-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Don't point the 40 on route 9 and then bring it on campus.
- Thread starter briz
- Start date
A Defiant Goose
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2016
- Messages
- 230
- Likes
- 44
Right? On top of this all, why are you even talking? I plead the 5th and I'd like to speak to my lawyer, thanks.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 24,144
- Likes
- 30,337
Ahhh forgot about that one I didn't read the article
Possibly it was just the reporter who got it wrong by trying to over-simplify things. It sounds like they might have a case for "Assault with a dangerous weapon" of the form "imminently threatened battery", i.e. the "I'm going to beat you with this baseball bat." form as opposed to the form "attempted battery", i.e. the "Ssssuuuuwwwwiiinngggg and a miss!" form.
AHM
NES Member
I think you've got to ask yourself:
Self, did this Einstein pause off-campus to secure the pistol?
Self, did this Einstein even claim during questioning that he paused off-campus to secure the pistol?
There's a more subtle variation on that; see below:
It was a Glock 23, so at the very least, the jerk has good taste in firearms.![[grin]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/041.gif "Grin [grin]")
100 quatloos to whoever finds the defendant asking online, "Can I get me a Glock 23 in Massachusetts?".
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,557
- Likes
- 33,624
In that case, we should put cops in front of every business with a street number that is in the fibbonacci series. Sooner or later one of them will be useful in responding to a crime, thus proving the validity of such a policy.
Wellesley police say "Mr. Began is being charged with Assault with a Dangerous Weapon (Firearm) and Possessing a Firearm on School Property."
More information in the Globe:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...-judge-says/Sf7rycViDRmUYsEFTxaIgJ/story.html
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...-judge-says/Sf7rycViDRmUYsEFTxaIgJ/story.html
Using the English Common Law tradition, Blackstone described assault as "an offer or attempt to beat another, without touching him" and battery as the "the least touching of another person willfully or in anger." (i.e. beating him) Every battery would inherently include an assault but nto vice versa.
In common use today the terms are used synonymously by most people and in some jurisdictions in a way that is not consistent with the traditional usage of the terms (In certain states for example, the the elements of the crime of assault (either generally or in certain degrees) require injury to be inflicted) (leaving what under English common law would have been considered an assault to either be chargeable under a different crime or as an attempted assault). Some other states will use one term/charge for either element, and some states like Mass (which happens to call the crime assault or assault & battery) allows the charge to be used for the actual or threatened use of force.
Last edited:
71montess
NES Member
Hope he gets help and gets his life back on track.
JRT
NES Member
DarthRevan
NES Member
Yeah he phucked up huge, however I certainly hope that after he gets proper treatment and has shown that he has regained his senses that he'll be able to one day get his LTC back.
AM I the only one who thinks that somebody who (1) waves his gun at somebody while driving, (2) admits to the police that he did it while (3) carrying his gun onto school property is somebody who shouldn't be carrying a gun?
Full retard road ragers should be prosecuted, but #3 shouldn't even be a crime to begin with, If he has a good attorney that charge might get dumped but I bet he still has to eat some other felony...
I think some time in a looney bin might be more helpful to this guy than prison, though, but who knows he could just be a conventional jerk who happened to serve.
-Mike
- - - Updated - - -
Never happening (even if by some miracle he walks, this is unsuitable defined), but he probably has bigger problems than whether or not he can carry.
-Mike
Hey I think we all agree #3 shouldnt even be a crime to begin with, but the fact remains, it is.
This kid ****ed up, there are no ifs, ands, or buts about it, he ****ed up.
PTSD playing a part in this? Maybe. Maybe not. Everyone deals with their demons differently, unless I have young Ians DD214 in hand, Im gonna keep my opinion to myself on that.
Maybe the looney bin will help him, maybe not, but youre accurate (my opinion anyways) with your " conventional jerk who happenned to serve" comment.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,557
- Likes
- 33,624
He was charged with a non-crime in the case of #3.
Carry on ones person on school property is a crime. Possession is not. See MGL 169-10j and read it carefully.
It may sound like i am sticking up for this guy, but it is not my intent to stick up for this guy allegedly waving a gun at people on the road. I am certainly not condoning doing what he allegedly has done nor am I suggesting anyone do what he has allegedly done. There...I hope my disclaimer is fully active for this post...lol
It has always been my experience on the road that it takes two to tango. Having said that I'm not sure who initiated the incident. Was the other driver completely innocent? Did he cut off this man with the glock? Did he make threatening gesture prior to the gun incident?
I'm not saying it justifies what Ian has allegedly done but it should make other mushrooms looking to be stupid on the road pause and think of what that the other driver you decide to screw with might be thinking or have in his possession.
So my guess is that there was some erratic driving by both and a huge testosterone dump at some point where mine is bigger than yours and when Ian allegedly pulled out the glock then scared willy went running to the popo.
I'm all about the audit trail. So I am interested in who started the altercation. And NO....two wrongs don't make it right but there should be some investigation into scared willy to see who initially caused the incident. And if scared willy was instrumental with initiating the altercation then I think some charges should be brought against him as well.
It has always been my experience on the road that it takes two to tango. Having said that I'm not sure who initiated the incident. Was the other driver completely innocent? Did he cut off this man with the glock? Did he make threatening gesture prior to the gun incident?
I'm not saying it justifies what Ian has allegedly done but it should make other mushrooms looking to be stupid on the road pause and think of what that the other driver you decide to screw with might be thinking or have in his possession.
So my guess is that there was some erratic driving by both and a huge testosterone dump at some point where mine is bigger than yours and when Ian allegedly pulled out the glock then scared willy went running to the popo.
I'm all about the audit trail. So I am interested in who started the altercation. And NO....two wrongs don't make it right but there should be some investigation into scared willy to see who initially caused the incident. And if scared willy was instrumental with initiating the altercation then I think some charges should be brought against him as well.
Wait. I'm NOT allowed to point my gun at people who are driving like *******s? That's 95% of the reason why I bought one...
fencer
NES Member
I am not. I don't give a frog's fat ass who started it. From my perspective, the only reason to draw a weapon on another motorist is if he is shooting at you or preparing to shoot at you. Even if the other guys was trying to run him off the road or ram his vehicle, it is just to easy to deescalate the whole thing by applying the brakes, putting on the blinker and pulling over, then call the cops.
Glock boy is a douchenozzle. Thanks a ton for giving the antis more fuel for the mandatory mental health screening that they salivate over.
I have talked to a neighbor kid who is more than a little pissed at some of these vets at the collage he is going to .
he says they are bragging to the chicks about how they won the war ect...,
when he knows they saw no action.
he was with 2/8 marines ,in Afganistan ,and was the entry guy with the dog and the shotgun, then a sniper in the field. Up front close and personal
was shot in the head and survived it.
so after reading about this incedent ,I think he might be on to something.
he says they are bragging to the chicks about how they won the war ect...,
when he knows they saw no action.
he was with 2/8 marines ,in Afganistan ,and was the entry guy with the dog and the shotgun, then a sniper in the field. Up front close and personal
was shot in the head and survived it.
so after reading about this incedent ,I think he might be on to something.
Last edited:
[AM I the only one who thinks that somebody who (1) waves his gun at somebody while driving, (2) admits to the police that he did it while (3) carrying his gun onto school property is somebody who shouldn't be carrying a gun?]
No...Not at all.
No...Not at all.
From that Globe article:
In what scenario has this ever worked out? He must truly believe he was justified for his road rage. Just completely nuts.
Someone tell Ian there are plenty of pre-ban G23 mags in the classifieds.
In what scenario has this ever worked out? He must truly believe he was justified for his road rage. Just completely nuts.
Someone tell Ian there are plenty of pre-ban G23 mags in the classifieds.
Similar threads
