NYC gun charges dropped. Now I can Speak

[Guest bkelm18]

I'm a bit stunned that some folks seem so willing to just lay day and say "please sir can I have another".

NYC is NOT the center of the universe (although I think Mayor Blooming idiot thinks that the earth's axis runs through his ass hole)...I suppose if NYC declares that we can't "think certain thoughts" if our plane happens to land in NYC; that would be okay with some folks as well???

There's a big difference between saying "Oh well it doesn't concern me" and "Those morons should read the laws before they travel with their guns".

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I flew one time after 9/11 and never flew much, but hopefully won't have to do it again. Its never been fun and has become lots less fun.

Either before 9/11 I didn't pay attention and was breaking the rules, or the rules even changed on pepper spray.

Taking a flight to commiefornia had packed some pepper spray in the checked bag, because I figured it would no longer be approved for carry on. But then read warnings after boarding the dern plane not to put pepper spray in checked luggage because the low pressure might make em splode and get pepper juice all over other folks baggage.

So was on pins and needles all the way out there hoping my pepper spray wasn't gonna explode in the baggage compartment, and then when traveling back left a perfectly good can of pepper spray in a drawer in the hotel room, figured maybe somebody else could use it. Wasn't gonna fly it back to TN with me.

[DaveTN]

I'm a bit stunned that some folks seem so willing to just lay day and say "please sir can I have another".

What are you going to do?

[TNMP40]

Thank you so much for posting that experience! I hope that the gal from TN gets a break and now the ex-marine is in the same situation. At least Fox News is going public about this type of actions against law abiding citizens!

[RobertNashville]

There's a big difference between saying "Oh well it doesn't concern me" and "Those morons should read the laws before they travel with their guns".

I consider myself pretty well versed in laws of the states I travel in and I review them every time I'm getting ready to travel...I KNOW I would never knowingly and purposely take a gun into, as in this case, NYC, but I didn't know that by following TSA regulations and that even by having a flight diverted to NYC, that I would be risking being charged as a violent felon...if you knew that already then I guess you are just smarter than me.

[RobertNashville]

What are you going to do?

Try (with my time and my money) to elect conservatives to Congress so that the Federal government might actually take action in an area when they should take action for a change. And every time I contribute to the NRALAC I'm going to raise this issue so maybe they'll get off their fat asses and help put some pressure on.

Beyond, I'm going to continue to do what I do locally...keep myself and my money out of areas (states, cities, businesses) where my second amendment rights aren't respected. For example, the last time I did Route 66 I purposely avoided Illinois and ended my trip before the California line.

[peejman]

Anyone can end up in that situation of no fault of their own according to the commie state laws. If you simply are diverted to NJ or NYC (even if that wasn't on your itinerary) you could find yourself in jail for doing nothing wrong. This isn't a matter of "don't take your guns to a commie state" if you don't have a choice.

I agree. In the OP, the guy intentionally brought his guns with him. That was dumb.

If something happens beyond your control and you end up there, that's something else entirely. If that happened to me, I'd certainly be talking to someone with TSA, the airline, and likely the local cops. Seems like attempting to explain the situation up front might help your cause. But maybe not. I do agree there's a hole in the law that can bite and otherwise law abiding citizen in the arse. The only real way to fix it is (unfortunately) litigation.

[Guest Patty]

It appears that you broke the law, and got out of it somehow. We all should support the local laws in this country even if we do not like them. Once we start thinking that the law does not apply to us or we choose to think we can prove a point, we then become lawless our selves. NYC has given you a lesson, I hope you will now start accepting your mistakes and encourage others to avoid them.

[Guest don_m]

I live in southeast Pennsylvania, sandwiched in among some of the most gun-unfriendly states in the country. Both NJ and MD are within a half hour of my home, and it is a felony for me to possess (let alone carry) a handgun in either of them -- as well as NY and MA. Occasionally I travel to New Hampshire (I used to live there), and the most direct route is through NJ, NY and MA. There's no way to avoid NY. Kind of like "running the gauntlet." I comply strictly with FOPA (which technically doesn't cover "accessories" so I leave those extra-deadly high capacity magazines at home. I don't have any NRA or gun-related stickers on my car. I stop only briefly (never overnight) and don't breathe easy until I cross into freedom in VT or NH. The same if I head south to Virginia, but fortunately the trip through Maryland is pretty short.

As for flying, I've never had a problem but would never attempt to check a gun at any of the NYC/NJ airports. I believe that there is a BATFE ruling that if you bring a handgun into the state and take it directly to the check-in you'd be covered under FOPA, but that's seems to me to be playing with a rattlesnake. Everyone that I've heard of being arrested had stayed overnight in NY. If I were to be diverted to a NY airport and had to claim the bag, I'd rent a car and head west on I-80 about 65 miles into Pennsylvania. I'd shy away from connections in Chicago and Boston, though I've never heard of a problem there. If I did get diverted to Boston, I'd head up I-93 about 50 miles into NH for the night. BTW, the DC airports are fine -- they're both in Virginia. And it has been against Federal regulations for the past several years to indicate on the outside of a bag that there is a firearm inside.

[rgaper]

I live in southeast Pennsylvania, sandwiched in among some of the most gun-unfriendly states in the country. Both NJ and MD are within a half hour of my home, and it is a felony for me to possess (let alone carry) a handgun in either of them -- as well as NY and MA. Occasionally I travel to New Hampshire (I used to live there), and the most direct route is through NJ, NY and MA. There's no way to avoid NY. Kind of like "running the gauntlet." I comply strictly with FOPA (which technically doesn't cover "accessories" so I leave those extra-deadly high capacity magazines at home. I don't have any NRA or gun-related stickers on my car. I stop only briefly (never overnight) and don't breathe easy until I cross into freedom in VT or NH. The same if I head south to Virginia, but fortunately the trip through Maryland is pretty short.

As for flying, I've never had a problem but would never attempt to check a gun at any of the NYC/NJ airports. I believe that there is a BATFE ruling that if you bring a handgun into the state and take it directly to the check-in you'd be covered under FOPA, but that's seems to me to be playing with a rattlesnake. Everyone that I've heard of being arrested had stayed overnight in NY. If I were to be diverted to a NY airport and had to claim the bag, I'd rent a car and head west on I-80 about 65 miles into Pennsylvania. I'd shy away from connections in Chicago and Boston, though I've never heard of a problem there. If I did get diverted to Boston, I'd head up I-93 about 50 miles into NH for the night. BTW, the DC airports are fine -- they're both in Virginia. And it has been against Federal regulations for the past several years to indicate on the outside of a bag that there is a firearm inside.

I grew up in SE PA.

The part in red is not correct. It's gotta be legal at Point A and at Point B, there's no safe passage that would allow you to get to the ticket counter if possession at the ticket counter is illegal. BATFE has no authority on this one as it's not their regulation that you're breaking.

To your point about being diverted, the case mentioned on page 3 of this thread where a guy got stuck in his connection city of Newark, NJ was an absolute idiot. Being from SE PA, you'll appreciate this. His final destination was Allentown, PA which is 80 miles way. Instead, he stayed overnight and attempted to check his firearm at the counter. He was about to drive a car 2,000+ miles, but wouldn't drive 80? I've personally been diverted to Newark-Liberty and my solution was easy... walk outside with luggage, get a cab, "drive me to Connecticut."

From: FOPA Doesn't Apply in NY/NJ!!

February 27, 2006 - The Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc. (ANJRPC) announced that it has commenced a lawsuit against the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and one of its police officers for wrongfully arresting and imprisoning for nearly five days a 57-year old Utah man delayed at Newark Airport by a baggage error while traveling from Utah to Pennsylvania.

The lawsuit seeks more than $3 million in damages for civil rights violations and a permanent injunction forcing the Port Authority to follow Federal law on interstate transport of locked, unloaded firearms that have been secured in luggage and declared by law-abiding citizens.

The Utah man, Gregg Revell, a real estate broker and family man with no criminal record and a Utah firearms permit, was flying alone from Salt Lake City, UT to Allentown, PA to retrieve a car he bought and drive it home. [edit: WTF???] He was travelling with a firearm for personal protection. As required by Federal law, the firearm was unloaded, cased, locked and inside his luggage when he declared it at check-in in Salt Lake City on March 31, 2005.

Due to an airline-caused baggage error, Mr. Revell missed his connection from Newark to Allentown and had to stay overnight in New Jersey. When he checked in at Newark Airport the next morning to complete his travels, he again declared his firearm, as required by FAA regulations. He was then arrested for possession of a firearm without a New Jersey state license, and imprisoned in Essex County jail for five days until his family arranged bail, which had been initially set unusually high at $15,000 cash (no bond).

[snip]

[RobertNashville]

It appears that you broke the law, and got out of it somehow. We all should support the local laws in this country even if we do not like them. Once we start thinking that the law does not apply to us or we choose to think we can prove a point, we then become lawless our selves. NYC has given you a lesson, I hope you will now start accepting your mistakes and encourage others to avoid them.

I profoundly disagree.

While we should obey existing laws we most certainly should NOT support laws, local or otherwise, that are clearly unconstitutional - rather, we should do all in our power to resist them and have them overturned/rescinded.

If NYC passed a law that outlawed Christianity I would certainly hope that no one would "support" such idiocy and if we wouldn't support a law that flies in the face of the first amendment why the hell should we ever support a law that eviscerates the second amendment?

[Guest Patty]

I profoundly disagree.

While we should obey existing laws we most certainly should NOT support laws, local or otherwise, that are clearly unconstitutional - rather, we should do all in our power to resist them and have them overturned/rescinded.

If NYC passed a law that outlawed Christianity I would certainly hope that no one would "support" such idiocy and if we wouldn't support a law that flies in the face of the first amendment why the hell should we ever support a law that eviscerates the second amendment?

"If" a bullfrog had wings. I guess flying would be a option. But in reality thats not the case. So the frog just hops along. Thats life for the frog.

[Guest don_m]

The part in red is not correct. It's gotta be legal at Point A and at Point B, there's no safe passage that would allow you to get to the ticket counter if possession at the ticket counter is illegal. BATFE has no authority on this one as it's not their regulation that you're breaking.

You're right that BATFE wasn't the source. According to a DOJ opinion (http://www.nraila.org/images/DOJltrTSA.pdf), the ticket counter is not your destination and under specific circumstances FOPA does apply. Basically from a free state directly to the baggage check-in counter and on to a free state destination. Everyone I've heard of being arrested had spent at least one night in hostile territory. That said, I'd certainly avoid it if there was any reasonable alternative.

[DaveTN]

I grew up in SE PA.

The part in red is not correct. It's gotta be legal at Point A and at Point B, there's no safe passage that would allow you to get to the ticket counter if possession at the ticket counter is illegal. BATFE has no authority on this one as it's not their regulation that you're breaking.

To your point about being diverted, the case mentioned on page 3 of this thread where a guy got stuck in his connection city of Newark, NJ was an absolute idiot. Being from SE PA, you'll appreciate this. His final destination was Allentown, PA which is 80 miles way. Instead, he stayed overnight and attempted to check his firearm at the counter. He was about to drive a car 2,000+ miles, but wouldn't drive 80? I've personally been diverted to Newark-Liberty and my solution was easy... walk outside with luggage, get a cab, "drive me to Connecticut."

From: FOPA Doesn't Apply in NY/NJ!!

February 27, 2006 - The Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc. (ANJRPC) announced that it has commenced a lawsuit against the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and one of its police officers for wrongfully arresting and imprisoning for nearly five days a 57-year old Utah man delayed at Newark Airport by a baggage error while traveling from Utah to Pennsylvania.

The lawsuit seeks more than $3 million in damages for civil rights violations and a permanent injunction forcing the Port Authority to follow Federal law on interstate transport of locked, unloaded firearms that have been secured in luggage and declared by law-abiding citizens.

The Utah man, Gregg Revell, a real estate broker and family man with no criminal record and a Utah firearms permit, was flying alone from Salt Lake City, UT to Allentown, PA to retrieve a car he bought and drive it home. [edit: WTF???] He was travelling with a firearm for personal protection. As required by Federal law, the firearm was unloaded, cased, locked and inside his luggage when he declared it at check-in in Salt Lake City on March 31, 2005.

Due to an airline-caused baggage error, Mr. Revell missed his connection from Newark to Allentown and had to stay overnight in New Jersey. When he checked in at Newark Airport the next morning to complete his travels, he again declared his firearm, as required by FAA regulations. He was then arrested for possession of a firearm without a New Jersey state license, and imprisoned in Essex County jail for five days until his family arranged bail, which had been initially set unusually high at $15,000 cash (no bond).

[snip]

The rest of the story….

The DA dismissed charges against Revell. That opened the door for a civil suit. Think the DA will think about that next time?

The case went all the way to the SCOTUS, who refused to hear it, upholding the decision of the lower court.

Here is what the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals had to say when they dismissed his civil case:

"We recognize that he had been placed in a difficult situation through no fault of his own," wrote Judge Kent A. Jordan of the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia. However, the law "clearly requires the traveler to part ways with his weapon and ammunition during travel; it does not address this type of interrupted journey or what the traveler is to do in this situation."

Stranded gun owners like Revell have the option of going to law enforcement representatives at an airport or to airport personnel before they retrieve their luggage. The careful owner will do so and explain his situation, requesting that his firearm and ammunition be held for him overnight. While this no doubt adds to the inconvenience imposed upon the unfortunate traveler when his transportation plans go awry, it offers a reasonable means for a responsible gun owner to maintain the protection of Section 926A and to prevent unexpected exposure to state and local gun regulations.

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Cert In Important Gun Rights Case, Revell v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey. - The Warshawsky Law Firm Blog - The Warshawsky Law Firm

[RobertNashville]

"If" a bullfrog had wings. I guess flying would be a option. But in reality thats not the case. So the frog just hops along. Thats life for the frog.

Maybe it escaped your notice but we aren't talking about bullfrogs. If you are fine capitulating to unconstitutional laws I suppose that's your right although I cant' help but wonder what trampling of the Constitution isn't okay with you.

Edited January 17, 2012 by RobertNashville

[Guest Patty]

Maybe it escaped your notice but we aren't talking about bullfrogs. If you are fine capitulating to unconstitutional laws I suppose that's your right although I cant' help but wonder what trampling of the Constitution isn't okay with you.

There is no maybe, and the OP's topic was not based on "IF", like you implied with your off topic comment about religion. That topic is not true. What is true, is that the OP broke an NYC law. He did something he should of not done. My opinion is just mine. But lets use your word "if", he had obeyed the current laws he would not of been in trouble.

[RobertNashville]

There is no maybe, and the OP's topic was not based on "IF", like you implied with your off topic comment about religion. That topic is not true. What is true, is that the OP broke an NYC law. He did something he should of not done. My opinion is just mine. But lets use your word "if", he had obeyed the current laws he would not of been in trouble.

I am not arguing about whether the person who is the subject of the story broke the law...perhaps I didn't say it clearly enough but let me say it again just to be clear; I understand that NYC (and other places have these laws) and I agree that as long as they exist, this man as do the rest of us have an obligation to obey them and if we don't obey them, we should be willing to accept the consequences.

What I was trying to discuss was your statement where you said...

It appears that you broke the law, and got out of it somehow. We all should support the local laws (emphasis mine) in this country even if we do not like them...

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your intent and if so then I apologize but but if I'm not then I call Bovine Scatology on your assertion that we should "support" such laws.

We should not "support" laws that are wrong and/or unconstitutional...yes we must obey them while they exist but support them??? Absolutely not. What we SHOULD do is to take whatever actions we can to get such idiotic, unconstitutional laws eradicated.

This not a matter of whether we "like" a law or not...this is about basic right and wrong and it's WRONG for any government to infringe on our right to keep and bear arms as so directly and eloquently stated in the Constitution.

My alluding to religion is not at all "off topic" for the point I was trying to make...if NYC had laws against Christianity (or the exercise of any religion) the entire country would be up in arms and appropriately so because such laws would be an affront to one of our most basic rights as human beings...laws that infringe our second amendment rights should receive just as much outrage...just as much condemnation as any laws that infringe on our right to practice our religion (or practice no religion for that matter). That so many, even among firearms enthusiasts seem to not care is a sad thing.

[daddyo]

I've only got one life.

That's EXACTLY why I carry everywhere, and if I can't, I don't go there. Been to Commiefornia, and if I never go back, I won't lose a minute of sleep over it. Same for NYC and Chicago. Too many other places to see that actually honor my constitutional rights.

[Guest Patty]

I am not arguing about whether the person who is the subject of the story broke the law...perhaps I didn't say it clearly enough but let me say it again just to be clear; I understand that NYC (and other places have these laws) and I agree that as long as they exist, this man as do the rest of us have an obligation to obey them and if we don't obey them, we should be willing to accept the consequences.

What I was trying to discuss was your statement where you said...

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your intent and if so then I apologize but but if I'm not then I call Bovine Scatology on your assertion that we should "support" such laws.

We should not "support" laws that are wrong and/or unconstitutional...yes we must obey them while they exist but support them??? Absolutely not. What we SHOULD do is to take whatever actions we can to get such idiotic, unconstitutional laws eradicated.

This not a matter of whether we "like" a law or not...this is about basic right and wrong and it's WRONG for any government to infringe on our right to keep and bear arms as so directly and eloquently stated in the Constitution.

My alluding to religion is not at all "off topic" for the point I was trying to make...if NYC had laws against Christianity (or the exercise of any religion) the entire country would be up in arms and appropriately so because such laws would be an affront to one of our most basic rights as human beings...laws that infringe our second amendment rights should receive just as much outrage...just as much condemnation as any laws that infringe on our right to practice our religion (or practice no religion for that matter). That so many, even among firearms enthusiasts seem to not care is a sad thing.

Your attitude towards my comments are out of line, and yet you continue. You trample the very rug you say you want to keep clean.

[RobertNashville]

Your attitude towards my comments are out of line, and yet you continue. You trample the very rug you say you want to keep clean.

You know and can know nothing about my "attitude" and while you can say that my comments are "out of line", your assertion of that is meaningless without further explanation.

As preciously stated, if I have misunderstood what you meant with your original comment, I apologize. If I have not misunderstood you then I am "trampling" on nothing.

Edited January 17, 2012 by RobertNashville

[rgaper]

You're right that BATFE wasn't the source. According to a DOJ opinion (http://www.nraila.org/images/DOJltrTSA.pdf), the ticket counter is not your destination and under specific circumstances FOPA does apply. Basically from a free state directly to the baggage check-in counter and on to a free state destination. Everyone I've heard of being arrested had spent at least one night in hostile territory. That said, I'd certainly avoid it if there was any reasonable alternative.

I stand corrected. Wow, thanks for passing on this document, I'm going to follow up on it. Living in Southern CT for the past few years, I regularly used the NYC-area airports (LGA, JFK, HPN, EWR) just as often as Hartford. Connecticut's gun laws are exponentially better than NY or NJ, so when traveling with firearms, everyone I know avoids NYC.

I'm constantly amazed by the ignorance of gun owners on FOPA, especially those of us who have lived in areas where dealing with much stricter state gun control is a few minutes drive away. FOPA is easily one of the most important pieces of gun legislation that the average citizen should be familiar with. 1986 brought the MG ban, but it also brought FOPA.

[rgaper]

The rest of the story….

The DA dismissed charges against Revell. That opened the door for a civil suit. Think the DA will think about that next time?

The case went all the way to the SCOTUS, who refused to hear it, upholding the decision of the lower court.

Here is what the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals had to say when they dismissed his civil case:

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Cert In Important Gun Rights Case, Revell v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey. - The Warshawsky Law Firm Blog - The Warshawsky Law Firm

Yes, I'm familiar with the rest of the story and I am glad for the guy and his family that it was dismissed. BUT... He spent some time in jail. I'm an exit-only kinda guy and the tour of the jail cells I got at Alcatraz is about the only time I ever want to spend in a place like that.

My point about him being an idiot is that he stayed overnight and attempted to check-in at what a reasonable person would believe to be an "unfriendly and unknowledgeable" ticket counter for a firearms owner. He flew 2000+ miles to drive a car 2000+ miles back home, but when he got stuck at the airport, he decided to spend the night instead of just renting a car to drive 80 miles to Allentown? 80 miles! That's insane. I've driven more than 80 miles just to get a hoagie.

[Guest Patty]

You know and can know nothing about my "attitude" and while you can say that my comments are "out of line", your assertion of that is meaningless without further explanation.

As preciously stated, if I have misunderstood what you meant with your original comment, I apologize. If I have not misunderstood you then I am "trampling" on nothing.

If NYC passed a law that outlawed Christianity I would certainly hope that no one would "support" such idiocy and if we wouldn't support a law that flies in the face of the first amendment

This is the place to discuss issues specifically regarding the Right To Keep and Bear Arms (RTKBA), only.

[RobertNashville]

...This is the place to discuss issues specifically regarding the Right To Keep and Bear Arms (RTKBA), only.

Really? Well...I'm glad you made that decision for every other member as well as for David (who owns the site)!

I WAS discussing the right to keep and bear arms but apparently you aren't familiar with the concept of using examples in order to make a point.

[Guest Patty]

Really? Well...I'm glad you made that decision for every other member as well as for David (who owns the site)!

I WAS discussing the right to keep and bear arms but apparently you aren't familiar with the concept of using examples in order to make a point.

]

[h=2]2nd Amendment Issues[/h]This is the place to discuss issues specifically regarding the Right To Keep and Bear Arms (RTKBA), only.

Lol, we just have to continue. I copied and pasted that, not really sure who is the author, but I can assure you its not me. And any examples that you or I choose to use to support the right to bear arms, should be of factual value, not fictional ideas to lash back at each others view points.