What did Plaxico do?

[D'kian]

Plaxico Burress, a wide receiver for the NY Giants, shot himself with a gun a few days ago, suffering a minor wound. I agree that's stupid for a man who makes a living off the performance of his body.

But it turns out he's been charged with some sort of violation regarding his posession of the gun. I don't know exactly what law he violated or how he went about it. His team suspended him for the rest of the season (which he would miss anyway because of the injury) without pay. The media are criticizing him almost brutally.

I don't get the vilification Plaxico's enduring. While he did something massively stupid, he didn't hurt anyone other than himslef, and carrying a gun is not a morally objectionable act (carrying it unsafely is, but it's not a major point). He's being compared to Michael Vick. Vick did nothing that should be consiered illegal, but that was highly objectionable morally.

Plaxico, now, did something similar to what ben Roeathlisberger did a few years back. Big Ben crashed his motorcycle while not wearing a helmet. Again, something idiotic for a man who depends on the performance of his body, but not something evil or illegal.

About the only semi-valid point made against Plaxico is that he dind't contact the police. I say semi-valid because while it would be prudent to inform the police about an accidental shooting, even of one's self, especially one that happened in a public place, with laws against carrying a gun in the books one would naturally be reluctant to go to jail for accidentally shooting one's self in the leg.

[Ordr]

New York City has some of the most draconian laws in the country with regards to firearm possession. From what I've been reading, Bloomberg wants to make an example out of him and lock him up for as long as possible. It is an absolute travesty.

[DavidOdden]

I think the objection is the combination of illegality (the weapon) and dishonesty (hiding his identity). Role models have to be above criticism on all fronts, and from the league's POV he's a PR liability.

[ers]

It's all part of a growing trend to criminalize gun owners. I suspect we'll see a lot more of this with an Obama administration and a brazen democratic congress.

Remember, while we are armed we are still citizens, not subjects. In some ways, the 2nd amendment is more important than the 1st.

[K-Mac]

Well, NY gun laws are ridiculous; however, that's where he chose to be, so he must abide by those laws.

Bloomberg is an idiot. That aside, I don't think he should get special treatment either way...get off easy or get the book thrown at him because of his NFL status. He should get a fair trial and if found guilty, be given the appropriate sentence.

As far as the league and his team are concerned, I think they understand this is a personal problem, but it also effects them. The sports industry is trying to clean up its act, albeit a very half-assed attempt, and he is a key player for his team that is now out for the season. In addition, this is not the first time he's done something stupid. This guy seems determined to self-destruct.

[Jake_Ellison]

He should be judged according to his crime...oh wait, there is no crime.

I challenge everyone who wants him to get a "fair" sentence (that by the way means at least a year in prison in NY) to name his victim, and the nature of that victim's loss or damage. Keep in mind, that mandatory one year comes not over endangering anyone, which might be a legitimate reason to prosecute him (it would result in a slap on the wrist), it comes from carrying an unlicensed firearm.

If you want him to spend a year in prison because its "fair", you are automatically sanctioning all the abuses the government commits.

You could say you don't care if he goes to prison or not, he shouldn't be so stupid and arrogant, but that's different from actually rooting for the gov. to abuse him.

[K-Mac]

Okay, are we gonna argue whether gun laws are fair or are we talking about what Plaxico did?

If we're gonna argue about gun laws, you're preaching to the choir. Most, if not all, gun laws are stupid and unnecessary.

If we're talking about what actually happened and the potential results, see my last post.

[Ordr]

Okay, are we gonna argue whether gun laws are fair or are we talking about what Plaxico did?

If we're gonna argue about gun laws, you're preaching to the choir. Most, if not all, gun laws are stupid and unnecessary.

If we're talking about what actually happened and the potential results, see my last post.

The problem is that the potential results of what happened are going to be unjust.

[K-Mac]

That's because gun laws suck and are stupid. Is that the topic of this thread?

[Ordr]

That's because gun laws suck and are stupid. Is that the topic of this thread?

Since the case against him and the subsequent media attention are based upon him breaking those laws, then yes, I guess it is.

[K-Mac]

Oh, I was reponding to the initial poster's comments.

[Ordr]

Oh, I was reponding to the initial poster's comments.

My mistake.

[K-Mac]

You should be able to carry a gun with you anywhere you wish to go, unless the property owner has banned it. If you shoot yourself, that would be your punishment. If you shoot yourself again, you should probably lose your right to carry a gun. If you shoot someone else that was threatening a life or taking property and they die, that's their punishment. If they don't die, they should be prosecuted for threatening a life or taking property. If you shoot someone else and they weren't threatening a life or taking property, you should be subject to judgement and punishment according to objective laws.

Plaxico did endanger others in the club by being so careless as to let his gun discharge, but other than that, I don't see where any crime should have been committed.

[D'kian]

Plaxico did endanger others in the club by being so careless as to let his gun discharge, but other than that, I don't see where any crime should have been committed.

Thank you. That's exactly my point.

A law punishing the unsafe handling of guns could be rational if "unsafe" were objectively defined (say if you're playing with it, if you´re pointing it at other people, etc.) I think there are already laws in some places about the wrongful discharge of a weapon (say by shooting in the air, which is dangerous, or shooting someone's property).

I think Plaxico should make a big deal about it. Maybe he's not the ideal candidate, seeing as how he shot himself. But he has the resources to take it all the way through appeals and even up to the Supreme Court. It shouldn't be a crime to carry a gun. Period.

That might make him unpopular in New York, granted. But there are plenty of other NFL cities where such an attitude would make him very popular, and whose teams would give their eye-teeth to have him.

Oh, there are three reasons usually to disobey a law: 1) idiocy, 2) malice, 3) to make a test case.

[Mammon]

I'm going to deviate a little off-topic here.

These sports players are some of the biggest idiots society turns out. I'm assuming everyone is familiar with the full story. The guy goes around drinking, in densely crowded places, with a loaded gun in this pocket!

How stupid is that?!

And then him and others were trying to cover it up -- signaling that they knew they were doing some wrong. Sheesh, I should be a prosecutor.

So, should people be able to go around getting shit-faced while carrying around loaded weapons and walking in densely crowded areas? If nothing else that's highly irresponsible and just plain dumb.

[RationalBiker]

So, should people be able to go around getting shit-faced while carrying around loaded weapons and walking in densely crowded areas? If nothing else that's highly irresponsible and just plain dumb.

There is nothing causally dangerous about carrying a gun while being intoxicated. There is some level of correlation between shootings and alcohol/drugs, just as there is some correlation between the use of alcohol/drugs and committing crime in general. Are you suggesting some law against packing heat while drunk would be proper? Or are you simply addressing the moral aspect?

[K-Mac]

These sports players are some of the biggest idiots society turns out.

Do you know any professional athletes or are you just speaking of the ones you see on the news? The news isn't going to report on the hundreds of thousands of professional athletes that are good, productive human beings, you know. That doesn't get ratings.

Having worked in the sports disability industry for a few years, I can honestly say that many professional athletes are intelligent, honest and hard-working individuals with lovely families. I can also tell you that there are some real bad apples with awful families. To lump them all into one category and call them big idiots is just ignorant.

Furthermore, I was unable to find where anyone suggested that getting drunk while possessing a firearm was a good idea or responsible. Of course people shouldn't be doing that. Hence...

Plaxico did endanger others in the club by being so careless as to let his gun discharge, but other than that, I don't see where any crime should have been committed.

People that violate other's rights should be charged for their crimes, period.

[Mammon]

There is nothing causally dangerous about carrying a gun while being intoxicated. There is some level of correlation between shootings and alcohol/drugs, just as there is some correlation between the use of alcohol/drugs and committing crime in general. Are you suggesting some law against packing heat while drunk would be proper? Or are you simply addressing the moral aspect?

Well, we have laws that penalize and criminalize driving drunk. So, in that context, maybe we should laws preventing packing heat and being drunk? Drinking and carrying?

I think it does violate people's rights in the same respect putting a nuclear warhead on your front lawn does. It puts everyone into a state of insecurity because the chances of someone having an accident while being drunk and carrying a gun seem like they would be higher. That's what I think at least. I don't have any statistics to back that up, other then point to the obvious -- that alcohol impairs judgment.

And I don't think you should have a weapon unless you are able to properly judge when it's appropriate to use it.

That's where the moral aspect comes in to play. I think, at least in this case, the guy put everyone in danger. I'm not 100% sure about making it illegal, but I am 100% sure about condemning him morally.

Do you know any professional athletes or are you just speaking of the ones you see on the news?

I know the ones in college where they are close to me. Most of them are horrible people too. But for the post above I was talking about the ones we see on the news. They have everything you can imagine, yet they they always seem to throw it away over the dumbest things. Things they either know are wrong to do or things that only someone who isn't thinking rationally at all would do. I just saw on the news the other day that there was a large group (about 6 or 7 I think, 3 from the Saints) that were found doing steroids. And I'm pretty sure that the coaches and owners of the teams and leagues tell people doing steroids is wrong/illegal. Yet they do it anyways. Why?

The valid and relevent question here is -- is there something that makes professional athletes more susceptible to bad behavior?

I'd argue that there is.

The news isn't going to report on the hundreds of thousands of professional athletes that are good, productive human beings, you know. That doesn't get ratings.

Okay then... what is ESPN for? They talk about good, "productive" athletes all day and night. It doesn't affect their ratings negatively.

Having worked in the sports disability industry for a few years, I can honestly say that many professional athletes are intelligent, honest and hard-working individuals with lovely families. I can also tell you that there are some real bad apples with awful families. To lump them all into one category and call them big idiots is just ignorant.

I figured you would know what I'm talking about since you'd said similar things before about the number of athletes that behave irrationally compared to the rest of the population.

To lump them all into one category and call them big idiots is just ignorant.

Does putting the word "ignorant" in a reply to me make you feel better?

I understand the point your making here. That this doesn't represent all the athletes. Just like a bad police officer doesn't represent all the police. I really hate these kinds of statements because they require you to drop the context when making evaluations. For instance, a lot of crimes are committed by black people, and the number of black people in prison is proportionally higher. Yes, that doesn't mean all black people commit crimes, but it doesn't mean it's not open to questioning why this is the case. Because there are black people who commit crimes, and some who don't, should we not ask why the ones who commit crimes commit them in such high numbers?

So is there something that makes athletes more susceptible to certain irrational behaviors? Again, I'd argue that there is. I'd also argue its more of certain sports then athletes in general.

Furthermore, I was unable to find where anyone suggested that getting drunk while possessing a firearm was a good idea or responsible. Of course people shouldn't be doing that. Hence...

*sigh*

Okay, do you really want to take me on this merry-go-round? It seems like I've ridden it a million times. Furthermore, I was unable to find where I was suggesting anyone suggested that getting drunk while possessing a firearm was a good idea or responsible.

I suggest you familiarize yourself with the concept of a rhetorical question.

[RationalBiker]

Well, we have laws that penalize and criminalize driving drunk.

And the significant difference here is that driving a car IS using the car dangerously. In other words, they are automatically engaging in the potentially harmful act while driving. Carrying a firearm is not the same as using a firearm.

The proper analogy would be; should we make it illegal to sit in a car while intoxicated?

Your line of reasoning is the same line of reasoning that outlaws drugs. It tries to say that since there seems to be a correlation between drugs and violent crime, that drugs should be illegal.

[ers]

The proper analogy would be; should we make it illegal to sit in a car while intoxicated?

Heh, I'm fairly certain that in some states if you sit in the driver's seat of a car while intoxicated and your keys are within reach/in the ignition you can be arrested.

[RationalBiker]

Heh, I'm fairly certain that in some states if you sit in the driver's seat of a car while intoxicated and your keys are within reach/in the ignition you can be arrested.

Yes, in my state if the keys are in the ignition that is considered "operating the vehicle". I don't agree with that personally.

[Ordr]

Yes, in my state if the keys are in the ignition that is considered "operating the vehicle". I don't agree with that personally.

I don't know if this question is out of bounds, but since you don't agree with that law, would you still enforce it as a police officer?

[Jake_Ellison]

I don't know if this question is out of bounds, but since you don't agree with that law, would you still enforce it as a police officer?

Nop.

[K-Mac]

Does putting the word "ignorant" in a reply to me make you feel better?

Feel better than what?

If anyone had posted anything as ignorant as that, I would've made the same comments. Get the chip(s) off your shoulder.

[RationalBiker]

I don't know if this question is out of bounds, but since you don't agree with that law, would you still enforce it as a police officer?

Yes. I don't go out of my way to do that, but I still believe the rule of law is important.