Mazi Smith facing felony weapon charge
December 1st, 2022 at 10:50 AM ^
Yikes
December 1st, 2022 at 11:03 AM ^
Mazi is from Michigan, and the law in this state clearly states it is illegal (and a felony) to carry a concealed weapon without a permit.
This would not be a crime in many states (Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia and Wyoming), where there is ‘permitless carry’.
That being said, as above, Mazi is from Michigan. Have to know the law and this is a major bummer to hear about.
Edit: As noted below, add Georgia, Indiana, Iowa to above list.
December 1st, 2022 at 11:15 AM ^
You can add Indiana to that list now
December 1st, 2022 at 1:03 PM ^
Hopefully Michigan gets added to that list.
December 1st, 2022 at 11:17 AM ^
Why is a legal action with a permit a felony without? Seems like it should be a misdimeanor.
December 1st, 2022 at 11:23 AM ^
And Iowa.
December 1st, 2022 at 11:31 AM ^
Gun laws be like that. Didn't see, but if he was in a car and the gun is in the car with him and not stored separately and away from ammunition then that's a concealed firearm felony im pretty sure. I got my permit to conceal because there's a lot of nuance that means that if you're a person who interacts occasionally with firearms, you could be committing a felony by doing something seemingly innocuous
December 1st, 2022 at 12:01 PM ^
To me it seems like it shouldn't be illegal at all and constitutionally protected. I can say that if this happened in Georgia with a uga player, it wouldn't even be considered a crime at all.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:55 PM ^
What do you mean? States have different laws. There are good reasons states have for putting gun laws in place. You may not agree with them. It doesn’t really matter what would happen in Georgia with a UGA player in this situation.
December 1st, 2022 at 1:10 PM ^
It matters when you are ultimately addressing things like what, if any, punishment he should face from the school. Universities have diverse student bodies and fans/alumni from all over. If something is not universally believed to be "bad", it's best to just leave it to the courts.
Would you think it ok for a female student athlete in Georgia to be suspended if she got charged for getting an abortion?
December 1st, 2022 at 3:04 PM ^
You didn’t say to were referring to what actions the university should take. You said it shouldn’t be illegal at all and that it’s not Georgia, as if that has bearing on what the legal consequences should be for something that happened in Michigan.
I think schools should have clear policies on what additional penalties, if any, they intend to impose on athletes if they break state or federal law. Of course there can be degrees of severity of punishment for minor vs felony crimes and first time vs multiple offenses, etc. But a policy is much better than an AD having to make spur of the moment decisions that can potentially reflect favoritism for better athletes or other factors that aren’t really fair.
December 1st, 2022 at 3:25 PM ^
I've talked about both in this thread. The law there isn't just, and the school should have a broader focus and act in context.
Regarding your second point, law enforcement is arbitrary enough. You need flexibility in the school administration to address these kinds of things appropriately.
December 1st, 2022 at 2:21 PM ^
Because people who carry without a permit are stereotypically poor, and up to no good. So they deserve to sit in prison for a few years. At least that's how police, and politicians see it.
December 1st, 2022 at 11:22 AM ^
I was just asking this in the other post. I used to carry mine with me, but stopped because of all the travel I do and some states consider that a felony while mine doesn't.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:00 PM ^
Yeah, I carry in Tennessee in my vehicle 100% of the time. I have to remember whenever I'm traveling to consider where I'm going. Shame given it's the states where it's a crime to carry is most likely the place I'd most likely need it. (Hopefully I'll never ever need it).
One of the downsides of states rights I'll gladly deal with considering the alternative.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:42 PM ^
States that allow concealed carry without permit and their ranking in the 2022 US murder rate.
Missouri #2
Arkansas #5
Alaska #6
Alabama #7
Mississippi #8
Tennessee #9
Georgia #13
Oklahoma #14
Ohio #15
Indiana #16
Kentucky #17
Arizona #18
Kansas #23
Texas #25
West Virginia #27
Montana #29
Iowa #32
South Dakota #35
Wyoming #39
Utah #42
Vermont #43
Idaho #47
Maine #48
North Dakota #49
New Hampshire #50
The idea that places with permit-less concealed carry are somehow "safer" is completely and utterly bogus. As you can see 12 of the top 20 murder rates in the country are in permit-free concealed carry states.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:51 PM ^
yea, but 6 of the top 10 (and ALL of the top 4) safest places are permit-less carry ....
I don't have a point here, just pointing out data can often be used to support both sides of an argument.
December 1st, 2022 at 1:06 PM ^
This is a little broad. You didn't break it down to where in the states. Missouri for example; the murder rate of St. Louis is 87 per 100,000 while the state as a whole is between 11 and 12 per 100,000. But also, it's not broken down to weapon used either and if a gun weather owned illegally or not; ie a felony possessing the firearm in the commission of the murder.
The state I live in Kentucky, had 251 total homicides in 2021. 188 of those were in Louisville (the largest city in the state) and 37 were in Lexington (2nd largest city). That's 225 of the 251 murders were committed in the largest cities in the state for just under 90% of all homicides. Louisville and Lexington's combined populations are 955,615 people. The entire state is 4,500,000 people. That means that 90% of all homicides are committed from a pool of people that only consists of about 22% of the population. When you break the numbers down fully, the issue doesn't seem to be carry conceal, but location. These numbers break down very similarly in every state.
December 1st, 2022 at 1:16 PM ^
The populated cities in those states:
#2 KC and St. Louis
#5 Little Rock
#6 Anchorage
#7 Birmingham
#8 Jackson
#9 Nashville and Memphis
Stop generalizing entire states because of crime filled cess pools. Those cities carry the bulk of the shootings like Detroit does for Michigan. Chicago, IL. Louisville, KY.
Those are the places carrying the high numbers for those murders. When I have to drive to Louisville for work youre damn right I'm packing every time because people are out of their fucking minds. My goal is to make it back home to my family at night.
I dont blame Mazi for carrying at all. He just needs to renew the permit he supposedly has. He's not a felon and he didnt try to hurt anyone. If he has it for his protection then 100% good for him.
December 1st, 2022 at 7:01 PM ^
I've been to all of those places except Anchorage. I don't think it's accurate to refer to them as "cess pools" or even as "crime filled".
December 2nd, 2022 at 11:46 AM ^
You obviously don't live in Kentucky. Louisville is a cesspool, haha. It has it's spots, but even Highlands has gone downhill.
December 1st, 2022 at 1:35 PM ^
The idea that places with permit-less concealed carry are somehow "safer" is completely and utterly bogus. As you can see 12 of the top 20 murder rates in the country are in permit-free concealed carry states.
Fundamental correlation/causation error here.
You assume permitless carry causes higher murder rates. One could also assume that the higher murder rate in these states caused their legislature to allow permitless carry to make it easier for law-abiding citizens to protect themselves.
All you've done is point out a correlation, not shown causation.
December 1st, 2022 at 2:22 PM ^
Jesus. The post said, and I quote:
"Shame given it's the states where it's a crime to carry is most likely the place I'd most likely need it."
Now is it possible that said poster only travels to big cities in a few murder-tastic states and never in all of the high-murder rate concealed carry states? Sure.
Is it more likely that this was some BS political swipe that is based on bad data? Yep.
December 1st, 2022 at 3:26 PM ^
This is what you said:
States that allow concealed carry without permit and their ranking in the 2022 US murder rate.
Missouri #2.
.
.
You're implying that the states with lax gun laws have more violent crime. Which is nonsense in the manner presented.
December 1st, 2022 at 4:25 PM ^
I'm not implying anything. I literally posted the murder rate stats from no permit required CC states.
Posting stats doesn't "imply" anything.
December 1st, 2022 at 4:54 PM ^
I'm not implying anything. I literally posted the murder rate stats from no permit required CC states.
You knew what you were doing. Nobody is that fucking obtuse -- even trolls here.
You should probably just take your negs and move along.
December 1st, 2022 at 2:34 PM ^
All states have seen violent crime drop.
In general the states with more liberal the concealed carry laws dropped less than the national average, and states with strict concealed carry generally saw drops larger.
December 1st, 2022 at 3:22 PM ^
All states have seen violent crime drop.
Not so fast.
December 1st, 2022 at 1:53 PM ^
Context matters.
Let's see your poll with how many of those murders were committed with illegally obtained weapons rather than if there are open carry rules.
People shooting up St Louis or Chicago every weekend are not law abiding citizens in the first place.
December 1st, 2022 at 11:26 AM ^
Georgia as well
December 1st, 2022 at 11:30 AM ^
Beat me to it. You can still get a weapons carry license if you want though just to have peace of mind when traveling with a firearm through a state that doesn't recognize constitutional rights.
December 1st, 2022 at 11:47 AM ^
user name checks out.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:36 PM ^
Yeah. Fuck those "Hillbilly" rubes who live in rural areas for carrying guns when the police are only a short 20 to 45 minute drive away. Our superior and sophisticated Urban/City laws should apply to everyone. Arrogant harrumph sound!
December 1st, 2022 at 12:02 PM ^
You should try actually reading work by real historians (not lawyers and judges masquerading as historians who are driven by and arguing for a specific outcome and are not trained in reading and researching archival materials) to see what the people who wrote and ratified the second amendment thought it meant and the purpose behind it if you're actually interested in "constitutional rights," but I don't actually believe you are. There is no originalist or textual basis for modern second amendment jurisprudence (e.g., Heller or Bruen) and it's not even close. It's all policy driven and preference driven. Just don't pretend it's anything else.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:10 PM ^
This is correct. 2A was written for one purpose and one purpose alone. Everything else is secondary (hunting, personal defense, etc). Context matters.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:18 PM ^
the 2A was written to ensure the American population would have access to firearms, in case the need arose to form a well regulated militia. can't form a well regulated militia if no one has guns.
whether that's viable, or necessary, in todays society is a totally different argument.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:14 PM ^
I'll leave it to the lawyers and judges to argue and interpret the law, thank you.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:20 PM ^
I’m fine with Mazi having a firearm if he is a member of a well regulated militia.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:30 PM ^
that's not a requirement of the 2A, as evidenced by volumes of writing from those who wrote, and ratified, the 2A, as well as the 2A itself.
December 1st, 2022 at 2:22 PM ^
Every single historical scholar disagrees with you, but ok.
December 1st, 2022 at 6:44 PM ^
that's literally false but ok
December 1st, 2022 at 1:02 PM ^
I mean I already saw those videos of him from this summer with the guns out. Bruce Feldman put it in his article.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:26 PM ^
What? Too late ... you already seem to have interpreted it here:
"when traveling with a firearm through a state that doesn't recognize constitutional rights."
December 1st, 2022 at 1:48 PM ^
Says the guy who claims to know which states "recognize constitutional rights"
December 1st, 2022 at 2:38 PM ^
The lawyers and judges - particularly the kind of lawyers and judges who favor the current 2A jurisprudence - have effectively punted to the historians through originalism, original public meaning, and Bruen's "history and tradition" standard. The problem is that lawyers and judges aren't historians and it leads to stupid and absurd results, like judges striking down laws banning guns without serial numbers because there were no such laws/traditions at the time of the founding or striking down laws banning people domestic abusers from owning guns because we did not historically ban such people from gun ownership. These are two, actual recent examples from the last 6 months.
Under the standard espoused by the Supreme Court, there is no plausible basis to get Heller or Bruen (e.g., I have a right to own a gun for self-defense that cannot be infringed) from how the Second Amendment was understood at the time of ratification. 2A reflected the Founders' distrust of English standing armies, hence the requirement for a militia. The weapons one needed at the time of ratification to effectively serve in a militia were vastly different than the weapons one would use for hunting or self-defense. You couldn't put a bayonet on a hunting musket and if you needed to use that hunting musket to club the guy you were going up against if you couldn't fire it for some reason, it would probably break on you. There were numerous laws against private gun ownership/outside of private militia training at the time of the ratification and immediately afterwards. In fact, some states had laws stating you had to become trained in militia style weapons under the threat of jailing. The founders viewed this as a duty - not just a right. That's in fact how they thought of rights.
Signed a lawyer, former Circuit Court clerk, and M.A. in constitutional history at the time of the founding.
December 1st, 2022 at 12:15 PM ^
"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824
"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789
December 1st, 2022 at 12:27 PM ^
those damn lawyers and judges trying to make an argument contrary to the actual intentions of the founders.....
oh wait....
December 1st, 2022 at 2:18 PM ^
Earlier you referred to access to firearms. Do you equate keeping and bearing firearms with access to firearms?
December 1st, 2022 at 1:58 PM ^
right. the guns were to form a militia that could overthrow their own government - in that case the english crown had just been ejected. everyone carried as they saw fit. also, reading the federalist papers might be helpful, though some could break out in a rash if they did so, but it is history in real time.