Per this story does he have a case?
I’m not sure about the legal side, but i have to say that Delta doesn’t come out of this looking very good.
Their staff let him fly with the gun, and then another member of their staff called the New York cops on him. That’s pretty fucked up. You’s think an airline that allows you to transport guns would at least take the effort to let you know if you were headed for a destination where carrying that gun would probably be illegal.
The guy was also an idiot for not checking first. Surely any gun owner must be cognizant enough of the large differences in policies across the country that they should know to check local laws before taking a weapon with them?
I was thinking he had no case right up to the point where it said Delta Airlines contacted the police.
I have no problem if Delta absolved itself of all responsibility for enforcing local laws. In such a case, it also has no responsibility to advise its passengers if they’re breaking the law. Passengers break a law and get arrested, it’s between them and the local police.
But if Delta got itself involved to the point where it called the NYPD, then it was aware that a law was being broken and did something about it. And if Delta did that then it should have advised the passenger of what was going on. Tell him that his actions were illegal and give him an opportunity to avoid breaking the law.
I’m no lawyer, but a university president should be smart enough to check the local gun laws if he’s going to travel with a weapon. *Should *be. It’d be one thing if it had been a layover, he never left the airport, and didn’t have access to his luggage. But engaging in interstate travel without reading up on his destination’s firearms laws beforehand is, in a word, very fucking stupid (okay, in three words). How can anybody with this guy’s level of education be unaware that firearm possession is governed by state law, not federal law, and thus prone to vary in states other than one’s own?
I suppose higher education can’t teach common sense.
I assumed that the plaintiff was in compliance with state laws at his origination point, then flew into NY, where he was subsequently arrested. If that was, indeed, the case, it would have been nice (but not a duty) of the agent to alert him to the fact that he could be arrested when he landed, had the agent known this to be true.
However, this was not the case. His flight ORIGINATED in NY, so he was still actively in violation of the state concealed law when the police were called.
As others have said, the burden for knowing state and local laws re gun handling should fall on the person packing the heat. If Benedetto is a medicinal marijuana smoker, I strongly advise him to read up on local laws re this before flying out of the country.
I’m totally with you, right up to the point where the article said Delta was legally required to contact the police, and that this incident happened on the RETURN flight, after the guy was illegally carrying a gun the entire time he was visiting NYC. Delta didn’t narc on him when he landed, but when he declared that he was carrying a weapon illegally to the ticket agent in NYC.
It’s not Delta’s job to inform you of all local laws, nor do they have to pretend they didn’t hear you declare your illegal actions, when they are required to report them.
This is a frivolous law suit. Among other things, he’s claiming that his shoulder was insured when being handcuffed. Unless he’s got some sort of physical disability, a shoulder injury isn’t going to happen unless he’s resisting arrest.
The guy’s an idiot.
Well, it actually seems depressingly common that people not resisting arrest get a good kicking, or pepper sprayed in the eyes at point-black range, or whatever, because they made the mistake of saying the wrong thing at the wrong time, or just got unlucky. I agree, in this case, it seems likely he was just looking for something to complain about. But it’s a disturbing question whether you COULD sue someone for calling the police, if they knew the police were likely to beat you up.
Agreed - it ends up in New York’s lap, as it is New York that imposes a “reporting requirement”, and Delta’s not in the business of corporate civil disobedience (around here we are supposed to have a similar requirement *both *coming and going, which is widely flouted).
It seems to me that there’s a larger issue lurking in the case, which is why a gun license doesn’t get the interstate full-faith-and-credit treatment that driver’s licenses or (some) marriage licenses do. That said, I can’t imagine Delta having any liability here.
Of course, it is not the FF&C Clause that produces that outcome, as you note by recognizing that states are free to choose which valid marriages of other states they will recognize.
Driver’s licenses are recognized by statute, and there is no suggestion that FF&C requires this. Although if a state excessively burdened out-of-state drivers with heightened licensure requirements, the Dormant Commerce Clause would likely invalidate that scheme.
As to the question in the OP, Delta has no duty to render legal advice regarding the firearm laws of their passenger’s destination. There is no basis for a suit.
The article is unclear, but I believe the law that was violated is a New York City law, not a New York State law. If that’s the case, he was fine until he landed in NYC.
If they contacted the police on him, then yes they are to blame, since they had ample opportunity before that to tell him that he was about to be breaking the law.
Why would they know he was breaking the law? There ARE people in NYC who are allowed to carry concealed weapons. pkbites took his pistol on a trip to NYC, went through LaGuardia, filled out paperwork regarding the checked pistol and had no trouble at all.
This article has a better description - on Sep. 28, he flew from South Dakota to NYC, having packed & declared his handgun. No one called the police, or warned him of any laws, at that point. The entire time he was in NYC, he was presumably in violation of their famously strict gun laws. On Oct. 2, he was flying back, and declared the handgun at La Guardia. That agent then called the police.
So I think he’s claiming the agent in SD should have told him about the NYC gun laws when he declared the gun there. I don’t see why he’d think the NYC agent would/should have told him about the laws before calling the police, since he was obviously in violation of the law at that point anyway.
So what? Do you argue that fact creates a legal obligation to notify? The OP’s question is whether there is a cause of action, not “who is to blame.” Like the OP, I don’t give a fig as to how random people on the internet feel about the extra-legal blameworthiness (or not) of Delta’s conduct.
The thing I find disturbing is an unloaded gun in a locked case inside a piece of luggage being considered a concealed weapon. Yes, of course it’s out of sight, but it’s not even remotely useful as a weapon in that state, as compared to a gun being carried on one’s person. Sounds like an asiniely written law to me.
In addition to the “no duty” argument, I don’t think “Delta” can give anyone legal advice, as “Delta” is not admitted to practice law in the State of New York. I can’t see requiring them to hire properly admitted lawyers to hang out at airports around the country in case someone has a legal question…
As much as I despise the gun laws of NYC, the fact is he was in a position to unlock the luggage and access the gun. If it had stayed in the custody of Delta, it wouldn’t have been a problem.
Since Delta knew of and accepted the declared gun when it flew from SD to NYC, was it in violation of NY law during the period when it handled his bag, prior to his picking it up on arrival?
Ah, you’re right. I was confusing matters.