Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
How does knowing the law help when you accidentally cross the border?

Because you follow it when you know that there is a possibility that you might accidentally cross the border.

You're not making much sense here. You know the law. It is different from the law where you live. You have no intent of going to the border state. You accidentally do. Not intending to be there, why would you already be conforming to a law different from the one where you intend to be? Do you routinely conform to laws for areas you do not intend to be?

I'm not sure why the heck I would follow a law for a place I don't intend to go, especially if that law is more restrictive than those of where I do intend to be.

 CptJake wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
How does knowing the law help when you accidentally cross the border?

Because you follow it when you know that there is a possibility that you might accidentally cross the border.

You're not making much sense here. You know the law. It is different from the law where you live. You have no intent of going to the border state. You accidentally do. Not intending to be there, why would you already be conforming to a law different from the one where you intend to be? Do you routinely conform to laws for areas you do not intend to be?

Okay... how do you "accidently" cross the border? O.o

<--- lives in St. Louis, but I'd know I'm in Illinois if I cross one of the River (Mississippi).

 MrDwhitey wrote:


From the sounds of it, he is mentally unstable and also needs treatment, and I hope he gets it. The people clamouring for Mexico laws to be ignored and for him to be released immediately probably make the situation worse, with Mexico being forced to "look tough" for its people in this case, instead of quietly releasing him at a later date. Who knows.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I really don't "blame" Mexico here; I simply think our gov't should be doing more to step in and help get him out of prison. It would have been, IMO, a good PR move considering the state of affairs with the VA.....

 whembly wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
How does knowing the law help when you accidentally cross the border?

Because you follow it when you know that there is a possibility that you might accidentally cross the border.

You're not making much sense here. You know the law. It is different from the law where you live. You have no intent of going to the border state. You accidentally do. Not intending to be there, why would you already be conforming to a law different from the one where you intend to be? Do you routinely conform to laws for areas you do not intend to be?

Okay... how do you "accidently" cross the border? O.o

<--- lives in St. Louis, but I'd know I'm in Illinois if I cross one of the River (Mississippi).

I know traveling north up I95 if you miss the last GA exit (which is not marked as the last GA exit) you very much accidentally (as in you didn't intend to go there) end up in SC. On the back roads it is even easier to accidentally cross the state border.

 cincydooley wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:


From the sounds of it, he is mentally unstable and also needs treatment, and I hope he gets it. The people clamouring for Mexico laws to be ignored and for him to be released immediately probably make the situation worse, with Mexico being forced to "look tough" for its people in this case, instead of quietly releasing him at a later date. Who knows.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I really don't "blame" Mexico here; I simply think our gov't should be doing more to step in and help get him out of prison. It would have been, IMO, a good PR move considering the state of affairs with the VA.....

The VA? I'm lost.

When you know there is a chance that you can cross the border and be in violation of the law, then you take the actions needed to be in compliance before it happens.

Or you can decide that you know that there is a chance that you can cross the border and be in violation of the law but you ignore that possibility and make the decision to be in violation of the law if it happens.

One is responsibility, one is negligence.

 cincydooley wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:


From the sounds of it, he is mentally unstable and also needs treatment, and I hope he gets it. The people clamouring for Mexico laws to be ignored and for him to be released immediately probably make the situation worse, with Mexico being forced to "look tough" for its people in this case, instead of quietly releasing him at a later date. Who knows.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I really don't "blame" Mexico here; I simply think our gov't should be doing more to step in and help get him out of prison. It would have been, IMO, a good PR move considering the state of affairs with the VA.....

I DO blame Mexico. Their guys are firing M2s at our border patrol. We should start responding in kind now.

 MrDwhitey wrote:


The VA? I'm lost.

For real? Maybe this isn't big news over the pond:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veterans_Health_Administration_scandal_of_2014

What, firing 2 rounds and missing wildly?

I know of the scandal cincy, "VA" just didn't twig for me. I googled "mexico va" and ended up on vaccinations.

 d-usa wrote:
When you know there is a chance that you can cross the border and be in violation of the law, then you take the actions needed to be in compliance before it happens.

Or you can decide that you know that there is a chance that you can cross the border and be in violation of the law but you ignore that possibility and make the decision to be in violation of the law if it happens.

One is responsibility, one is negligence.

No.

If complying to laws where I don't intend to be restricts or constrains me from legal actions where I do intend to be, it don't happen. It is not 'responsibility' to limit your self to standards for a place you don't think you are going to end up.

There is no negligence in her not having complied to the laws of a place she did not want to go. She did not make a decision to be in violation of any law. She didn't know there was a chance she would end up across the border.

 CptJake wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
How does knowing the law help when you accidentally cross the border?

Because you follow it when you know that there is a possibility that you might accidentally cross the border.

You're not making much sense here. You know the law. It is different from the law where you live. You have no intent of going to the border state. You accidentally do. Not intending to be there, why would you already be conforming to a law different from the one where you intend to be? Do you routinely conform to laws for areas you do not intend to be?

Okay... how do you "accidently" cross the border? O.o

<--- lives in St. Louis, but I'd know I'm in Illinois if I cross one of the River (Mississippi).

I know traveling north up I95 if you miss the last GA exit (which is not marked as the last GA exit) you very much accidentally (as in you didn't intend to go there) end up in SC. On the back roads it is even easier to accidentally cross the state border.

Fair enough.

I'm in the camp that everyone is at fault... it's what our Politicians subscribes to!

When did she accidentally cross the border? From what I can tell she just thought her permit was good for everywhere and was quite deliberately in New Jersey.

 whembly wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
How does knowing the law help when you accidentally cross the border?
I know traveling north up I95 if you miss the last GA exit (which is not marked as the last GA exit) you very much accidentally (as in you didn't intend to go there) end up in SC. On the back roads it is even easier to accidentally cross the state border.

Fair enough.

I'm in the camp that everyone is at fault... it's what our Politicians subscribes to!

She screwed up. It happens. I have ended up in SC and didn't mean to. And almost ended up in Mexico at the El Paso/Juarez crossing because the last turn to avoid it was over a mile inside the US, and again, it wasn't clearly marked (I had to brake hard and cut across a couple lanes of pissed off drivers to get off in time).

Having said that, once you do cross you should expect the law there to apply to you. Personally I think the minimum sentencing for this is silly. I also think the arresting officer should have very easily been able to tell this poor lady just fethed up, turned her around with a warning of possible consequences, and let it go at that.

She didn't "accidentally cross the border", it seems she was there deliberately, she just didn't bother to check their laws beforehand.

I think mandatory minimum sentencing is a load of crap, btw.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
She didn't "accidentally cross the border", she was there deliberately, she just didn't bother to check their laws beforehand.

I think mandatory minimum sentencing is a load of crap, btw.

Not according to this:

A Philadelphia mother of two is facing three years in prison after she mistakenly entered New Jersey, where she was stopped for a traffic violation and found in possession of a handgun loaded with hollow-point bullets.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/16/honest-mistake-leads-to-philly-mother-facing-three-years-on-gun-charge/

She didn’t realize the permit wasn’t valid in every state and was driving in New Jersey when she was pulled over for a minor traffic offense. She informed the officer she had a weapon and provided her permit, thinking she was within the law.
But she wasn’t. New Jersey’s stringent gun laws don’t recognize Pennsylvania’s concealed-carry permits.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/why-doesnt-the-left-care-about-shaneen-allen/article/2551368

Allen said that she didn't know her permit didn't apply to New Jersey so when she was stopped for a minor traffic offense she told the police about her gun and her permit to carry. In this case, being honest may have cost her.

http://www.my9nj.com/story/25996007/nj-gun-permit-problems

I have no idea about the reliability of these, can't be worse than Fox though.

Also, most things saying it was a mistake say that in the sense "that her feth up was entering New Jersey, she should not have done that oh no", not that she "accidentally crossed a border without knowing" mistake. Regardless, she put herself into this situation, but I have sympathy for her and reiterate that mandatory minimum sentencing is a load of crap. I mean, jesus, there's apparently even a program available for people to avoid jailtime for this in NJ? Why the feth not put her on that?

Isn't the real question here, "Who acually gets pulled over for failure to signal." Really?

I didn't know anyone actually ever got pulled over for this.....

Does anything you posted indicate she intended to be in NJ and contradict what I posted?

Nope. Nothing says she intended to cross into NJ, and I did find a source saying she did not intend to. So, yes, my source may be wrong and she may have been fibbing, but your sources don't really show this to be the case.

What I posted indicated that she knew she was in New Jersey, and thought she was good. It's reasonable to infer she intended to be there, especially when so far only Fox has said she didn't.

She was ignorant of the law at the very least, and as I said, regardless of intention, she put herself in the position.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
What I posted indicated that she knew she was in New Jersey, and thought she was good.

She was ignorant of the law at the very least, and as I said, regardless of intention, she put herself in the position.

Being pulled over by a Jersey cop can be an indicator of your location. And, as in my examples of missing the last GA exit on 95, yes, the huge 'Welcome to South Carolina' signs tell you where you are, but that knowledge is not indicative of intending to be there or even having realized prior to those signs that you had missed the last GA exit.

it would be like having to remember what specific counties inf particular states allow your particular vehicle to drive through...

yeah, ignorance of the law isnt an excuse,

but having 100+ different laws for 100+ different areas, for the same object, is not exactly the kind of information that people can keep in their heads, even if they HAVE read all the various rules for all the various areas.


on top of that, people should NOT be going to federal prison and having their lives ruined over what amounts to a paper work crime.


next stop, canuckistan type laws,

where if you forget either your licence at home , your "hall pass" to take the gun to the range, or your registration certificate
or the peice of paper blows away in the wind
you are now commiting a federal crime with real jail time and your life is over as you know it if caught.

Obviuosly, we need to blame the victim.

Oh, and Mandatory minimum sentencing is bad..... mmmmkay.

 CptJake wrote:

Having said that, once you do cross you should expect the law there to apply to you. Personally I think the minimum sentencing for this is silly. I also think the arresting officer should have very easily been able to tell this poor lady just fethed up, turned her around with a warning of possible consequences, and let it go at that.

I think that normally this would be the case, however with dash cams (and I'm assuming there's sound as well), the incident was recorded and she gave him her license, registration and CCW permit (for PA) AND informed the officer that she had the weapon she was registered to carry.

If there was audio, then there really was nothing the officer could do, as if they reviewed the footage, and found that he let a "villainous outlaw" off the hook, he's in some deep gak.


Beyond all that, yeah, mandatory sentencing is BS for MOST crimes (I mean, I think that there are definitely some things out there that we should maintain a mandatory minimum for), and this is definitely one of them.

 Peregrine wrote:
Also, note that federal law allows you to transport a gun through a state if you're just passing through, even if the gun wouldn't be legal in that state. The article in the OP seems to be trying to portray this as a case of an innocent traveler being arrested just for trying to cross through a state with strict gun control laws, when it really isn't.

Judging by the fact it's a tiny pistol, I suspect she had the gun in her purse or on her hip. If so, that would not be "transporting" in the sense of the FOPA; it would be carrying. That's a big distinction here.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for this woman. I recently went on a trip across several states, and was bringing my rifle and my handgun. I carefully researched the gun laws of every state I was driving through, and of the states I might go through, and then packed my firearms in accordance. I knew exactly which states recognize my Iowa CCW, and which ones did not, and which ones my 30 round magazines and hollowpoints were allowed in, and which were not.

It's interesting to see the usual "personal responsibility" types coming out here and saying it's an innocent mistake and ignorance of the law is sort of OK when it's guns. Pretty hypocritical. Let the thread be about healthcare, giant sodas, unemployment, or welfare, though...

I also think mandatory minimums are horrible law and she should have been let off with a warning. Prosecuting her serves the law, but not justice.

 Ouze wrote:

It's interesting to see the usual "personal responsibility" types coming out here and saying it's an innocent mistake and ignorance of the law is sort of OK when it's guns. Pretty hypocritical. Let the thread be about healthcare, giant sodas, unemployment, or welfare, though...

While I do think this really is an "innocent mistake" it's one that could easily have been avoided... I'm unfamiliar with the PA CCW courses/laws, but in all of the CCW courses that I've seen across many states, reciprocity IS a key point in the instruction. Failure to look up and see that your state doesn't have reciprocity with the VAST majority of the states bordering it (I think I've seen somewhere the of the 5 states directly bordering PA, only 1 has reciprocity for CCW holders, which is pretty bad, IMO), should have some punishment with it, if the situation warrants it.


IMO, in THIS exact situation with the lady in the OP, she at most should have gotten a ticket/citation with a fine (as in, basically a speeding ticket, and a "don't do it again" warning)... Now, if the situation were somehow different, then the punishment should be different as well. But, minimum jail time really is horrible.

I'm guessing I am one of the 'personal responsibility types' you mention.

And I stated that she fethed up and should be subject to the laws where she ended up. I never said her ignorance of the law was okay, I did say that it is very possible to mistakenly cross into another state, and that she said this is the case.

I also maintain that obeying laws governing a place you have no intention of visiting, which are more restrictive than the laws of where you do intend to be, is not something a person should be expected to do.

I also said I thought the arresting cop should have let her off with a warning.

But, her accidentally crossing a border is a lot different than your planning a trip in which you intend to cross multiple borders. Equating the two is silly.

 CptJake wrote:
But, her accidentally crossing a border is a lot different than your planning a trip in which you intend to cross multiple borders. Equating the two is silly.

But also living your life by some other locality's laws where you don't intend to visit is equally silly. (For instance, I have no real reason or desire to visit california, so why would I buy an AR-15 or some such with limited ammunition capacity magazines?)

She was ticketed in Atlantic County. She is from PA.

If she accidentally crossed the border and drove THROUGH THE ENTIRE STATE OF NEW JERSEY without realizing that she left her home state then she is officially dumber than any minimum sentencing law on the books.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
But, her accidentally crossing a border is a lot different than your planning a trip in which you intend to cross multiple borders. Equating the two is silly.

But also living your life by some other locality's laws where you don't intend to visit is equally silly. (For instance, I have no real reason or desire to visit california, so why would I buy an AR-15 or some such with limited ammunition capacity magazines?)

I agree. However, I was told not doing so is 'negligent' and doing so is 'responsible' if there is a chance you may accidentally go there.

Don't preach that gun owners are responsible in one thread and then pretend that it is easy to have accidents that you should not be responsible for in another.