No need for debate. It was accessible for immediate use by fact, as evidenced by his immediate use during the incident.
The glove box is lockable.
2 Likes
Reproducing top comment here from the Jalopnik article:
He looked like a total badass. The control of his weapon points to adequate training. Glad he’s armed and spraying our highways for justice.
What other pre-trial punishments do you think are reasonable? What should the government be able to do to you based on their say-so, without proving you did anything illegal?
How much power are you willing to give to the police to decide what people can, and cannot, do even if they are not guilty of a crime?
As I mentioned above, Florida does have a law that covers the display and use of a weapon while under indictment. So your goal of “ban as soon as charged, until acquittal” is already happening.
1 Like
2 Likes
The fingerprint-activated gun safe in the center console was locked as well. He had to fumble a few times to get it to unlock before he could take out the gun.
This isn’t clear in the video attached to this Boing-Boing story, but it is clear in the longer video of it that the Boing-Boing clip was taken from. The “2nd gun in the center console” that people are mentioning is the shiny lock on top of the safe lid, not a second gun.
If I am embedding this correctly, here is the twitter post that publicized this, with a longer video.
Hard to tell, it’s impossible to see whether he has cellulite or not.
2 Likes
If you are accused of assaulting someone, you have to stay away from them.
If you are charged with financial crimes you may not be a fiduciary, comptroller, or in any other position of authority regarding other people’s money.
If you are charged with a DUI your license is suspended until trial.
I can go on. There is no compelling reason someone needs to have a gun while they await trial for a firearm offense.
7 Likes
“Charged” and “indicted” are not exactly the same thing. Indictment is a charge from a grand jury and I didn’t get from the post that this was a grand jury case, just a standard local DA case.
3 Likes
kids who are accused of stealing backpacks can spend years in rikers before trial, and even thrown in solitary for durations considered to be human rights abuses
now, such things aren’t good, and it may come down to things like skin color, but that’s the standard of justice in america
temporarily forbidding someone access to a gun when there’s a reasonable question ef future violence - that seems more than fair.
i mean id imagine he’s out on bail, or no bail was set - so he’s already better off than most
7 Likes
I don’t get it. I asked what (someone) considered reasonable. And you respond by citing punishments that you say are “considered to be human rights abuses”.
The only conclusion I can make is that you consider human rights abuses to be a reasonable response to being accused, not convicted, of a crime.
Is that what you meant?
I don’t know Florida well. However, in New York, the only way to be charged for a felony is via a grand jury indictment.
That is incorrect. In NY a person may be charged and arrested for a felony. A felony charge may not proceed to trial unless and until a grand jury has made an indictment
6 Likes
Huh? Grand juries aren’t even convened in many jurisdictions on a continuous basis. Those same jurisdictions charge people with felonies all the time.
Not to mention, being prohibited from owning or carrying firearms for some temporary period isn’t a punishment. That’s overly dramatic.
6 Likes
unless i’m totally misreading the comment, @gatto was describing the types of punishments people of color often face in the states describing them as the “standard of justice in america” and then comparing those punishments to the punishment which the above described florida man who shot up his own car received which was “temporarily forbidding [him] access to a gun when there’s a reasonable question of future violence” which @gatto stated “seems more than fair”.
@gatto went on to say “he’s al;ready better off than most”
so your interlocutor above explained the standard of justice for people of color to which they compared the temporary penalty the florida man has currently been subject to and described that treatment as more than fair and better than most receive. how you go from that summary of the situation and come out the other side with “must consider human rights abuses to be a reasonable response” is very hard to understand. could you elaborate on your logic so that i might understand more clearly how you derived that conclusion for @gatto 's comment?
8 Likes
thank you. that was amazing.
5 Likes
… but, see, if I don’t understand what you posted, that means I’m right and you’re wrong 
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
