusions. We can and do get alot of questions from the story. Why did his lawyer not bring up moving till closing arguments is probably the biggest question, and I suspect is the crux of it. Could it be that the reason is because the argument would not hold up well to being examined? Dunno, but that would explain things without being some miscarriage of justice.
Click to expand...


So, in NJ, and yes this is true. If I drop, 1 hollow point bullet in my trunk, and I get pulled over and they find it, I can go to prison for 7 years?


yes, the law is that vague. You can buy em, you can own em, but you can't transport them?


Unless he menaced someone with said gun, 7 years for a magazine that holds 13 rounds ****IS**** a miscarriage of justice.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Let's say you are 100% right.


In what society do we sentence a man such as Brian Aitken to a 7 year sentence for the "crime" of having legal bullets and a magazine that holds 13 round?

a sick society.


That said, I don't agree. hollow points are legal.
Click to expand...

as are high-cap magazines (nationally). i have several for my 9mm.

guess what i keep in them?

:) hollowpoints :D
 
cpwill said:
as are high-cap magazines (nationally). i have several for my 9mm.

guess what i keep in them?

:) hollowpoints :D
Click to expand...



they are banned in NJ.


funny thing though it's a grey area if you can "block it".... There are cases of conviction and acquittal where a person put a sheet metal screw through an AK magazine to limit it from 30 to 10.

There is no consensus so while one man walks, another man gets 7 years. all at the whim of the prosecutor and judge.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I guess it takes talent and intellect to figure out the quote system. Don't let me down.





No confused with one who lives not under a bridge.







Anything on the topic or are you just attempting to derail. I provided you with law, you lied and stated i provided no evidence, I provided you with links. you lied and said I had no evidence.


Post an honest reply and I might respond to you again my statist friend.
Click to expand...

First, if you meant TROLL, you need to learn to either type better or spell better.

Second, I will quote you any way I want to quote as long as it is your words. If I only need a line I will copy and paste that line. If I want the whole thing, I will use the feature.

Third, you claiming to have provided evidence does not equate to providing evidence. When you make big boasts like the government has a problem and then fail to back it up with any statistics to show it and instead put the crap that you did there and even that contradicted your boast, it is you who look foolish.

You want to talk about somedoing doing damage and a disservice to gun owners? That would be you trying to take an isolated case involving a possible lousy judge and turning it into the current right wing cause celebre.

But please, be my guest. Just learn about evidence and supporting your claims and provide some.
 
Last edited:
Under McDonald he might well get a reversal. since NJ issues normal capacity (15-17) round magazines to their police officers, that state cannot be heard that such magazines are not common or normal which was the thrust of the Heller decision which was then applied via the 14th to the states
 
I would note that felons in possession of firearms rarely get a federal sentence that long. No one witout an underlying felony conviction should ever be punished for merely possessing common firearms and common bullets. NJ's law is an abomination and If this man's life is ruined by such idiotic laws I would not find it morally repugnant if he engaged in retalation when he is released. 7 years in prison is pretty much ruination for someone like that.
 
I haven't read all the posts on this thread, but I did read the full article. I'd like to point this out.

New Jersey and Colorado are on opposite ends of the gun-control spectrum. In Colorado, all he needed was the background check to own the guns.

In the Garden State, Aitken was required to have a purchaser's permit from New Jersey to own the guns and a carry permit to have them in his car.

...

New Jersey allows exemptions for gun owners to transport weapons for hunting or if they are moving from one residence to another. During the trial, Aitken's mother testified that her son was moving things out, and his friend in Hoboken testified he was moving things in. A Mount Laurel officer, according to Larry Aitken, testified that he saw boxes of dishes and clothes in the Honda Civic on the day of the arrest.

The exemption statute, according to the prosecutor's office, specifies that legal guns can be transported "while moving." Despite testimony about his moving to Hoboken, a spokesman for the prosecutor said the evidence suggested that Aitken had moved months earlier, from Colorado to Mount Laurel. "Again, there was no evidence that he was then presently moving," spokesman Joel Bewley said.
Click to expand...

The way I see it, NJ needs to clarify the time "between moves" that a new resident has to properly quarter his firearms according to New Jersey law and to get a purchaser's permit and a carry permit as required by New Jersey law. That would make this situation much more clear cut.
 
Brian didn't receive oral sex from calves; he only lawfully possessed firearms
Click to expand...
:rofl WTF kind of quote is that?


Aside that bit of quizzical humor:
In the Garden State, Aitken was required to have a purchaser's permit from New Jersey to own the guns and a carry permit to have them in his car.
Click to expand...

So - this is what was necessary to be a lawful owner of a firearm in this state. There's no mistake of fact: he did not satisfy this - this isn't even argued.

And he violated this:
"If Mr. Aitken did the research he said he did, he would not have hollow-point bullets and large-capacity magazines in the vehicle," Miller said. "They are illegal, period."
Click to expand...

Does this mean he's a horrible person - guilty of a horrendous crime?
No.

So those things were in violation - and that means that the issue came down to whether he was in the process of moving or not and establishing his residence - and soon to be abiding by the rules.

It's a confusing case and it seems the judge's refusal to cooperate with the jury's very understandable and rightful request of the laws concerning ownership prevented an adequate interpretation of the facts and law.
 
I think the guy should have been given some time to comply with the Jersey laws.
 
winston53660 said:
I think the guy should have been given some time to comply with the Jersey laws.
Click to expand...

Ususally when one breaks a law - but they ahven't done anything horridly wrong - they're fined, maybe . . . yes, given time to comply.

THAT wouldn't have been a problem and I'm sure THAT happens all the time.
 
Redress said:
According to your link, the facts of the case are in something of dispute. That makes it impossible to judge properly. We are only really seeing the families side of the argument, which may or may not be accurate. Rushing to judgment based on disputed facts is probably not a good thing to do.
Click to expand...

Actually, I started to question the cops and DA's judgement as soon as I saw the paragraph about the cop sticking his penis in 5 calves mouths and them debating on whether or not to prosecute...sure...guilt by association...but...thats a hell of an association...

What happened to common sense? Yes...dude...you screwed up...heres the law...here is your ticket...we are confiscating the munitions...thanks for having the good sense to keep them locked...pay the clerk and have a nice day...
 
People who place blind faith in prosecutors to somehow use clarity or fairness in their decisions lives if a fantasy world where the sky is green and grass is blue.

We have a Constitution that says we are to all be treated equally under the law but that never applies in real life or there would be no such things as hate crime which give more rights to some than to others.

For example if i were become involved in a dispute with someone that ended in a fight and I were to come out the victor, even if it was a fair fight and witnesses proved the other guy started it, the minute it became public that he was gay it would be a hate crime and I would be charged accordingly.

At least in California, nd I know because I have seen it happen more than once.

Just remind me never to visit New Jersey and get me the Hell out of the Granola State.
 
I think this should go to the state's highest court to be considered overall.

There's obviously ambiguous language that they've never had to clarify before over how much time he had and so on - I know that in some places over certain Issues I've been granted 60 days to make the whole moving process complete.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom