Shaneen Allen moved to pre-trial diversion

[Solus]

I have no problem with her saying "F*ck their unconstitutional laws, I'm carrying and they can get bent".
What pisses me off is that when she got caught all of a sudden she's a "victim" .
People pushing this crap are no better than Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson.
Jay, if you want a "poster child" try finding one that is actually innocent.
This broad deserves what ever she gets.

She became a "victim" when a heavy handed prosecutor decided to make an example of her as a warning to any who might disagree with NJ gun laws by throwing the book at her. 

True, she should have been aware of the laws but she had absolutely no criminal intent, as can be shown by her following the law she was aware of and informing the police officer she was licensed to carry and was carrying.

To compare his to the Ferguson is ludicrous.

The "victim" in Ferguson deliberately assaulted a police officer doing significant physical damage and was shot in self defense by the officer.

This woman did not deliberately commit a crime and absolutely no one was harmed by her actions.

To compare criticizing the prosecutors aggressive handling of her case with the actions of Sharpton and Jackson is unreasonable at best.

The sentence she was given currently should have been what happened from the start.



 

[tombogan03884]

If I run over you while driving drunk I have not "deliberately committed a crime" but I'm still a dumb ass who broke the law and deserve jail.
What makes this just exactly like Ferguson and Trayvon Martin is that a bunch of assholes with an agenda are trying to make a criminal into some kind of pathetic hero.
I prefer to give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she just said screw their laws rather than think some one carrying a loaded gun was to damned stupid to know that laws vary by state.
When I go to certain nearby states I say to hell with their laws and carry any way.
If I get caught, I'm caught and will do my year in jail.
I will not play some kind of victim.
But then I'm not black either, they all seem to be the victim of something.

[jaybet]

Well, it wasn't a year in jail...it was 10. She had no record of any kind. AND...the prosecutor and judge were the SAME prosecutor and judge that let Ray Rice do an intervention program for bashing a woman unconscious and dragging her around. These guys were up to a gross miscarriage of justice, but they are so blinded by hatred of gun people here, they thought they would get away with it. The Democrats are incredibly arrogant here.
Yea she broke the law, but they make deals for people all the time. What they were up to was BS.

[Solus]

If I run over you while driving drunk I have not "deliberately committed a crime" but I'm still a dumb ass who broke the law and deserve jail.
What makes this just exactly like Ferguson and Trayvon Martin is that a bunch of assholes with an agenda are trying to make a criminal into some kind of pathetic hero.
I prefer to give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she just said screw their laws rather than think some one carrying a loaded gun was to damned stupid to know that laws vary by state.
When I go to certain nearby states I say to hell with their laws and carry any way.
If I get caught, I'm caught and will do my year in jail.
I will not play some kind of victim.
But then I'm not black either, they all seem to be the victim of something.

Nice try, but still a miss.

If you run over me while drunk, you have done damage to someone, where she has not, even if you can somehow prove you didn't now there were laws against drunk driving, you have still cause injury through your actions and, drunk or not, you would be facing charges for negligence. 

And if you were aware driving while intoxicated is a crime, which is more likely the case, then you deliberately violated the law when you got behind the wheel.

And I don't see where anyone has been trying to make her a hero.  Just pointing out that she has suffered because of the actions of a over zealous prosecutor.   

And she has suffered.  Lose of the 3 jobs she was working to provide for her kids, vehicle reposed, evicted from housing, and, what, I think it was a month or more behind bars when, with her clean record and obvious non-criminal intent, she should have been offered this sentence from day one.   

[tombogan03884]

I should have left out the part about running over you, but I was visualizing Harp seals and 2X4's.

"And I don't see where anyone has been trying to make her a hero.  Just pointing out that she has suffered because of the actions of a over zealous prosecutor."

What part of" the woman is guilty" makes the prosecutor "overzealous" ?

And don't bring up that bullshit about Rice smacking his old lady because it has nothing to do with this case.
If you don't understand that a GUILTY poster child does you no good then you're to damned stupid for me to waste any more time on.   

[Sponsor]

[jaybet]

HaHa Tom! I don't think anyone here called her a hero, at least I didn't. But Ray Rice was brought up because the people that wanted to take this admittedly dopey young lady with no criminal past and lock her up because of her GUN, were willing to let a massively muscled and trained warrior bash the crap out of a woman, but let him go on aggravated battery because he's a celebrity and rich, and he didn't have a GUN (at least not that we know of). That is really crappy justice and both the judge and the prosecutor are asshats for running their offices that way.

The whole push here wasn't that she broke the law, it was because of the unequal application of justice on the singular basis that her offense involved a gun. That's why I think it became such a big deal -at least with the NJ gun community.

The other point I tried to make that seems to have missed the mark is that even though she's guilty, the gun community changed the course of this travesty by using lib tactics. "So what if she's guilty, blah,blah, blah, it's for the children" and something actually got done. I think we've been missing the boat tactically.

[tombogan03884]

So you are proud that instead of one out of 2 black perps actually being held accountable neither one is.
Yep, that's something to be real proud of there.

[Solus]

Think about this.

There was NO Criminal Intent and NO negligent damage.  That has a major impact on guilt.

Here is another case with similar circumstances..and I do hope it turns out similar to how this case finally was resolved.

 It is clear that Andrew received the green light to enter Mexico without being stopped, and that he was the one who decided to contact a customs officer in an effort to find a way to turn around. Therefore, he lacked the necessary criminal intent to commit the crimes alleged.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/09/17/why-andrew-tahmooressi-marine-held-in-mexico-will-be-home-soon/?intcmp=latestnews

You may agree with the Mexican Government that this Marine should spend a long period in a Mexican jail for a unintentional violation of a law, but I do not.

It should always be the spirit of the law that is enforced, not the letter of the law.  In both cases the spirit of the law is to prevent unauthorized weapons from being brought in.  Without the criminal intent to do there is no crime.

[jaybet]

So you are proud that instead of one out of 2 black perps actually being held accountable neither one is.
Yep, that's something to be real proud of there.

No, not "proud" Tom...just making a few observations. First, I don't know where you're going with "black perps" but yes, they did violate the law. They HAVE been held accountable too. Maybe not to the degree you'd like or not, but they were arrested, held, arraigned, and will have to do community service or something, pay fines, all that good stuff. The more violent of the two has tarnished his reputation and has lost money (although he'd probably never lose his job over this). The dopey one reportedly has lost all of her work, her home, and her vehicle.

What I am pleased with, and what the NJ2AS and others rallied about, was that the dopey one didn't receive punishment that is GEOMETRICALLY greater than the violent one for the sole reason that her offense didn't only include a gun, but the presence of the gun was the entire offense. I'm glad that the arrogant asshole prosecutor and judge were not able to get away with what they had intended.

Third, how that came about was interesting to me because the gun community seemed to employ tactics that you'd normally see from the Mommies or from the Lez-Gay-Trans whatever those letters are.The gunners ignored the fact that she was indeed guilty, instead squawking about the fact that it wasn't right and we don't like it...what about the children...shame shame shame on you corrupt government officials, etc etc.  That crap seemed to work way better than a reasoned plea for lenience or at least fairness.

My point was that our use of facts and statistics are like ancient Sumerian to libs and politicians. They respond much better to the wailing and gnashing of teeth with no facts to back it up. I'm thinking we should try it more often.

[Ulmus]

It looks like the guys over at The Gun Nation also agree with Jaybet and the others.

http://www.gunnation.us/2014/09/9-24-2014episode117-tactical-hippies.html

They talk about it somewhere in the first ten minutes of the 'cast.