Plaxico Burress Indicted on Weapons Charges

As gun owners we should realize this: there are, and always will be idiots who misuse guns. Any amount of outrage on our part won't change this. Perhaps education could, but we can't and shouldn't make it mandatory. As I've said before, his only real crime is reckless endangerment. Charge him, punish him for that, and have it be the end of it. The gun charge crap we're seeing in the papers is basically just the sheep bleating "for the children!". You're all for charging someone under these laws if it suits your agenda (ie pro-gun... sort of), but if a regular joe gets charged under a draconian gun law we're up in arms. If the SCOTUS had some balls and integrity these laws would all be declared unconstitutional.
 
I just wish he shot himself a year earlier and spent the 2008 Superbowl in jail

PLAXICO BURRESS PLEADS GUILTY

http://www.nypost.com/seven/0820200...ttan/plaxico_burress_pleads_guilty_185509.htm

Here's one break Plaxico didn't catch.

In a stunning move, former Giants wide receiver Plaxico Burress pleaded guilty today to attempted criminal possession of a weapon and agreed to spend two years behind bars.

The ex-Super Bowl hero shot himself in the thigh with an unregistered .40-caliber Glock last November at a Midtown nightclub.

Burress, 31, who caught the winning pass for the Giants against the New England Patriots in Super Bowl XLII, will turn himself in Sept. 22.

"This was not an intentional criminal act," Burress' lawyer, Benjamin Brafman said. "In my judgment, a two-year prison sentence is a very severe punishment."

Burress walked out of the courthouse without saying a word as shocked fans cheered him on.

Burress was indicted in Manhattan Supreme Court earlier this month on two counts of criminal possession of a weapon and one count of reckless endangerment.

He originally faced up to 15 years behind bars had he been found guilty at trial.

In what was supposed to be his arraignment this morning before Supreme Court Justice Michael Melkonian, Burress instead took the deal that had been presented to him by prosecutors a few weeks ago.

The deal arranged by the Manhattan DA's office expired today. As part of the deal, Burress agreed to serve two years in prison -- a sentence that could be reduced to 20 months after good behavior.

Burress looked nervous -- and resigned -- throughout the 15-minute court appearance.

During the court appearance, Brafman said that "after extended discussions" with Burress and his family over the past few days, the NFL star decided to enter a guilty plea.

The Giants released Burress in April. He has not signed with any other team.

The NFL is also considering a suspension.

Burress was hanging out with former teammate Antonio Pierce at the Latin Quarter nightclub in the early hours of Nov. 29 when an unlicensed gun tucked into his waistband slipped down his leg and fired, shooting him in the right thigh.

The gun was not licensed in New York or New Jersey, where Burress lived. Buress' license to carry a concealed weapon in the state of Florida had expired in May 2008.

"Unfortunately, there was no legal defense we could offer," Brafman told the judge.

Pierce was not indicted in the case.

The grand jury also did not indict the nightclub security guard who carried the gun to Pierce's car or the hospital staff members who failed to notify police that Burress had been shot.
 
Last edited:
rep308 said:
The ex-Super Bowl hero shot himself in the thigh with an unregistered .40-caliber Glock last November at a Midtown nightclub.

Burress was at the Latin Quarter nightclub Nov. 29 when a gun tucked into his waistband slipped down his leg and fired, shooting him in the right thigh.


Assistant District Attorney John Wolfstaetter said the bullet that hit Burress narrowly missed a nightclub security guard who was standing inches away.

The bullet lodged in the floor and was recovered by a bartender, Morgenthau said
Click to expand...

So much for the Glock "Safe Action"
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised that he's getting 2 years in prison.

I'm saddened that with his resources he didn't even try a challenge to the mallum prohibitum anti-self-defense law.

Everyone in NYC should be allowed to carry, open or concealed, a handgun for self-defense without begging for approval from the government.

That he was stupid and didn't have it in a proper holster, is just stupid (What was Gov. Ventura's line? "You can't legislate stupid.")

That he endangered the public by having it so insecure that it discharged in a crowed nightclub, should have him charged. My feelilng is that it should be charged as a misdeameanor worth about 4-6 months -- which is a long time for anyone not a regular criminal.

To the comment about "Glock trigger", I suspect that as the gun slipped from his waistband, he grabbed at it and grabbed the trigger. He's superb reflexes failed him here -- a slower guy would have come up with empty pant leg by the time the gun was on the floor.

Imagine if his thought process had been to not keep a round in the chamber as he was going to carry in his waistband. As he had cleared out of the club, and the gun made it to NJ after the ND but before the police got involved, he probably would just picked up the gun, left, and he'd be at pre-season NFL practice today.
 
It looks to me like a middle-of-the-road result. Plax gets time in jail, but much less than what would call for with strict application of all the laws he broke. You can argue about RKBA all you want, but the common man hasn't been able to carry a handgun legally in NYC for about a century. He acted in a lawless manner, and the forces of law and order don't like that at all.

Question: will NJ try to get a bite of the apple? As I understand it, he lives in NJ, kept the gun in NJ, transported the gun from NJ to NY?
 
jcr said:
To the comment about "Glock trigger", I suspect that as the gun slipped from his waistband, he grabbed at it and grabbed the trigger. He's superb reflexes failed him here -- a slower guy would have come up with empty pant leg by the time the gun was on the floor.
Click to expand...

yeah wasn't he pant's carrying with SWEATPANTS?!
 
Carrying "Mexican Style" no gun holster tucked into the waistband of his sweatpants. The guns slips into his pants he grabs at the gun and pulls the trigger. He could of performed a .40 caliber vasectomy.
 
Last edited:
jcr said:
I'm surprised that he's getting 2 years in prison.

I'm saddened that with his resources he didn't even try a challenge to the mallum prohibitum anti-self-defense law.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but even for a millionaire this isn't an easy road to hoe. A commie state court is going to convict you, and the only way out is to appeal up to a federal court level on 2nd amendment grounds. Doing this isn't cheap, and his isn't exactly the best "test case" out there, either. The lawyer probably told him the cheapest way out is to just plea out and make a deal.

I'm not surprised at the sentence- NY has some of the worst, most offensive gun laws in the country. This is a locale that acquitted Bernie Goetz of murder but still put him in jail on gun possession. [rolleyes]

The reason most "beautiful people" get off on gun charges in NYC is because they've greased the appropriate people to get the required permits. There already is a big time greasing system in place, even for the lower level permits.

-Mike
 
the-hobbit said:
All i can say is WOW!

What you say could be true and probably is taking into account what is not being done. But G.D. I find it hard to believe that none of the big media people, or the people around them, carry.

When i think of all the stars that get caught with illegal guns or who are just stupid with them, it makes me believe there has to be LEGAL gun owners among them. Some of whom may want to help like Charlton Heston, who was on our side.
Click to expand...

They don't need to carry, they have bodyguards.....that do.*cough* Rosie*cough*
 
This is probably a really dumb question, but is he now a prohibited person? I'm assuming he is, but I'd like to hear what the experts here (and there are some) have to say.
 
Garys said:
This is probably a really dumb question, but is he now a prohibited person? I'm assuming he is, but I'd like to hear what the experts here (and there are some) have to say.
Click to expand...

If he plead out to a gun rap in NY, he's definitely a PP, as I imagine the max punishment is way beyond 2 years, and it's also likely labeled as a felony.

It is a sad state of affairs when someone can get their rights taken away for exercising them. Yeah, the guy was a moron, but he didn't hurt anyone but himself.

-Mike
 
I'm going to sum things up:

He was carrying an unsecured (in pants not in holster) loaded firearm concealled in a HEAVILY populated area while drinking. Due to his lack of care, he experienced an unintiantional discharge of the weapon and someone was injured (himself)

Should he have been allowed to have a firearm? Absolutely, he has a constitutional right to have a firearm.

Should he have been allowed to carry it openly? Absolutely, again, Constitution _should_ provide him with the RIGHT to "Bear Arms" - open carry.

Should he have been allowed to carry concealled? If the judiciary would recognize that every American Citizen has the RIGHT to open carry firearms under the Second Amendment, I have no issue with the believe that concealled carry is NOT protected under the Second Amendment and that states can place their own restrictions on concealled carry.

Should he be arrested and charged? ABSOLUTELY!

He should be charged with negligent discharge of a firearm resulting in injury. Unfortunately, due to the messed up laws in NYC and twisted interpritation of the US Constitution, he will be charged with unlawful posession of a firearm. He SHOULD NOT fight this up the appeals court on 2nd Amendment grounds as it is a horrible test case that would more than likely harm 2nd Amendment Rights by judicial precident rather than help further them.

The test case you want is an out-of-state minister with a home-state concealled carry license who shoots a rapist in the act of raping a single mother of two. But NYC knows that would be an ideal test case to throw their laws out, so they wouldn't even charge him in the first place.
 
drgrant said:
If he plead out to a gun rap in NY, he's definitely a PP, as I imagine the max punishment is way beyond 2 years, and it's also likely labeled as a felony.

It is a sad state of affairs when someone can get their rights taken away for exercising them. Yeah, the guy was a moron, but he didn't hurt anyone but himself.

-Mike
Click to expand...

I think the bottom line is that he's a moron.
 
ShadeWPI said:
The test case you want is an out-of-state minister with a home-state concealled carry license who shoots a rapist in the act of raping a single mother of two. But NYC knows that would be an ideal test case to throw their laws out, so they wouldn't even charge him in the first place.
Click to expand...

They've done this before. A lady in a wheelchair shot a mugger not that long ago, and she only had an NYC "target grade" handgun permit. She claimed "she was going to the range" (or coming back) despite the fact that her act of shooting the BG was pretty much 110% logistically incompatible with the likely "unloaded and locked in a case" requirement that NYC has for target shooters. She was quite obviously illegally carrying a loaded gun in defiance of the law.

They basically let her off the hook knowing the political ramifications of prosecuting a disabled woman that defended herself would likely result in a groundswell of support to get the laws changed or amended. They knew that if anyone whined they could say "Well, she had a "permit"" even if the permit clearly disallows self defense on the street by its limitations.

As much as I think it should exist, this is one OBVIOUS downside of prosecutorial discretion- eg, they're clearly not prosecuting someone on an blatantly obvious violation of the law due to political ramifications- and they get to DODGE the outrage such a
prosecution would cause.

Ergo, I also suspect that if Bernie Goetz was on the subway in a wheelchair a similar thing would have occurred, or maybe if he was "Bernadette" instead. So much for "justice and equality".


-Mike
 
Last edited:
while drinking
Click to expand...

I didn't know about the drinking part.

The accident happened when he was entering the club from what I heard. I don't know if he intended to drink alcohol or not; or whether he had been drinking before he got there.
 
drgrant said:
They've done this before. A lady in a wheelchair shot a mugger not that long ago, and she only had an NYC "target grade" handgun permit. She claimed "she was going to the range" (or coming back) despite the fact that her act of shooting the BG was pretty much 110% logistically incompatible with the likely "unloaded and locked in a case" requirement that NYC has for target shooters. She was quite obviously illegally carrying a loaded gun in defiance of the law.

They basically let her off the hook knowing the political ramifications of prosecuting a disabled woman that defended herself would likely result in a groundswell of support to get the laws changed or amended. They knew that if anyone whined they could say "Well, she had a "permit"" even if the permit clearly disallows self defense on the street by its limitations.

As much as I think it should exist, this is one OBVIOUS downside of prosecutorial discretion- eg, they're clearly not prosecuting someone on an blatantly obvious violation of the law due to political ramifications- and they get to DODGE the outrage such a
prosecution would cause.

Ergo, I also suspect that if Bernie Goetz was on the subway in a wheelchair a similar thing would have occurred, or maybe if he was "Bernadette" instead. So much for "justice and equality".


-Mike
Click to expand...

A similar event occured in MA. Just after the "Year in Jail Gun Law" was enacted, mandating a year for illegal posession of a hand gun, a black grandmother was caught with a loaded pistol in her shopping bag. This happened in Boston and she was never charged. I got this from a friend who was a prosecutor in Suffolk county at the time. They knew a PR disaster when they saw one!
 
"As much as I think it should exist, this is one OBVIOUS downside of prosecutorial discretion- eg, they're clearly not prosecuting someone on an blatantly obvious violation of the law due to political ramifications- and they get to DODGE the outrage such a prosecution would cause. "

As a business owner I absolutely must treat all employees the same. What we do for one we must do for all. Policies must be enforced equally and fairly. If not our policies become unenforceable.

Should the DA and prosecutors not be held to the same standard? If they choose not to prosecute for one, should not therefore be required not to prosecute all?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander...

Rich
 

Similar threads

not indicted.......2yrs later, indicted
Replies
5
Views
480
LakeTrout
L
Gov. Youngkin Vetoes Virginia Democrats’ ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban
Replies
21
Views
647
rudiewhitebwoy
rudiewhitebwoy
Georgia on my mind
2 3
Replies
88
Views
1K
allen-1
allen-1
CO Democrats’ ‘Assault Weapons’ Legislation Bans 9mm Pistols With Threaded Barrels
Replies
0
Views
117
Reptile
Reptile
Biden Nominee to 7th Circuit Supported Banning ‘Assault Weapons’ But Cannot Define Them
Replies
23
Views
482
HARRYM
H
Back
Top Bottom