Johnson City man accused of pointing rifle at neighbor, jailed on firearm charges

[OwnTheRide]

https://www.pressconnects.com/story...e-gun-arrest-assault-rifle-weapon/1382546002/

This is the reality of liberal gun control. Guy allegedly threatens his neighbor and points a gun at him. After the police have placed him under arrest and searched his home, they find three rifles, a sawed-off shotgun, and a few standard capacity magazines.

So what was he charged with?

Zurn was charged with felony counts of criminal possession of a firearm and third-degree criminal possession of a weapon, along with a misdemeanor count of second-degree menacing.

His worst alleged crime, threatening to kill someone and pointing a gun at them, is a misdemeanor. But the BS gun charges are felonies. How topsy-turvy has this state become when something that is completely legal in most states is a worse crime than threatening to kill someone and backing it up with a display of force?

/rant off

 

[BDinPutnam]

Well I imagine he might very well be awaiting "further court action" with respect to the SBS.

Also unsaid- whether he is a GCA "prohibited person." For all we know he may be a convicted felon.

 

[GOPerfect]

Maybe he should have not pointed a gun at his neighbor? Wonder what the reason was that he thought it would be worth losing his property.

 

[OwnTheRide]

Not sure if you guys missed the point of the post or are just commenting on other aspects of it.

 

[GOYABEAN]

Not sure if you guys missed the point of the post or are just commenting on other aspects of it.

His decision making skills aren't the greatest that's for sure

 

[Robin]

 

[Airborneguy]

I think your point is that the menacing should be a higher charge. I agree. But at the same time, I don't see a problem with someone being charged with gun crimes when they've used one illegally against a victim.

 

[@thewheels]

Dammit! It's hard enough to get a reasonably priced Saiga and this guy just guaranteed one will get destroyed.

 

[OwnTheRide]

I think your point is that the menacing should be a higher charge. I agree.

Yes. Threatening to kill someone is a much worse offense than possessing property.

But at the same time, I don't see a problem with someone being charged with gun crimes when they've used one illegally against a victim.

We have crimes defined for illegal use of a firearm against a victim. What you're essentially saying here is "I'm okay with the SAFE act as long as it is only used against people I think deserve it."

 

[BDinPutnam]

Well the short barreled shotgun is a federal felony so...

 

[Deplorable Me]

Dude, be the gray man...............

 

[@thewheels]

On the other hand, perhaps the old guy perceived the neighbor as an immediate threat.
The article makes no mention as to what precipitated the rifle pointing.

If the rifle pointing was a valid response to the neighbor, this guy just got screwed.
But, we'll never know from this article.

 

[Airborneguy]

We have crimes defined for illegal use of a firearm against a victim. What you're essentially saying here is "I'm okay with the SAFE act as long as it is only used against people I think deserve it."

This has nothing to do with the Safe Act (well sort of), so no, I didn't say that. The charges he got would have been similar prior to the Safe Act. The weapon he used would have been charged as CPW because it goes along with the menacing. The rest would have been seized at that point due to his act. The sawed off shotgun is illegal federally.

Only the magazine charges may be because of the Safe Act.

 

[GOYABEAN]

That shotgun looks pretty close to 18"1/2

 

[OwnTheRide]

This has nothing to do with the Safe Act (well sort of), so no, I didn't say that.

I didn't say you said that. I said "what you're essentially saying."

You're latching onto the words "SAFE act." If it helps, replace "SAFE act" with "overbearing gun control."

The charges he got would have been similar prior to the Safe Act. The weapon he used would have been charged as CPW because it goes along with the menacing. The rest would have been seized at that point due to his act. The sawed off shotgun is illegal federally.

Only the magazine charges may be because of the Safe Act.

As I said, I used "SAFE act" as a form of shorthand, and because it probably applies here in regards to the mags.

As for he origin of each individual charge, that's less clear (to me, at least). Consider the CPW charge. I think it could have come about from any of the following sections of 265.02 (and a little bit of 265.01):

§ 265.02 Criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.
A person is guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree when:
(1) Such person commits the crime of criminal possession of a weapon
in the fourth degree as defined in subdivision one, two, three or five
of section 265.01, and has been previously convicted of any crime; or
...
(3) Such person knowingly possesses a machine-gun, firearm, rifle or
shotgun which has been defaced for the purpose of concealment or
prevention of the detection of a crime or misrepresenting the identity
of such machine-gun, firearm, rifle or shotgun; or
...
(7) Such person possesses an assault weapon; or

(8) Such person possesses a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

If they are charging under section(1), then your assertion that it goes along with the menacing is correct.

If they are charging under section(3), then it likely relates to the shotgun

If they are charging under section(7), then it likely relates to the "AK-47 style" weapon

If they are charging under section(8), then it likely relates to the standard capacity magazines.

The CPF charge seems to relate to the "AK-47 style" weapon:

§ 265.01-b Criminal possession of a firearm.
A person is guilty of criminal possession of a firearm when he or she:
(1) possesses any firearm or; (2) lawfully possesses a firearm prior to
the effective date of the chapter of the laws of two thousand thirteen
which added this section subject to the registration requirements of
subdivision sixteen-a of section 400.00 of this chapter and knowingly
fails to register such firearm pursuant to such subdivision.
Criminal possession of a firearm is a class E felony.

 

[Airborneguy]

Any time someone uses an onbject as a weapon, resulting in a crime, CPW is also charged. It’s implied as the part of the crime. That’s what I meant, sorry I should’ve explained further.

 

[Bob]

Curious - was it really a sawed-off shotgun, or was it a Shockwave/Tac14?

 

[Acer-m14]

who need a gun anymore .. seams just jaded drunk memories will do the same