2 bullets too many. NY arrest permit holder.

[NMRMN]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05 ... ullet-cap/

[rugersol]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/13/n-y-man-arrested-for-having-two-extra-bullets-violating-states-7-bullet-cap/

IANAL ... but, do they not need "probable cause" to examine his weapon/magazine?! ... I mean, he was pulled over for a burned out license-plate bulb?!

[Heffay]

They probably asked him how many rounds it held and he told them.

[Thunder71]

That'll show him.

Scary thinking MN was headed down that road until MN citizens spoke up and showed up.

[smurfman]

The burned out bulb was the probable cause for the initial stop, the pistol sitting in plain view on the passenger side of the car made probable cause for a check of the magazine and to see if it was stolen. If there was a requirement to notify law enforcement that one had a permit and was armed would likely have also been probable cause to check the magazine (as well as the serial number to see if it was properly registered, this is New York remember). With all the hoopla regarding the magazine issue, one had to be pretty dense to not know about the law, or not care about the law, or wants to become a test case. I'll toss in a few bucks for his defense if the latter but for the others he is on his own.

[TommyMN]

Don't live in New York. Problem solved.

[LarryP]

Driving without a license, & to many bullets. Can't fix stupid.

[XDM45]

Don't live in New York. Problem solved.

..or in CA, CO, TX, IL, FL, because all of them have issues which severely restrict 2A and freedom; however, as I've said before, all laws will do one or all of the following: limit, restrict, or remove rights and freedoms. If wearing purple pants on Sunday isn't against the law, it's legal, however, the state, law enforcement, federal government, whoever, can, many, and probably will, come after you for something else if they cannot get you for the purple pants, it may be under the guise of "disturbing the peace". "Purple pants" in this case is just a silly example, but you get the idea. If they can't get you in one way, they will another. (Capone got nailed on taxes, not for his other crimes, for example.) Laws are NOT your friend, and neither is the legal system; they are tenuous, fickle acquaintances at best which may help you from time to time, but at the drop of a hat, will turn around, bend you over and insert a big one deeply inside of you the first chance the law gets. NEVER forget that. Anyone is foolish to think otherwise. (ala "anything you say CAN and WILL be used AGAINST you."

In one regard, from an ideological and utopic point-of-view, I'm against all laws since if everyone followed the golden rule, there wouldn't be need for laws; however, humankind (and thus most individuals), can't self-govern; which is sad, but thus why we have laws... (that and other people want to control other people too, but that's another issue than self-governing is.) (Side note: It's also why we have Religion too. A lot of people like/want/need to be told what to think, say and do.)

NOT living somewhere isn't the answer because the laws and gun issues at the state level can influence laws and gun issues at the federal level; but besides that, they are against 2A, but largely against freedom and pro-restriction as previously mentioned above.

Apply that thought process to WWII for a moment... Would a Jewish person moving from Germany have saved their life? As long as they didn't go to an area that was occupied or would be occupied by the NSDAP, maybe... but the NSDAP party and government was after the entire World, so what then? Where do they go? to the moon? Sure, NOT living in NY or one of the other locations will help you short term regarding your gun ownership, etc, but how well did that work out during the 1994-2004 AWB? It didn't matter WHAT state or city you lived in, if you were in the US, you were affected. I think it's short-sighted to say "Don't live in New York. Problem solved." as I see that as NIMBYism and also Someone Else's Problem.

You're entitled to your opinion, as is everyone; but in my opinion, I see yours as short-sighted. I'm sure you'll disagree, and that's fine.

I for one, am very disappointed in the recent law changes in the aforementioned states, and yes, they do affect me, in my opinion. (Example: Can I OC in TX, FL or even carry in IL? Nope. One very small example. Do I go to those states? Yes, I do.)

[TommyMN]

New York has been a dump longer then he has been alive and will still be a dump after he's dead. States like Texas will accept him with open arms, less restrictive laws, less taxes, etc. The laws of ny are set by libtards for libtards. How exactly are you gonna change a libtards thought process and voting? I'd really like to know so we can fix MN.

[damian_mb]

Driving without a license, & to many bullets. Can't fix stupid.

Very well said!

[Holland&Holland]

Now was it just bullets he had to many of or actual cartridges?

[JeremiahMN]

How exactly are you gonna change a libtards thought process and voting?

I'm sure calling them libtards a bunch of times instead of having a logical discussion is definitely the right direction to change minds.

[Heffay]

How exactly are you gonna change a libtards thought process and voting?

I'm sure calling them libtards a bunch of times instead of having a logical discussion is definitely the right direction to change minds.

He's doing whatever he can to remain irrelevant to a democratic society.

"Work with someone else because if I can't convince others to understand my viewpoint they'll just roll over me? SCREW YOU, JERKFACE! FREEEEEEEDOM!!!!!!"

[NMRMN]

He's doing whatever he can to remain irrelevant to a democratic society.

So the second amendment is now part of the democratic process?

Like he was saying about libtards...

[bensdad]

Careful guys. Calling them "libtards" and "democraps" hurts their feelings. Never mind that their exhalted leader and-or his appointees have:

1) run guns to Mexico to prove that American guns end up in Mexico

2) left Americans to twist in the wind because admitting that Al Queda wasn't "on the run" might have had a political cost

3) once in power, had their IRS target and hobble the opposition and

4) crushed the 1st and 4th with an historic over-reach of intrusive information gathering (against their friends at the AP no less!)

None of this matters. They still deserve

a logical discussion

. We aren't allowed to be frustrated with their politics or their antics.