Man charged with safe act violation.

[zerohedge]

I agree that the story doesn't add up. Why in the hell would you return to your house to retrieve your 'unsafe' rifle and then walk back outside to confront the dog? Clearly he has an issue with his neighbors dog and was looking for justification. That was a bad move on Devin's part. Threatening a fist fight with the chief and later going AWOL will certainly not work in his favor.

In addition to the Chief of Police, the Fort Edward Police Department has 4 full-time officers and 5 part-time officers. So I'm not surprised if the Chief actually goes on most of the calls. The village doesn't even have 7,000 people. Likely everyone knows everyone's business.

Regardless, I really hope this goes to trial if he truly had a recently purchased 'compliant' rifle. My bet is that it'll be quietly plea bargained to a lessor charge. Btw, why no mention about going after the FFL for the sale of this supposedly illegal rifle?

I did a little research on Devin Pratt. From court records, he has a long list with years of financial judgements for unpaid bills, delinquent taxes, custody hearings, failed child support payments, etc, etc. Not that any of that has bearing on this case. However, from a character perspective, he is by no means a model citizen. If anything, this shows that he has a history of making bad decisions and I would suspect that might play into the bad blood between him and the Chief of police in this small town.

 

[speedkills27]

I did a little research on Devin Pratt. From court records, he has a long list with years of financial judgements for unpaid bills, delinquent taxes, custody hearings, failed child support payments, etc, etc. Not that any of that has bearing on this case. However, from a character perspective, he is by no means a model citizen. If anything, this shows that he has a history of making bad decisions and I would suspect that might play into the bad blood between him and the Chief of police in this small town.

Sounds like the guy went through a nasty divorce. As far as I can tell there is no mythical human being who is of perfect character ever since he/shes been born. We all have our flaws, we are all human

 

[ManrisFrack]

Huh, who woulda thought a broke guy with questionable character would be targeted to set the case law that screws us all.

 

[libertysnake]

Sounds like the guy went through a nasty divorce. As far as I can tell there is no mythical human being who is of perfect character ever since he/shes been born. We all have our flaws, we are all human

Which is why, to someone bring this full circle, we have the second amendment. The founders recognized that we aren't perfect, and that sometimes bad people do bad things. That's why the populace as a whole is armed, not just select people.

 

[Shadow2]

aside from the fact this sounds bizar to begin with it does raise questions.

And the polices authority to take a gun off a person who is on there own property without charging him with a crime. It's already well established the mear presence of a gun is not probable cause to assume it's illegal or to inspect it. We actually have legal precedent here in NY. The NYSP wrote a memo on propper handling going forward after the incident a few years ago when they counted the guys bullets.

Too much cherry picking and no consistency of when and where police authority lies when it comes to securing guns.

If a cop needs to research if a gun is legal or not IMO he has no suspicion of anything and it amounts to fishing.

 

[Acer-m14]

How is that not a 4th amendment violation if the guy isn't under arrest? Can you impound my car to determine if its compliant too?

What other property can be taken without evidence of a crime being committed?

.. taking your house and farm for a FUAC Casino ... here is your 500 dollars ... now its ok ..

 

[spat]

Its no different than asking for the papers to prove your car is legal, except in this case it would require the actual gun to check functionality. Plain view, that’s the legal premise. If the cop is so incline, they could absolutely take possession of a possible “assault weapon” to check its status. Unfortunately that’s what the Safe Act did.

You can't just take a car to check to see if its legal, unless someone is driving it on a public street, or you have probable cause.

Also, we are not specifically required to carry paperwork with our long guns the way we are with handguns and cars.

Can you just randomly search bags for drugs because they *might* be illegal ?

 

[redtail]

"A preliminary hearing is scheduled for Wednesday morning at 9 a.m."

Any locals know the scoop ?

 

[Airborneguy]

You can't just take a car to check to see if its legal, unless someone is driving it on a public street, or you have probable cause.

Also, we are not specifically required to carry paperwork with our long guns the way we are with handguns and cars.

Can you just randomly search bags for drugs because they *might* be illegal ?

The contents of a bag are not plain view. Walking around carrying a weapon in plain view which may not conform to the law is grounds for a legal stop.

 

[Jsmegs77]

The contents of a bag are not plain view. Walking around carrying a weapon in plain view which may not conform to the law is grounds for a legal stop.

On private property? Wouldn't there have to be some extenuating circumstance aside from "individual holding what appears to be a firearm, that appears to fit the current political definition of an "assault rifle"" (holy fuck I hate that term)? I'll grant that an awful lot of context is lost in these sort of armchair quarterbacking sessions, but I think most of us are very uncomfortable with the concept that law enforcement can or should confiscate our arms under anything other than fairly clear-cut circumstances involving violence, disturbance of the peace, or similar lawbreaking. Counting the number of rounds in the weapon has been covered, but what about checking status of something appearing to be in violation of unSAFE? Troy PAR, full featured but pump action? Registered firearm with full feature set, actually registered in compliance with unSAFE? Featureless yet still retaining much of the appearance of a banned item from 50 feet? A handgun that weighs more than 50 oz? Where's the line?

I realize your context is different from many of ours, as you live and serve in the 5 boroughs, but for the sake of the discussion the more data the merrier!

 

[Airborneguy]

Remember I didn’t say that it should be done, just that it can. Private property doesn’t matter when possible criminality is in plain view, either actions or items such as drug paraphernalia, guns, possible stolen items, etc.

If I’m looking for a piece of stolen electronics and I see a guy carrying a TV down the street, I can legally stop him to determine if that’s the TV in question. That’s actually a common scenario presented in police academies. “But it’s just a TV! You can’t check it!” Yes, I can based on the other facts of the situation (should they align).

But now change it a little. “Officer, a man just stole a TV from our store and went into that house.” If I don’t see any of that incident unfold, I cannot search that house without a warrant due to much stronger 4th Amendment protections on one’s home, even though I know almost 100% that a stolen TV is in there with the perp.

 

[GOPerfect]

Is it really too much to ask for to get the entire story? I have opinions in regards to this one, I just don't want to post them due to the fact that there are nearly no facts to determine what is really going on.

 

[IrishMick]

Agreed. No one knows all the facts. However there is one fact that really angers me. No matter what his actions were, in most states, there would be no charges for the rifle he was using based on arbitrary features.

 

[kev74]

Is it really too much to ask for to get the entire story? I have opinions in regards to this one, I just don't want to post them due to the fact that there are nearly no facts to determine what is really going on.

It would be awesome to get the whole story. Until then, all we can do is debate what little we've been told.

 

[Jsmegs77]

It would be awesome to get the whole story. Until then, all we can do is debate what little we've been told.

Which we're doing! After all, isn't that the whole raison d'être behind the internets? Armchair quarterbacking is a time honored tradition, dammit! I know I'm enjoying the exchange of ideas and viewpoints, at any rate.

 

[spat]

The contents of a bag are not plain view. Walking around carrying a weapon in plain view which may not conform to the law is grounds for a legal stop.

Unless you can tell by looking that the gun is *probably* illegal, it is no different than a bag that might contain contraband.

If you need to impound the rifle to tell, that's a search. You are searching the rifle for illegal features as surely as you are searching the bad for illegal drugs.

If you can clearly see an illegal feature (and can somehow argue that it probably isn't registered and therefore legal ?) Then you are right. But if you can't say by looking if that mag is fixed, then confiscating the rifle to check is the same as searching the bag.

 

[Airborneguy]

If you’re talking about taking it to the precinct, you’re right. I’m talking about taking possession on scene to inspect it, run checks whatever (I wouldn’t even know how to check registration status).

It seems somehow the cop took possession of the rifle and then the man fled. If that’s the case, of course it’s coming back to the station at that point.

 

[GOPerfect]

This is a story that I plan on following...

These are the stories that I am interested in; from all points of view.

From what I have read, the Sheriff seems like he may be a dick, at least to the perp.

The gun owner has some explaining to do as well. Why did he go into hiding?

So, he was in fear of being attacked by the dog, he went into the house, retrieved his AK-15 and held the dog off with it? I guess the dog knew it was a deadly weapon.

I would like to know why the Police took his gun away from the guy? Did I read the incomplete story correct? They removed the rifle and took it back to the station? Why/

 

[camper4lyfe]

The fact that he went into the house and came back out could end up biting him in the ass.

 

[Shadow2]

Simply put you have a gun in public law enforcement will treat you like a criminal / active shooter. Guilty until proven innocent.

 

[Burzum]

Cops conclude its not safe act compliant and go back to arrest him and he took off.

There was also something about him telling people he was gonna shoot the police.

Screw any pinkerton, sucking Cuomo's penis, every New Yorker with a sack should have begun after Sullivan in 1911 threatening the fascist-cowards hiding behind a badge seeking to destroy people's lives on a NY gun charge that would not exist on the federal level from where gun laws should only come.

That post is NOT anti-LEO, just anti-fascist, anti-Cuomo salad tossing, anti-cockwashing, anti-coward, police.

 

[Darth]

Sounds like the guy went through a nasty divorce. As far as I can tell there is no mythical human being who is of perfect character ever since he/shes been born. We all have our flaws, we are all human

Yet the trend on this forum continues of throwing other gun owners under the bus because, I mean, the cops couldn't POSSIBLY be in the wrong here right?

The guy had to be a thug/scumbag/criminal/of bad moral character.

We really are our own worst enemy in this state. It's pathetic.

 

[RDN]

"AK-15" - You can't fix Stupid

 

[nortatoga]

"AK-15" - You can't fix Stupid

You may want to Google it?

 

[RDN]

I stand corrected - my BAD

 

[redtail]

Word on another site is the guy had a standard capacity 30 mag with the mag release button epoxied over.
Also stated it was the DA ,not chief who made the decision to prosecute.

 

[Bozo]

Numerous companies sell 10/30 mags that appear to be identical to standard cap, apart from the fixed floorplate. So, we wait and see...

 

[freddy]

Word on another site is the guy had a standard capacity 30 mag with the mag release button epoxied over.
Also stated it was the DA ,not chief who made the decision to prosecute.

http://nyfirearms.com/forums/laws-p...-defense-weapons/145497-safe-act-charges.html

 

[kev74]

http://nyfirearms.com/forums/laws-p...-defense-weapons/145497-safe-act-charges.html

Not a reliable source.

 

[Marine Cpl]

http://nyfirearms.com/forums/laws-p...-defense-weapons/145497-safe-act-charges.html

Ability to accept are the key words. I'm not a dummy after all according to some who think I was. (Not you.)

This could happen to any one of us. I mean not the dog thing. That's stupid and the guy put himself in that situation but it could easily be us in a car accident on the way to the range, concerned liberal neighbor, vindictive ex, ECT
.