“Free Plaxico Burress”

Amen to that.

David Kopel, writing today at the Wall Street Journal, argues that charging Burress with a felony that on conviction would have him go to prison for exercising a Constitutional right is an outrage:

His crime? Not having a license, which New York City never would have issued him, for the exercise of his constitutional right to bear arms.

I’m nearly apoplectic on this matter, so hit the link and read Kopel for a more rational argument, and don’t read beyond this paragraph of mine if you have any sort of positive devotion to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. For accidentally discharging his handgun and shooting himself in the leg, Burress could legitimately be charged with reckless endangerment. There really is no excuse for “accidental discharge” of a gun in a public place. But the possession without a permit felony charge, complete with a minimum 3-1/2 year sentence, is an outrage.

Now, I call Michael Bloomberg a slob for a number of reasons. His loose imperious billionaire demeanor being one. His creepy whiney voice being another. His attitudes toward the right of New Yorkers to self-defense being the greatest.

Bloomberg wants Burress prosecuted to the full extent of his unconstitutional law.

I’m just guessing, but I suspect that Bloomberg travels around with a security detail of at least a half-dozen tactically trained and heavily armed NYPD bodyguards. I don’t know for certain, but I would be shocked if those officers did not carry automatic weapons and are able to defend the Mayor against a fulsome attack by a crew of serious terrorists. All well and good, because he is a high-profile political leader.

But on the rights of individuals to protect themselves he is a smarmy whining punk.

Forget for a second about Plaxico Burress. It could be someone named Jane Jackson returning by subway after midnight to her home in Harlem who the Mayor wouldn’t allow to be armed to protect herself against robbery, rape, or a beating, or worse.

I don’t know anyone named Jane Jackson, but her right to defend her life is more important to me than Michael Bloomberg in any of his capacities. I’m sure that when he was just a billionaire and not yet a mayor, he made sure that he was more than adequately protected.

Jane Jackson, however, is denied access, under the harsh penalty of law, to the status quo means of self-defense: the handgun.

Give me a break, please. Bloomberg is a vicious slob and all the money in the world will not change that.

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.