Topic: Man, 72, faces 10 years in prison for antique pistol (Read 1024 times)
According to the BATFE, any firearm made before 1899 officially is not a firearm.
That is ridiculous! You can't even fire the god damn gun without all these special gunpowder and loading mechanisms, and 10 years is absolutely absurd for having a gun in his car. Why would they be even looking in his car anyways?
This is why you never consent to a search. Hell, don't even talk to the cops, ever.
They want to take a look? Tell em to get a warrant.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
They want to take a look? Tell em to get a warrant.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
total control is what they want ,This is the NWO laws and regulations : Gov can use your ignorance of nonsensical laws to control and or punish you.
What a ridiculous law. Any judge with a brain stem will quickly dismiss this case. You can't even load that thing without special tools.
Carry any black power, wading, shot and a ram in your car too?
Carry any black power, wading, shot and a ram in your car too?
Indeed the law is a joke these days. A cop shoots a person and gets a bail. And this guy gets 10 years for a fake gun .
Meanwhile, the cops are shooting people with fake hand guns and getting a way with it!
Welcome slaves to our new and beautiful world! Your shackels will be hidden is that not wonderful debt slaves? Now get back to work to pay off the countries debt or it's waterboarding and anal feedings for you.
What a ridiculous law. Any judge with a brain stem will quickly dismiss this case. You can't even load that thing without special tools.
Carry any black power, wading, shot and a ram in your car too?
Carry any black power, wading, shot and a ram in your car too?
Whats the problem? that looks like a great museum piece.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/17/gordon-van-gilder-72-faces-10-years-in-prison-for-/
Quote
Gordon Van Gilder, a 72-year-old retired schoolteacher in New Jersey, faces a 10-year prison sentence for possessing an unloaded 18th-century flintlock pistol in his car.
Mr. Van Gilder, a collector of 18th-century memorabilia, said he had the gun unloaded and wrapped in a cloth in the glove compartment of his vehicle when he was pulled over in November by a Cumberland County sheriff’s deputy for a minor traffic violation, according to a video posted last week by NRA News.
After consenting to a search of his vehicle, Mr. Van Gilder said he alerted the deputy of the pistol in his glove box. The deputy let him go that night, but four police officers showed up at his home the next morning with an arrest warrant, he told NRA News.
Mr. Van Gilder, a collector of 18th-century memorabilia, said he had the gun unloaded and wrapped in a cloth in the glove compartment of his vehicle when he was pulled over in November by a Cumberland County sheriff’s deputy for a minor traffic violation, according to a video posted last week by NRA News.
After consenting to a search of his vehicle, Mr. Van Gilder said he alerted the deputy of the pistol in his glove box. The deputy let him go that night, but four police officers showed up at his home the next morning with an arrest warrant, he told NRA News.
Quote
New Jersey’s gun laws explicitly include antique firearms, even though federal laws exempt them.
Evan Nappen, an attorney who specializes in gun law cases and is representing Mr. Van Gilder, says that even a plea agreement that avoids jail time but convicts Mr. Van Gilder of a felony would likely jeopardize his teacher’s pension he spent 34 years earning, Legal Insurrection reported.
“It’s a mid-1700s flintlock bonafide antique pistol, unloaded, and yet he’s facing the same draconian penalty as if he had a .44 magnum loaded on his person. It doesn’t matter. There’s no distinction,” Mr. Nappen said.
Mr. Nappen said the prosecutor in the case even asked for ballistics testing on the black powder gun — an exercise that experts in the video argued is futile on such an old firearm.
Evan Nappen, an attorney who specializes in gun law cases and is representing Mr. Van Gilder, says that even a plea agreement that avoids jail time but convicts Mr. Van Gilder of a felony would likely jeopardize his teacher’s pension he spent 34 years earning, Legal Insurrection reported.
“It’s a mid-1700s flintlock bonafide antique pistol, unloaded, and yet he’s facing the same draconian penalty as if he had a .44 magnum loaded on his person. It doesn’t matter. There’s no distinction,” Mr. Nappen said.
Mr. Nappen said the prosecutor in the case even asked for ballistics testing on the black powder gun — an exercise that experts in the video argued is futile on such an old firearm.
Here's the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu6nBQI8ZVo
As was stated in the video, whatever happened to discretion? IMO, in this case especially, a car search for a minor traffic violation is completely unwarranted. He definitely shouldn't have consented to the search.
No wonder people who are afraid of the NRA are afraid of the freedom of We, the people.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/17/gordon-van-gilder-72-faces-10-years-in-prison-for-/
Quote
Gordon Van Gilder, a 72-year-old retired schoolteacher in New Jersey, faces a 10-year prison sentence for possessing an unloaded 18th-century flintlock pistol in his car.
Mr. Van Gilder, a collector of 18th-century memorabilia, said he had the gun unloaded and wrapped in a cloth in the glove compartment of his vehicle when he was pulled over in November by a Cumberland County sheriff’s deputy for a minor traffic violation, according to a video posted last week by NRA News.
After consenting to a search of his vehicle, Mr. Van Gilder said he alerted the deputy of the pistol in his glove box. The deputy let him go that night, but four police officers showed up at his home the next morning with an arrest warrant, he told NRA News.
Mr. Van Gilder, a collector of 18th-century memorabilia, said he had the gun unloaded and wrapped in a cloth in the glove compartment of his vehicle when he was pulled over in November by a Cumberland County sheriff’s deputy for a minor traffic violation, according to a video posted last week by NRA News.
After consenting to a search of his vehicle, Mr. Van Gilder said he alerted the deputy of the pistol in his glove box. The deputy let him go that night, but four police officers showed up at his home the next morning with an arrest warrant, he told NRA News.
Quote
New Jersey’s gun laws explicitly include antique firearms, even though federal laws exempt them.
Evan Nappen, an attorney who specializes in gun law cases and is representing Mr. Van Gilder, says that even a plea agreement that avoids jail time but convicts Mr. Van Gilder of a felony would likely jeopardize his teacher’s pension he spent 34 years earning, Legal Insurrection reported.
“It’s a mid-1700s flintlock bonafide antique pistol, unloaded, and yet he’s facing the same draconian penalty as if he had a .44 magnum loaded on his person. It doesn’t matter. There’s no distinction,” Mr. Nappen said.
Mr. Nappen said the prosecutor in the case even asked for ballistics testing on the black powder gun — an exercise that experts in the video argued is futile on such an old firearm.
Evan Nappen, an attorney who specializes in gun law cases and is representing Mr. Van Gilder, says that even a plea agreement that avoids jail time but convicts Mr. Van Gilder of a felony would likely jeopardize his teacher’s pension he spent 34 years earning, Legal Insurrection reported.
“It’s a mid-1700s flintlock bonafide antique pistol, unloaded, and yet he’s facing the same draconian penalty as if he had a .44 magnum loaded on his person. It doesn’t matter. There’s no distinction,” Mr. Nappen said.
Mr. Nappen said the prosecutor in the case even asked for ballistics testing on the black powder gun — an exercise that experts in the video argued is futile on such an old firearm.
Here's the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu6nBQI8ZVo
As was stated in the video, whatever happened to discretion? IMO, in this case especially, a car search for a minor traffic violation is completely unwarranted. He definitely shouldn't have consented to the search.
Jump to: