Regard this article discussing the killing to find out what he did when he fired said weapon. No argument about the facts, he is in custody now and admits having done what he is charged with doing. ( I pity his civillian defense attorney. )
Here is my question: as a Private in the Army who was home on leave gathering his wife to take her back to Texas to live, and not on any kind of military assignment or duty in any fashion at all, was he required to carry a loaded gun on his person at all times? Was he required to carry it at all when he left Ft. Hood in Texas to travel back home to Queens? Was he required to leave it on base when leaving?
Aside from the civillian crimes he quite obviously has committed here, has he committed military crimes by doing what he has done? And if so, will he be taken by the Army to face charges before the civillian courts can prosecute him, therefore robbing the victim’s families of their right to see him face the charges and possibly pay his debt to (civillian) society?
How will the Military Justice system interact with the NYC civillian justice system in this case? Who has first dibs on this person? How will this affect this person’s military career?
Where do you get that this was his service-issued weapon? He is being additionally charged with criminal possession of a weapon, which leads me to believe this was his own, unregistered weapon.
Far from being required to carry a weapon, I would be surprised if it was even legal for him to carry one, unless he had a CCW. Just being in the military doesn’t entitle one to carry weapons. I assume this is reflected in the fact that he is being charged with criminal posession of a firearm.
My army brother was recently relieved in Iraq, and apparently even while still IN Iraq, but at a base that’s not considered dangerous, he had his M-16 taken away. He told his wife he started carrying Newsweek under his arm because that was better than having nothing to grab at all when he habitually reached for his rifle.
The military and civilian legal folks will get together and decide among themselves who will prosecute. As to what factors they take into consideration when deciding, I don’t know. Of all the incidents that I’m personally aware of where active duty folks ran into serious trouble with the law in civilian jursidition, all but one were handled by the civilian courts.
Excellent point. I assumed, and perhaps wrongly- though the article hasn’t specified if it was his service sidearm or not. The questions still stand- would he have violated laws within the U.C.M.J. by even having that sidearm with him in NYC, and how would it affect him?
CynicalGabe, cite? No offense, but " he no longer has one " is a bit heavy. I would HOPE it’s over, but one never knows.
Q.E.D., now that I think about your question, is it not possible that a civillian police force would indeed charge him with criminal posession of a weapon- even if it was his service sidearm? Either he is permitted to carry it, or he is not. My questions were, is he supposed to or not? And of course, is he allowed to or not?
The two questions are not the same- some municipal police forces require their officers to carry both badge and gun when off-duty, therefore basically insuring that they are always on duty and able to respond in a criminal emergency with deadl force. Not all forces require this, but some do.
Sure, it’s possible. Criminal possession of a weapon in the State of New York is defined here. I don’t know which part of the statue he is being charged with violating.
The only people in the Army I can think of who would be permitted to carry a firearm in public (in the US) would be CID. I welcome correction to that. I’m also going to guess that the Private in the OP was not an agent with CID.
Army personnel are not law enforcement. We in the CG, OTOH, are federal law enforcement, and even we are not authorized to carry sevice weapons in a non-duty status. (exception: CGIS agents) The weapons are issued and returned after every boarding or duty period where law enforcement is a likely mission.
Yes, breaking local laws can always get you in trouble with the UCMJ.
So, let’s say he was CID, and he did something stupid with his service weapon. The UCMJ has that covered as well:
As far as “criminal possession of a weapon”, I believe that it is a New York City law. I was told years ago by my father (a now-retired police officer, ex-Marine and avid shooter) that NYC bans private possession of firearms, or at least handguns.
I will be interested to see what happens to this fellow in the coming months as attention dies down. We’re at war. He’s Army. Some quiet strings may well be pulled and he may well walk.
Hope not. Time will tell. At any rate, your cite regarding what happens when a gun is fired that was issued by the Military is most illuminating.
This is going to come as quite a shock to the hundreds and hundreds of bodyguards, private security personnel and businesspeople who own firearms in the 5 boroughs of New York City. Most of the abovementioned do not conduct their work with shotguns. They conduct their work with handguns. Quite a few have legally issued CCP ( Concealed Carry Permits ).
NYPD might not like non-cops owning guns, but I have to ask you for the cite proving that anyone doing business within or residing within the 5 boroughs is legally banned from owning a handgun.
I mean no offense to your father who served both country and city, but I am wondering if you are mis-remembering, or of the law has changed in the years since he shared that with you.
Is there a difference in the potential punishments if convicted in the civilian courts instead of by a military court? Other than the specifics of where the person would serve time, I mean.
I’m going to guess that the military courts can mete out much more severe punishments on a majority of the cases they try if they choose to do so. Whether they actually do so or not, I don’t know. The maximum punishment available to the various courts may be a deciding factor in who prosecutes.
We did have a Reserve Navy JAG officer on the boards here not that long ago - perhaps s/he has some inside info?
I believe that military personnel who are acting as couriers for sensitive materials are also armed with a sidearm while in transit. Not that this applies to the OP’s case.
I can’t imagine why the case would be handled by the military courts, since he was on leave at the time and not on a military base. But of course IANAL.
I can’t imagine that the Army would want him back, given the stupidity and poor judgment shown in his actions.
The Sullivan Act is still in effect in New York City, meaning that a bodyguard still has to be vetted to be allowed to carry. As a practical matter, I’m sure that the city government has no real problem with people on official business carrying weapons, but I am pretty certain that the average citizen will be denied a permit if they apply for it. Therefore, I think that “private ownership of handguns” in the sense of “a common citizen not requiring the possession of a weapon to fulfill their professional duties” is spot on.
Yes, of course you’re right. Also, personnel transporting weapons (duh!) are also required to be armed.* There’s probably a list of reasons why a few, select individuals may be armed.
*about 2 years ago, two CG Petty Officers, properly armed as they were transferring small arms from a shooting range, stopped at gas station where they happened upon an armed bank robbery escape in progress. They were able to stop the would be robbers until the local police arrested them.
I saw a blurb on the NY news station the other day, and it appeared that the local courts were charging him. The military still has jurisdiction over the man, despite his location and leave status, and could have tried him instead of the locals if all the parties agreed to it.
Agreed. Recruiting goals undoubtedly take into account that X number of personnel are going to get tossed from the service for a host of reasons - criminal activity certainly being one of them.
I would agree, except for the fact that I’ve been on a lot more movie sets in New York City than you have, Airman Doors, and I have routinely seen personal bodyguards wearing guns in waist holsters or that strap-around the chest and under-the-armpit type of holster. Ditto for music video sets, where in addition to the illegal weapons that tend to be around, the big stars have their bodyguards. All of whom are armed. Vetting, yes I agree wholeheartedly. But the people who are vetted and issued permits to carry in New York City may or may not pass your personal muster. Doesn’t mean there are not many hundreds of folks carrying concealed weapons on any given day in NYC.
The Sullivan Act, as described in Wikipedia, is a May Issue Act. Yes, the city of New York may issue a permit to carry a concealed weapon. ( Interesting, that we are both talking about CCP’s, and yet the menion made by Phase42 of what his Dad had told him was only of ownership period and how that was illegal in NYC. Not just CCP’s ).
Here are some slightly better-fleshed discussions of what the Sullivan Law is, how it is applied and was applied to citizenry when first enacted in 1911 ( specifically aimed towards immigrants and minorities of color ), and so on.
Here is an overview of New York State laws concerning gun ownership- with NYC exceptions listed when applicable.
This excellent Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence site discusses some details regarding NYC gun laws. Click on “CCW Limits”. Also, having read this site, I guess it’s only proper to use the proper terminology- it is a Carry Concealed Weapon permit, or a CCW. So, my apologies for using the wrong acronym previously.
This article detailing a former US Air Force Major’s issues with gun licensing and permitting detail the NY State and some NYC Law quirks and regulations as well, and offers an excellent comparison between the NYS and NYC laws and those of other states in the USA.