Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

SAFE Act case going to trial

February 23, 2014

Jury selection will begin next month in the case of Benjamin Wassell, who is charged under the SAFE Act....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(28)

Dan1776

Feb-28-14 2:33 PM

Misinformation is a very confusing and destructive to the truth. There are several good points made here. Perhaps, all would agree that violent criminals should not have firearms and those that sell them to them should be held accountable. In this case, however, the facts are not yet in. Just because there is an accusation does not make it so. Additionally, until trial, the defense is somewhat helpless, because it tends not to try the case in the media (which we know has its own problems.) Most importantly to recall, firearms' laws have been used for many years now, to threaten and attempt to control the good people of the United States. Often used as a substitute for doing what we know would work to reduce crime, the so-called SAFE Act, only makes it safer for CRIMINALS. Good people are a threat to no one except those who threaten to unjustly attack innocent people. Knowing this, we should ask: Why do politician-types continually try to make such good people LESS safe?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Auwtsnae

Feb-25-14 8:51 PM

I think the jurors in this case should take their cue from U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and nullify the law, if they don't agree with it.

The power to nullify the law rests with every juror who opposes it.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Deloniak

Feb-25-14 11:32 AM

This story (as are many printed by the Observer) is not true and accurate. The retards at the Observer..led by John D'agostino have this wrong (suprise suprise) A grand jury only reviews evidence to determine if there is enough evidence to proceed to trial. There is no trial at a grand jury (idiots). People need to be disgusted with what the government and Attorney general is doing in this case and many cases across the state. I hope Mr. Wassel is exonerated. This isn't the first story related to crime they got wrong and it won't be their last. This Observer is wrong..useless and writted by retards for retards

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Christopher

Feb-25-14 9:12 AM

What you people are calling "Entrapment" is the main way most drug dealers are caught, the exact same technique. That's what undercover cops do. Entrapment is a very specific violation, and not hard to determine in court if that's what happened. I doubt it. IF this guy was willing to sell to a person he thought was a convicted felon, he's too dangerous to EVER own any gun of any kind, period. IF he was trying to sell a gun to a convicted Felon, it has nothing to do with the Safe Act.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Psychofux

Feb-25-14 4:48 AM

This is why we need the SAFE act. Felons don't deserve the same constitutional protections/rights as ordinary citizens. Their voting rights should also be taken away. Oooh, they can't defend themselves. Too bad. Don't commit felonies.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

1Laona

Feb-24-14 2:17 PM

Come protest the NY SAFE ACT in Albany on 4/1/14.Deluxe Bus leaving from Dunkirk/Fredonia Plaza at 4:30AM/returning 3PM.Tickets on SCOPE site(Chautauqua Co Bus)or contact Bill Vacanti at 716-672-6210 Mon-Thurs 9AM-5PM Fri 9AM-4PM.$40 a seat(coffee&donuts provided).

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Deloniak

Feb-23-14 10:57 PM

It is absolutely disgusting that the government is getting away with this fraud. This is an abuse of power by the NYSAG. I hope I get chosen for this jury...and I hope we all vote out the Governor and the NYS AG this election because of their Hitleresque policies.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

tjefson

Feb-23-14 8:03 PM

If he sold a gun to a convicted felon, he should be found guilty as charged. If he was lured into committing a supposed crime by someone impersonating a felon then this is entrapment. The case should be thrown out.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CadeFoster

Feb-23-14 7:31 PM

If he has Paul Cambria Jr as his lawyer , they dont get any better than him.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kcw007

Feb-23-14 7:13 PM

If they haven't charged him with knowingly selling to a "felon" then the issue is legally moot & irrelevant. If that's the case, you can count on Cambria not allowing it to be brought up in court. But if it IS provable, I just can't see why the Feds haven't placed charges; as was done in the matter involving the matter where the two firefighters were slain up on Lake Ontario. Whether you provide a weapon to the well known felon that lives next door, or somebody from Craig's list (or whatever) who tells you he's a felon; it's all the same thing.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stangv8

Feb-23-14 6:45 PM

I detest the SAFE Act but it's not the SAFE Act that's the real problem in this case. The problem is he sold firearms to a convicted felon which is a violation of Federal Law. I looked up Firearms Law in Missouri which is considered one of the top firearms friendly states in the Union.

It is unlawful to knowingly sell, lease, loan, give away or deliver a firearm or ammunition to any person who is not lawfully entitled to possess one.

The undercover cop told him he was a felon and therefore unable, by Federal Law, to possess a firearm. Even states that have no gun registration, waiting period, or magazine capacity limits say it's unlawful to sell a firearm to anyone who's a convicted felon. This guy would go to jail in Missouri, Texas, Arizona, Montana, or any other state in the Union.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CadeFoster

Feb-23-14 5:46 PM

I hate the safe act as much as any gun owner here. you just dont sell to a felon or when the law says you cant. law is law ,like it or not.

nice to see people disagree with this staement.......those clowns are the reason the safe act was made....they dont need to follow the law, thye can sell guns and buy guns from anyone they want, and when they get shot at they pout and cry,lol...........

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CadeFoster

Feb-23-14 5:14 PM

I hate the safe act as much as any gun owner here. you just dont sell to a felon or when the law says you cant. law is law ,like it or not.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CadeFoster

Feb-23-14 5:11 PM

if the undercover told the seller he was a felon and the sell proceeded to sell it then he is guilty. And if it would sell to an undercover who told him he was a felon, the sell would sell to anyone ,no matter their background! they played the tape on the news where he was informed before he sold the weapon, that the buyer was a felon.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

1Laona

Feb-23-14 2:10 PM

Wait to see what"the facts" are before deciding he "defaced/sold to a felon".Prince Andy & his AG certainly aren't to be trusted. 33 counties have forbidden the use of their Seal on Gun Permit Renewal paperwork(is it news yet Observer?).Bus to April 1st Protest in Albany leaves at 4:30AM from D&F Plaza-$40 a seat (SCOPE sponsored).

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Feb-23-14 1:49 PM

Escapee that is an interesting thought? On a side note the Annual NRA meetings and exhibits are April 25-27 in Indianapolis. Rooms are going fast! Don't forget the SCOPE rally April 1st at the Mall(state) in Albany. We are going to let the "fool" know we are still here!

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Escapee

Feb-23-14 12:28 PM

bmwjnw2004’s comment is interesting. I’m not sure exactly what bmwjnw2004’s point is, but it occurs to me that no sale to a felon actually occurred unless the officer is a convicted felon.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kcw007

Feb-23-14 12:26 PM

The term "deface" typically means that an effort was made destroy "maker's marks" or serial numbers. If "deface" is now interchangeable with "modify", then ever kid that put a spoiler and hood scoop on his old man's Ford Pinto is in big trouble. Of course just as putting those things on a street vehicle doesn't make it a race car, neither does putting a pistol grip or flash hider on a semi-auto rifle make it an "assault weapon", other then in the eyes of technically ignorant legislators.

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bmwjnw2004

Feb-23-14 11:59 AM

If the facts were actually printed you would know he did not deface anything or sell to a felon in anyway shape or form.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kcw007

Feb-23-14 11:47 AM

But is he even being charged with selling to a person reasonably believed to be a felon CadeFoster? To me, that point is the "slam dunk", over riding issue in the matter. Yet I can't find anything that specifically states that such a charge as been laid. The Feds consider the violation worthy of up to a ten year stay at one of their fine "resort" facilities.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Clowns

Feb-23-14 10:40 AM

How can he be not guilty? He admits having defaced guns, which is illegal. He sold them to a felon, which is illegal. Am I missing something?

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Clowns

Feb-23-14 10:40 AM

How can he be not guilty? He admits having defaced guns, which is illegal. He sold them to a felon, which is illegal. Am I missing something?

3 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kcw007

Feb-23-14 10:05 AM

The two issues which I find fundamental to this case, and which I simply will not excuse, is the apparent violation of the 1968 Federal Gun Control Act (18U.S.C. 922), sale to a person reasonably believed or understood to be a felon; and the apparent violation of the so called Lautenberg Amendment to the 1968 Federal Gun Control Act; possession by a person convicted in any court of a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence. What I find troubling is the state's "promotion" of the SAFE Act, while the long standing federal violations are far more fundamental to the matter.

10 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CadeFoster

Feb-23-14 10:01 AM

ummm, safe act or not, it is illegal to sell a gun to a professed felon. If you do, then you to are a criminal.

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bob1957

Feb-23-14 9:07 AM

There is nothing SAFE about the SAFE Act which is a law. So it is the SAFE Law not act. Next, NYS Legislature and Governor have made a criminal out of a veteran, family man, taxpaying citizen to pursue their political agenda on guns. It is hard to understand why people believe criminals will follow laws while the rest of us will be left unprotected except for calling 911, are we supposed to hit them with a phone once 911 answered or would that be assault.

9 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 28 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web