She is Jean Valjean. The rest of us are Javert.
1
Stupid laws; stupid results. I look forward to the election of a president and a congress who will seat supreme court justices who will eventually ensure the fullest nationwide expression of our civil rights, including those of the 2nd Amendment.
5
I wonder at Mr. Dwyer's choice of this particular case as an example of our overly harsh criminal justice system. She was not an African American entrapped by the police, nor a juvenile. She was an adult, a parent, who simply didn't bother investigating the culture and the laws of the place she chose to visit. Let us remember that many of the guns used in crimes in New York originate in Virginia and trafficked by Virginians to New York, and then cost a New Yorker his or her life.
While this woman probably would better serve society by having her conviction pardoned, I would hate to open the floodgates to other "innocent" people "innocently" bringing their legally registered guns here. Deterrence is indeed part of punishment, and we surely need to deter the trafficking of these deadly weapons here.
While she has certainly been a law-abiding citizen since, we don't really know why she brought the gun here. We don't know if she was trying to sell it. We don't know if she had planned to commit a crime.
Her time would be better spent thinking less about herself, and more about the increased risks she exposed her child to by keeping a gun in the house, and the scourge of gun violence in America, unique among developed nations, that has cost many innocents much more than the small price she has had to pay.
But sadly gun ownership is religion in parts of America. She wants absolution. I don't think New York needs to give it to her.
While this woman probably would better serve society by having her conviction pardoned, I would hate to open the floodgates to other "innocent" people "innocently" bringing their legally registered guns here. Deterrence is indeed part of punishment, and we surely need to deter the trafficking of these deadly weapons here.
While she has certainly been a law-abiding citizen since, we don't really know why she brought the gun here. We don't know if she was trying to sell it. We don't know if she had planned to commit a crime.
Her time would be better spent thinking less about herself, and more about the increased risks she exposed her child to by keeping a gun in the house, and the scourge of gun violence in America, unique among developed nations, that has cost many innocents much more than the small price she has had to pay.
But sadly gun ownership is religion in parts of America. She wants absolution. I don't think New York needs to give it to her.
5
Maybe it was ok for her to carry a gun in Virginia, but she was in New York & she DID NOT have a permit for there. It's incredibly stupid to take a gun anywhere without checking first to see if it is legal there..& taking a gun on a plane, even in checked luggage & pre-9/11 is just totally nuts. Sorry lady but I have no sympathy for you.
4
Sorry, you put a gun in a suitcase going on a plane and you should expect something like a "permanent ball and chain." We're not talking about a pen-knife or a larger than 3 oz. bottle of liquid, here--it was a GUN!
As harsh as the punishment may be for the offender, maybe, just maybe, it will deter someone ELSE from carrying a gun onto a plane checking a gun, or explosives, into luggage. Deterrence IS part of the point of punishments.
As harsh as the punishment may be for the offender, maybe, just maybe, it will deter someone ELSE from carrying a gun onto a plane checking a gun, or explosives, into luggage. Deterrence IS part of the point of punishments.
5
NYer NYC-
No. If you live in a state that allows carrying of weapons, with a permit, and you cross borders to another state, then within the United States there should be reciprocity. My permit is valid in 34 -38 states. I do not travel to NY, NJ, CT or other states with my weapon. If I go hunting in another state, I lock down the weapon, remove the bolt, and put that somewhere else and also lock down the ammo. It's not being carried on my person. But, still in NY or NJ I could face penalties even with those precautions. In New Jersey possessing banned ammunition can land you in jail. An unregistered AR 15 rifle in NY is another penalty. I can't keep track of all the rules but they are punitive and irrational.
My driver's license is valid in all 50 states and my car is more lethal then any weapon. There is no valid reason for states to have such punitive laws that put ordinary citizens at risk of being charged as criminals for reasons that defy reason.
Deterrence for criminals is reasonable. Deterrence that punishes innocent violations and innocent citizens who can't keep track of a ridiculous hodge lodge of laws should also not be punished.
No. If you live in a state that allows carrying of weapons, with a permit, and you cross borders to another state, then within the United States there should be reciprocity. My permit is valid in 34 -38 states. I do not travel to NY, NJ, CT or other states with my weapon. If I go hunting in another state, I lock down the weapon, remove the bolt, and put that somewhere else and also lock down the ammo. It's not being carried on my person. But, still in NY or NJ I could face penalties even with those precautions. In New Jersey possessing banned ammunition can land you in jail. An unregistered AR 15 rifle in NY is another penalty. I can't keep track of all the rules but they are punitive and irrational.
My driver's license is valid in all 50 states and my car is more lethal then any weapon. There is no valid reason for states to have such punitive laws that put ordinary citizens at risk of being charged as criminals for reasons that defy reason.
Deterrence for criminals is reasonable. Deterrence that punishes innocent violations and innocent citizens who can't keep track of a ridiculous hodge lodge of laws should also not be punished.
19
You realize this was 30 years ago? There was no "3 OZ rule" I do not think this person knowingly violated a law, that 30 years ago was not as widly known or needed as it is now. For someone to unknowningly violating a law, and be punished for it for the rest of their life is a horrible thing.
16
There might be another focus to this story: those in Virginia (and similarly situated personnel in New York and elsewhere) who, because of legal restrictions or concern for their own jobs, failed to hire Ms Langkil. Past felony convictions unrelated to bona fide job qualifications should not be a bar to employment.
20
Recently a retired state judge who is now municipal judge in Ferguson Missouri threw out 10,000 cases saying these cases should not have been started. Our judicial system needs funditmental changes. This article is an example.
16
Appearing in court in Queens, she was told by a judge, she said, “‘This ain’t Texas; we don’t carry guns here.’”
Really? The number of crimes committed in New York and New York City far exceed the number of gun related crimes in Texas.
In this case, and many others, New York law and the prosecution of good citizens is an unnecessary punitive burden that is crying out for relief.
New York should be ashamed and embarrassed. And New York should change it's laws and forgive those millions who have scarred for life.
Really? The number of crimes committed in New York and New York City far exceed the number of gun related crimes in Texas.
In this case, and many others, New York law and the prosecution of good citizens is an unnecessary punitive burden that is crying out for relief.
New York should be ashamed and embarrassed. And New York should change it's laws and forgive those millions who have scarred for life.
21
This is not justice. This an ill conceived application of the law which the state has an obligation to repair. If there are many in need of such help it only makes the point with greater force. The justice system exists to render justice and cannot be blind to the miscarriage of justice.
27
The excuse - it's OK where I come from - isn't good enough. Take responsibility for your actions or stay at home.
6
I don't think whether or not it's "good" enough isn't really the point. Yes, she should have known the law and yes she should have followed the law. However, there is a legitimate issue here with harshly punishing people for a crime that 1) harmed nobody 2) lacked any knowledge of wrongdoing by the perpetrator and 3) provided no tangible benefit to the perpetrator.
If those three elements are lacking from a crime, then it's astonishingly difficult to justify such a harsh response.
Knowledge of the law is no excuse, but not knowing you did anything wrong generally is . . . which usually only happens when you criminalize ordinary behavior (like carrying a firearm).
If Utah passed a law saying it's a felony to request birth control (even over the counter birth control) without first having a consultation with a physician, and a woman from New York gets arrested for requesting condoms without having consulted with a physician . . . yes, she should have known the law where she was -- but at the same time the fact that she harmed nobody, didn't realize she was doing anything wrong, and didn't benefit from her criminal act, should preclude any harsh sentences.
And I'm sure anyone from New York would be up in arms about such a law, and its enforcement.
If those three elements are lacking from a crime, then it's astonishingly difficult to justify such a harsh response.
Knowledge of the law is no excuse, but not knowing you did anything wrong generally is . . . which usually only happens when you criminalize ordinary behavior (like carrying a firearm).
If Utah passed a law saying it's a felony to request birth control (even over the counter birth control) without first having a consultation with a physician, and a woman from New York gets arrested for requesting condoms without having consulted with a physician . . . yes, she should have known the law where she was -- but at the same time the fact that she harmed nobody, didn't realize she was doing anything wrong, and didn't benefit from her criminal act, should preclude any harsh sentences.
And I'm sure anyone from New York would be up in arms about such a law, and its enforcement.
14
It's also notable that this occurred 30 years ago. Ignorance of the law may not be a legal defense, but the sheer size of the penal code makes it reality even today, when the internet has vastly increased access to information.
14
Bern:
I have accepted responsibility for my actions for 30 years. I am just saying that enough is enough. I am sorry that you missed the point of my article. Although I committed a crime in New York I was ignorant of such law as it wasn't the case where I lived. The judge also advised me that ignorance is not excuse and that I should have checked the laws when travelling. If I would have thought to do that at the time you and I would not be having this conversation. I would like the criminal justice reexamined. I would like a second chance.
I have accepted responsibility for my actions for 30 years. I am just saying that enough is enough. I am sorry that you missed the point of my article. Although I committed a crime in New York I was ignorant of such law as it wasn't the case where I lived. The judge also advised me that ignorance is not excuse and that I should have checked the laws when travelling. If I would have thought to do that at the time you and I would not be having this conversation. I would like the criminal justice reexamined. I would like a second chance.
43
People convicted of a crime, as long as it is not a violent crime, need to get automatic expungements after 20 years of crime free lives. This is absurd.
34
No one should have to pay this price for a mistake. Period.
32
It's always shocking to me that in the midst of a movement against unduly harsh prison sentences and legal codes which disproportionately exasperate blacks in America, we have failed to realizes that gun laws are in the same vein.
New York leads the way on these laws. In parts of New York it can cost $300 in processing fees simply to have the right to exercise your constitutional right to bear arms. The fact that a $300 barrier to exercise civil liberties is not seen by New York residents as racial discrimination, but a $25 fee to get an ID to vote is, is startling to me. I think a lot of people simply don't consider the right to bear arms to be the guaranteed individual right the Constitution (as affirmed by the Supreme Court) says it to be.
A woman gets a felony conviction simply for having a gun . . . her constitutional right.
Imagine if we applied such harsh laws to other civil liberties. What if we gave people a felony conviction for holding a picket sign without a permit to do so? What if we gave people a felony conviction for attempting to vote at the wrong polling location (or in the wrong State while at college)? What if we gave people a felony conviction simply for requesting an abortion after their pregnancy passed the legal threshold in their State?
Yet we have a massive collection of ticky-tacky gun laws in the US that people are perfectly content with. For instance, it's a felony to use marijuana and own a gun, even where marijuana is legal.
New York leads the way on these laws. In parts of New York it can cost $300 in processing fees simply to have the right to exercise your constitutional right to bear arms. The fact that a $300 barrier to exercise civil liberties is not seen by New York residents as racial discrimination, but a $25 fee to get an ID to vote is, is startling to me. I think a lot of people simply don't consider the right to bear arms to be the guaranteed individual right the Constitution (as affirmed by the Supreme Court) says it to be.
A woman gets a felony conviction simply for having a gun . . . her constitutional right.
Imagine if we applied such harsh laws to other civil liberties. What if we gave people a felony conviction for holding a picket sign without a permit to do so? What if we gave people a felony conviction for attempting to vote at the wrong polling location (or in the wrong State while at college)? What if we gave people a felony conviction simply for requesting an abortion after their pregnancy passed the legal threshold in their State?
Yet we have a massive collection of ticky-tacky gun laws in the US that people are perfectly content with. For instance, it's a felony to use marijuana and own a gun, even where marijuana is legal.
14