(more) Proof that gun laws in MA are a joke

Face it; the laws only affect those of us who abide by them. She obviously had it illegally-so, she doesnt lose her license. MY guess, she was already a felon. So, she wouldnt give 2 shits either way. Maybe it was a straw purchase?!?!?!
 
glide said:
...and that the Globe could use some proof readers.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/08/hold_hold_hold_3.html?p1=News_links

"She was also aqcuitted child endangerment, unlawful possession of a firearm, improper storage of a firearm."

Yes. The same loaded firearm that was sitting in an unlocked drawer was NOT improperly stored.
Click to expand...


During a four-day trial, Assistant District Attorney David Deakin sought to convince the eight-woman, five-man jury that Gadson, 34, kept a loaded handgun, or allowed her teenage son, Jayquan McConnico, to keep a loaded handgun, in her apartment at 266 Seaver St., within reach of small children.

IANAL but it sounds like they charged the wrong person to me.

Bob
 
TomH said:
Maybe some citizens who understand the constitution nullified on those charges.
Click to expand...

Doubtful. They probably acquitted her due to the sob story factor of her losing her son... and at least up until the point where her son got shot by her nephew, she could probably legitimately claim she didn't know the gun was there.

Basically, the jury gave her a free pass.

I can't see the point of sending her to jail, even if she is an idiot, though.

-Mike
 
I guess if this state can't convict her on a storage violation, what's the point of having the law? All the supporters of "safe storage" do is talk about keeping children away from guns but this fine, productive citizen leaves her puke juvenile son with access to an illegal firearm and it's no big deal.

I think I'll take the racial discrimination point of view: "I bet if that were a white boy who died, they'd care. Massachusetts juries don't give a damn about an urban black kid".

That explains it, right?
 
I drove right by that building Saturday afternoon coming out of Egleston Square on my way to Zero Hour. I feel so bad for those poor kids. The one that's dead, and the one who shot him. I don't care where you live, you shouldn't allow a 15 year old have a unsecured loaded handgun in your home, especially when there are younger children present. That mother should be locked up in Framingham until 2020 at the very least [angry] .

Maybe in the future when a legal gun owner is charged with improper storage of a firearm, Comm of Mass vs Gadson case will be cited.

[Scrivner Claus] This all my opinion and is not to be construed as law or fact.
 
You haven't heard the last of this one I would bet and I wonder if she will get her kids back from the multiple fathers. Maybe Deval will come up with another law before we retire him using this case as an example of storage law needs and requirements.
 
drgrant said:
Doubtful. They probably acquitted her due to the sob story factor of her losing her son... and at least up until the point where her son got shot by her nephew, she could probably legitimately claim she didn't know the gun was there.

Basically, the jury gave her a free pass.

I can't see the point of sending her to jail, even if she is an idiot, though.

-Mike
Click to expand...

This plus the jury was probably thinking her teenage son was more to blame for most of the charges.
 
Not for nuttin! But I have known a lot of people in my life that I wouldn't trust with a butter knife much less a gun. If the laws were properly administered and enforced, I might agree we are weeding out the gene pool of people you wouldn't turn your back on but they are not and they haven't been for some time.

I have to obey the laws and these scum bags should not get a break when they break the same laws that cause me to have to jump through hoops to keep my rights. These people are the main reson why lawful citizens have to continuously defend against laws that they won't obey in the first place.

I am willing to bet that this woman has a history you have not read about and none of it good. Unless of coarse she was lucky enough not to get busted. Either way, we have one more entitled moron with kids, screwing up the future generations because she couldn't blow her nose if her snot was a nuclear weapon.
 
HorizontalHunter said:
During a four-day trial, Assistant District Attorney David Deakin sought to convince the eight-woman, five-man jury that Gadson, 34, kept a loaded handgun, or allowed her teenage son, Jayquan McConnico, to keep a loaded handgun, in her apartment at 266 Seaver St., within reach of small children.

IANAL but it sounds like they charged the wrong person to me.

Bob
Click to expand...

McConnico was charged with the same offenses and pleaded guilty some years ago.
 
I find it pretty horrifying that people on a gun board want this broad charged with a blatantly unconstitutional, not to mention ridiculous, firearms charge. Improper storage? WTF? People on a gun board in Mass. wanting ANYONE charged with that BS? That's just pathetic.

What, you're all so pissed off over your CHOICE to comply with B.S. laws that you want them enforced just so you can vicariously vent your frustration with a prosecution of a fundamentally flawed and unconstitutional law? -So much for gun rights. I guess they only count when it's your ass on the line.

Read the Fing article. The gun was her son's. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter over this. You can't control a 15-year-old. That's way past the age when you have much to say about their behavior if they're bound and determined to ignore you. Maybe she knew about the gun, maybe not. Apparently the jury didn't think she did.

The woman is a POS. She got got convicted on the totally righteous obstruction charge. The gun charges were a DA trying to score points with the anti-gun rights wackos in the PRM.
 
What bothers me is that in today's article the judge is said to have given jurors instructions "that the charge of child endangerment “relates to the presence of a firearm in the home.’’"

Many on this forum then ought to be in trouble - watch out! [angry]
 
Um WTF!!!!!

she had NO LTC and got off ALL the firearms-related charges!!!

ONE GUN a MONTH would have kept the 9mm handgun out of the childs reach..


[rolleyes]
 
I followed this trial in the news. Assuming for a moment that the reporting before and during the trial was accurate, I believe the jury got this absolutely right. Apparently, the gun was not hers and she had no knowledge of its presence prior to the shooting. Well, at least prior knowledge was not proven. She was convicted on the charge of lying to the police when they initially investigated. Trial testimony already revealed that a teenage gang-banger son hid the gun in the home, he admitted to ownership and admitted that she did not know it was present. The gang-banger is already incarcerated for the manslaughter that happened in this case.



EC1 said:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/08/hold_hold_hold_3.html

What would be the finding if it were you???????
Click to expand...
 
This is the most accurate post I have read thus far regarding this case. I don't always agree with Bill Nance, but I'm completely with him in this case. Be careful what you wish for, folks.



Bill Nance said:
I find it pretty horrifying that people on a gun board want this broad charged with a blatantly unconstitutional, not to mention ridiculous, firearms charge. Improper storage? WTF? People on a gun board in Mass. wanting ANYONE charged with that BS? That's just pathetic.

What, you're all so pissed off over your CHOICE to comply with B.S. laws that you want them enforced just so you can vicariously vent your frustration with a prosecution of a fundamentally flawed and unconstitutional law? -So much for gun rights. I guess they only count when it's your ass on the line.

Read the Fing article. The gun was her son's. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter over this. You can't control a 15-year-old. That's way past the age when you have much to say about their behavior if they're bound and determined to ignore you. Maybe she knew about the gun, maybe not. Apparently the jury didn't think she did.

The woman is a POS. She got got convicted on the totally righteous obstruction charge. The gun charges were a DA trying to score points with the anti-gun rights wackos in the PRM.
Click to expand...
 
Irrespective of individual laws, this woman was guilty of gross negligence leading to the death of her son. The jury may have well told themselves "this woman has been punished more than we can possible do", which I'm sure is true. And she was never up for "mom of the year".

However, we don't really know how good, convincing or competent the prosecution was. They clearly did not convince the jury that this woman was guilty of something for which she should have been punished.
 
Dench said:
So... you support the enforcement of unconstitutional laws?
Click to expand...

No, I'm sure he doesn't. His POINT, I suspect is that had the woman in question been middle class the result likely would have been different. The MA courts enforce the laws selectivly with more latitude granted to the underclasses.
 
Bill Nance said:
I find it pretty horrifying that people on a gun board want this broad charged with a blatantly unconstitutional, not to mention ridiculous, firearms charge. Improper storage? WTF? People on a gun board in Mass. wanting ANYONE charged with that BS? That's just pathetic.

What, you're all so pissed off over your CHOICE to comply with B.S. laws that you want them enforced just so you can vicariously vent your frustration with a prosecution of a fundamentally flawed and unconstitutional law? -So much for gun rights. I guess they only count when it's your ass on the line.

Read the Fing article. The gun was her son's. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter over this. You can't control a 15-year-old. That's way past the age when you have much to say about their behavior if they're bound and determined to ignore you. Maybe she knew about the gun, maybe not. Apparently the jury didn't think she did.

The woman is a POS. She got got convicted on the totally righteous obstruction charge. The gun charges were a DA trying to score points with the anti-gun rights wackos in the PRM.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is really hung up on the storage law I am more pissed because I know if I was the parent in this exact same situation only I am licensed like I am they would have me locked up for life, and it seems all the adults in this situation are gonna get a pass to have more kids and be felons some more.
 

Similar threads

4000 More Machineguns Are Now Transferable
Replies
1
Views
577
Yosemite Sam
Yosemite Sam
Mexico is suing US gun manufacturers because its strict gun laws don’t deter crime.
Replies
7
Views
327
akma
A
Are people this retarded at the Gun Parlor?
3 4 5
Replies
123
Views
4K
Stee
S
US Surgeon Jackass Murthy: "Guns are a public health crisis" 🤡
2 3
Replies
67
Views
1K
peterk123
P
Are lower 80% prohibited in MA...yet?
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
EJFudd
EJFudd
Back
Top Bottom