LaShawn Craig may spend years behind bars—because the gun he used to justifiably shoot someone was unlicensed

[Auburn85 432]

https://reason.com/2023/12/08/prosecutors-agree-he-shot-a-man-in-self-defense-theyre-still-trying-to-put-him-in-prison/

 

Quote

 

Billy Binion | 12.8.2023

 

 

A New York City man is facing several years in prison after killing someone who'd broken into his apartment.

But perhaps most interesting is that, at his arraignment last month, prosecutors did not dispute that LaShawn Craig acted in self-defense when he fatally shot Timothy Jones. Instead, they hit Craig with several charges related to the criminal possession of a weapon, because he did not have a license for the handgun he used to protect himself.

On November 17, Craig, who has no criminal history, was standing outside his building talking to a neighbor when he heard his home alarm go off. After returning to his residence, he found Jones—wearing a mask and gloves—who, after Craig ordered him to leave, reached into his pocket. (It was later determined that he had a Taser.) Craig then fired several shots, after which he called 911.

Law enforcement reportedly labeled the shooting a "justified homicide." While obviously a tragic situation, that's clearly the correct decision. Which also makes the government's choice to prosecute him for criminal possession of a weapon, a violent felony, all the more preposterous. Put differently, Craig should spend years in prison, law enforcement says, not because he used his weapon improperly, but because he used it without first jumping through the barriers—which are both time consuming and financially burdensome—required to register a gun with the government.

Craig is far from the first such defendant. This past summer, Charles Foehner, an elderly New York City man, shot a man attempting to mug him. Soon after, he learned that prosecutors would seek to have him die in prison. But it wasn't because he hadn't acted in self-defense. He had, the proof of which was caught on video. It was because police searched his apartment after the shooting and found that only some of his weapons were licensed with the government.

Jones, whom Craig killed, reportedly had over 20 prior arrests for grand larceny, robbery, and domestic violence, among other convictions; Cody Gonzalez, whom Foehner killed, had at least 15 prior arrests. Like Craig, Foehner has no criminal record. And yet Foehner, if convicted on all charges, would go to prison for far longer than Gonzalez would have had he survived.

Opposition to New York's gun licensing scheme has, refreshingly, attracted some strange bedfellows. The 2022 Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen paralyzed parts of New York's restrictive licensing rules governing concealed carry. Among those cheering that result: progressive attorneys.

The year prior, The Black Attorneys of Legal Aid, The Bronx Defenders, and Brooklyn Defender Services submitted an amicus brief, asking the high court to incapacitate New York's approach to concealed carry. As I wrote in June:

They offered several case studies centered around people whose lives were similarly upended. Among them were Benjamin Prosser and Sam Little, who had both been victims of violent crimes and who are now considered "violent felons" in the eyes of the state simply for carrying a firearm without the mandated government approval. Little, a single father who had previously been slashed in the face, was separated from his family while he served his sentence at the Vernon C. Bain Center, a notorious jail that floats on the East River. The conviction destroyed his nascent career, with the Department of Education rescinding its offer of employment.

Now LaShawn Craig will have to add his name to the unenviable list of people who used his gun to protect his life and was prosecuted for it anyway.

 

 

[CoffeeTiger 5,180]

You may need a car, but you've got to have insurance and be licensed to drive or you'll get in trouble. You may need a house but you still have to pay taxes and follow local codes for it to be legal or you'll get in trouble. If you feel you need a gun, you still need to do everything legally and register it properly...or prepare to get in trouble if you get caught. 

Not that hard, and I don't think people using guns in self defense should make them immune from being charged themselves if their weapons aren't legal. 

 

I doubt either of these men are actually going to spend a long time in jail. The article is likely using 'maximum' possible sentences for their crimes, but they'll be pled down to lesser charges or given leniency on the punishment in all likelihood.

 

Edited December 13, 2023 by CoffeeTiger

[KansasTiger 3,256]

54 minutes ago, Auburn85 said:

https://reason.com/2023/12/08/prosecutors-agree-he-shot-a-man-in-self-defense-theyre-still-trying-to-put-him-in-prison/

 

 

Better live in a state that doesn't require such nonsense.

[LPTiger 5,173]

53 minutes ago, Auburn85 said:

https://reason.com/2023/12/08/prosecutors-agree-he-shot-a-man-in-self-defense-theyre-still-trying-to-put-him-in-prison/

 

 

NY doesn't have enough jail space to house violet offenders yet the prosecutors are going after a process crime.... 

[LPTiger 5,173]

1 minute ago, KansasTiger said:

Better live in a state that doesn't require such nonsense.

Fast forward a few years, while searching your house they find you possess a gas stove, a 65 Pontiac and a toilet that holds 1.5 liters of water....

[auburnatl1 5,057]

Yet every week there’s mass shooting the refrain from gun rights people is that we don’t need more laws, just enforce the ones we have.

Obviously this one situation is wrong but it’s a spectator sport watching the flip flop depending on who’s getting killed or arrested.

[Leftfield 2,664]

9 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Yet every week there’s mass shooting the refrain from gun rights people is that we don’t need more laws, just enforce the ones we have.

Beat me to it.

This is one of the major reasons for registration. How up in arms would rights advocates be if one of these people years down the road, or someone in their home, went out and starting shooting up a crowd because they'd become violent or mentally unstable. Even if they'd been getting professional help, no one outside of the family would have known they had access to a firearm. 

 

 

[Mikey 16,738]

3 hours ago, Leftfield said:

Beat me to it.

This is one of the major reasons for registration. How up in arms would rights advocates be if one of these people years down the road, or someone in their home, went out and starting shooting up a crowd because they'd become violent or mentally unstable. Even if they'd been getting professional help, no one outside of the family would have known they had access to a firearm. 

 

 

Registration of said weapon would make no difference in the scenario you describe.

[Gowebb11 9,381]

It always seems to be Opposite Day in NYC. 

[Leftfield 2,664]

8 hours ago, Mikey said:

Registration of said weapon would make no difference in the scenario you describe.

So if someone is red flagged and must have their weapons confiscated, you're telling me it would make no difference if the government didn't know they had weapons?

[Mikey 16,738]

1 hour ago, Leftfield said:

So if someone is red flagged and must have their weapons confiscated, you're telling me it would make no difference if the government didn't know they had weapons?

 

I'll take the risk. The greater good is that it's none of the government's business how many guns any individual might choose to own. If someone goes off their rocker mentally they will find a way to do damage anyway. Would you have the government confiscate their car? Confiscate everyone in the immediate family's cars? Because to the deranged having or not having a driver's license does not matter.

[CoffeeTiger 5,180]

25 minutes ago, Mikey said:

 

I'll take the risk. The greater good is that it's none of the government's business how many guns any individual might choose to own. If someone goes off their rocker mentally they will find a way to do damage anyway. Would you have the government confiscate their car? Confiscate everyone in the immediate family's cars? Because to the deranged having or not having a driver's license does not matter.

You may be willing to take the risk, but luckily most people in America aren't willing to put their own, their children, and their families lives at risk for some Libertarian wet dream scenario involving guns. 

[LPTiger 5,173]

2 hours ago, Leftfield said:

So if someone is red flagged and must have their weapons confiscated, you're telling me it would make no difference if the government didn't know they had weapons?

In that scenario, wouldn't the bad guy simply claim he longer has the gun?  

[Mikey 16,738]

4 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

You may be willing to take the risk, but luckily most people in America aren't willing to put their own, their children, and their families lives at risk for some Libertarian wet dream scenario involving guns. 

Most people in America support the 2nd amendment.

[CoffeeTiger 5,180]

1 minute ago, Mikey said:

Most people in America support the 2nd amendment.

Most people in America don't believe the 2nd Amendment means "no regulations or government oversight" 

Edited December 14, 2023 by CoffeeTiger

[KansasTiger 3,256]

1 minute ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Most people in America don't believe the 2nd Amendment means "no regulations or government oversight" 

Yeah, "shall not be infringed" can be tricky to interpret. Like, can we infringe a little? Can we require nationwide registration so we can take them away later if we label you 'dangerous', cause I can't imagine a scenario that could be misused by the govt? 

No. The answer is no.

[Gowebb11 9,381]

21 minutes ago, KansasTiger said:

Yeah, "shall not be infringed" can be tricky to interpret. Like, can we infringe a little? Can we require nationwide registration so we can take them away later if we label you 'dangerous', cause I can't imagine a scenario that could be misused by the govt? 

No. The answer is no.

Strong 2A advocate and happy gun owner here. And think it is a travesty if this guy spends one day in jail. But I’m Curious what your interpretation of infringe is, versus regulation. All of the amendments are in one way or the other subject to legislative and/or court ordered regulation. Example: I’m not allowed to purchase an M60 machine gun as easily as I can a .22 rifle. Do you support zero restrictions in the most literal sense?

[KansasTiger 3,256]

9 minutes ago, Gowebb11 said:

Strong 2A advocate and happy gun owner here. And think it is a travesty if this guy spends one day in jail. But I’m Curious what your interpretation of infringe is, versus regulation. All of the amendments are in one way or the other subject to legislative and/or court ordered regulation. Example: I’m not allowed to purchase an M60 machine gun as easily as I can a .22 rifle. Do you support zero restrictions in the most literal sense?

My view of the situation is framed a bit. Would I like some current, 'regulations' we'll call them, lifted? Perhaps, but I'm not naïve that will ever be viable in today's climate, so I think arguing for or about them is a waste of time. What I think can be done is holding the line on any further restrictions or regulations being added. If that makes any sense.

[Gowebb11 9,381]

18 minutes ago, KansasTiger said:

My view of the situation is framed a bit. Would I like some current, 'regulations' we'll call them, lifted? Perhaps, but I'm not naïve that will ever be viable in today's climate, so I think arguing for or about them is a waste of time. What I think can be done is holding the line on any further restrictions or regulations being added. If that makes any sense.

Makes perfect sense. 

[auburnatl1 5,057]

30 minutes ago, KansasTiger said:

My view of the situation is framed a bit. Would I like some current, 'regulations' we'll call them, lifted? Perhaps, but I'm not naïve that will ever be viable in today's climate, so I think arguing for or about them is a waste of time. What I think can be done is holding the line on any further restrictions or regulations being added. If that makes any sense.

What further polarized the environment was the advent and acceleration of mass shootings.  Used to be just the “responsible gun owners” vs bad guys arms race debate.  Now it’s also about mental illness and fire power.

[Leftfield 2,664]

2 hours ago, Mikey said:

 

I'll take the risk. The greater good is that it's none of the government's business how many guns any individual might choose to own. If someone goes off their rocker mentally they will find a way to do damage anyway. Would you have the government confiscate their car? Confiscate everyone in the immediate family's cars? Because to the deranged having or not having a driver's license does not matter.

"That wouldn't make any difference."

"Yes , it would."

"Well.......I'll take my chances."

Always great when gun supporters use the car example, as if their purpose is the exact same thing and a car has no other use.

"Hey, if you take their guns, are you going to take their rakes, too!?!? You can KILL a person with a rake!!!"

Edited December 14, 2023 by Leftfield

[Leftfield 2,664]

2 hours ago, LPTiger said:

In that scenario, wouldn't the bad guy simply claim he longer has the gun?  

Certainly could, but if there is no paper trail on selling or disposing of the gun, and no report of it being stolen, then further actions can be taken.

[LPTiger 5,173]

1 hour ago, Leftfield said:

Certainly could, but if there is no paper trail on selling or disposing of the gun, and no report of it being stolen, then further actions can be taken.

Further actions = search warrant?

[LPTiger 5,173]

3 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Most people in America don't believe the 2nd Amendment means "no regulations or government oversight" 

Isn't the real question what did the drafters of the second amendment believe?

[auburnatl1 5,057]

18 minutes ago, LPTiger said:

Isn't the real question what did the drafters of the second amendment believe?

Muskets? 1 shot, 20 sec reload, limited range…