Decorated Combat Veteran arrested in New York: Charged with 5 felonies for possession AR magazines

Army Vet Nathan HaddadIn the latest attack on the American people, a decorated War Hero has been arrested and charged with five counts of third degree criminal possession of a weapon, for having empty 30 round AR-15 Magazines in his vehicle.

On Sunday January 6th Staff Sgt. Nathan Haddad, a decorated combat veteran, was driving through Jefferson County New York when he was randomly pulled over for a vehicle check. Haddad, who had five 30 round empty magazines in his possession, was arrested by the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department and charged with five felony counts.

According to Haddad’s brother, Michael Haddad, Nathan thought these magazines were legally made before the New York Assault Weapons Ban. When Nathan Haddad was arrested the new ban had not even been fully enacted yet.

This is not a criminal, this is not some thug looking to hurt people; this is a decorated combat veteran who was recently honored by the Philadelphia chapter of Blue Star Mothers and the Union League’s Armed Services Council for helping disabled vets get back on their feet. What’s happening to Army veteran Nate Haddad is an absolute attack on liberty. Here we have a man who honorably served his country, who was trusted with weaponry that far exceeded anything he was carrying, that now finds himself facing the possibility of spending years in prison.

Still think these gun control laws are meant to stop criminals?

Nathan Haddad’s brother has set up a legal defense fund for his brother who cannot afford to fight these charges on his own. We ask that you share this story with everyone you know so that this attack on Hassad is seen for what it is, an attack on every law-abiding citizen in America.

217 Comments

  1. Cathy
    January 31, 2013 at 1:40 pm

    5 empty magazines and nothing to put them in? Ban not fully enacted? I hope he wins his case and sues!

    • Fred
      January 31, 2013 at 9:47 pm

      John T. Burns is the sheriff. His address is

      Jefferson County Sheriffs Office
      753 Waterman Drive
      Watertown, NY 13601

      Everybody let him know how you feel.

      • joe burrows
        January 31, 2013 at 9:55 pm

        This charge should be dropped and then sue the law enforcement.

        • Ron
          February 1, 2013 at 6:01 pm

          Disagree on suing Law Enforcement,they were only enforcing the law enacted by some numb nuts known as commissioners on the county pay and had nothing else to do. I would first sue the county then work my way up, up, up!!!!!

          • Jay
            February 1, 2013 at 6:38 pm

            Disagree with you. If the ban was not fully in effect then the officers had no business enforcing a law that was not a law. They are just as liable for making mistakes as are we. We have to pay for ours as should they

          • chris
            February 1, 2013 at 7:35 pm

            What about illeagel search. They randomly pulled him over for a vechile search!!!!! That’s a complete violation of the Constitution. Remember the 4th admendment? Anyone?

          • Mark D.
            February 1, 2013 at 11:04 pm

            Sheriff John Burns can chose not to enforce such laws. Is the ACLU going to defend this warrior-I doubt it. Watertown is right next to an Army Post where there are “real assault” combat weapons used everyday in training. We are headed down a very slippery slope. Who is going to challenge this type of law that makes criminals out of most citizens?

          • Nick
            February 1, 2013 at 11:35 pm

            I think that the sheriff should know the difference between legal, and lawful, and what his duty is to the oath of office. Norton v Shelby County, 118 US 425, the court said; “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”

          • ex-Bronxite
            February 2, 2013 at 8:18 am

            The cop and the sheriff had better start putting their houses in their wives’ names, otherwise this guy they arrested will be owning them when this is all over.

          • Danny
            February 2, 2013 at 1:50 pm

            Disagree… MANY County Sheriff’s have this situation right… they are saying in written and public statements that they will not uphold the laws that attack the second amendment as they will view them unconstitutional. Suing in court is a VALID action to take when attacked unconstitutionally by the law and by the Feds and other governments who enact and attempt to enforce ILLEGAL laws… that is part of the process to fight back.

          • Jim
            February 3, 2013 at 7:36 am

            @Chris. You have no Constitutional Rights in New York. Not a good State to be living in. New City, you can be stopped and searched while walking down the street. There are cameras in place watching you, they want xray to be able to search you without you knowing it. Sounds like TSA on the streets.
            @ Others. Suing them is quite costly. And the jury will be, residents who like the “safety” provided by the government overlord.

          • Debbi Spencer
            February 3, 2013 at 8:38 pm

            He should just be released immediately with a sincere apology and, say $500 a day for every day he was held or considered under arrest. Suing
            only ends up costing us all. It wold be the county or the state being sued, and guess where they get their money…?

          • Enforcing the law
            February 3, 2013 at 8:44 pm

            The fact is this officer was making
            an arrest on a law abiding American and the magazine was completely legal at the time of arrest. All these charges will be dropped at once and I’m 100% sure a law suit is permissible against the sheriff department. If the judge decides to not follow the law then you need to contact department of justice and have the judge removed and precede with another law suit.

          • greg johnson
            February 4, 2013 at 10:01 pm

            The SS and Germans working the ovens were only following orders too. the bill of rights prohibits the fed gov from infringing on your rights and any order to do so is invalid and any LEO who tries to enforce it is no different than any other thug mugging you

        • Joshua
          February 1, 2013 at 8:56 pm

          Forget sueing them!
          WE should be dragging them from their homes and beating them in the street!

          • Neil
            February 2, 2013 at 3:07 pm

            I agree with you Joshua!

          • martinconte
            February 2, 2013 at 4:25 pm

            Search would be completely legal if items were in PLAIN VIEW!

          • bob
            February 2, 2013 at 9:57 pm

            I agree. That is why they are taking our guns.
            Something has to be done before this goes much futher.
            We are loosing our freedom fast as hell with this group in washington.
            They should be the ones draged out of their homes

          • CJ
            February 4, 2013 at 7:37 am

            Martin,
            The fact they pulled him over to check the vehicle is unlawful. They cant see into the car while its moving. This is crap and will continue untill we do something about it. Like Wyoming putting laws into action that make it a crime for federal officers to enforce any law that goes against the 2nd amendment.

        • Ken
          February 2, 2013 at 1:20 am

          I have been an officer for 28 years in a large dept., and I would nix the lawsuit. With this statement “was arrested by the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department and charged with five felony counts” that pretty much tells us that there is a law banning possession of 30rd mag’s in Jefferson County is. My question is why in the hell did this officer feel the need to arrest an army staff sgt., who could have many valid reason’s for those mag’s being in his vehicle. Now my suggestion for letting this officer know that even though he may feel like what he did is on the same level as taking down a drug kingpin, but what would be more punitive than a lawsuit that would never be filed. Would be to have military groups, follow this officer, and video tape his daily work performance while on patrol, which is perfectly legal to do, to see if a person your tax money is paying for is doing what he is suppose to. I am not suggesting anything illegal, just that when he takes an hour lunch, complain, when he takes a very long time on a call, you have it on tape showing he was parked somewhere reading a book, complain. When he goes into a sports store to shop, again proof of his pick and choose “sworn oath” which i’m sure he would drop on everyone upset with his arresting the Army vet.complain It may seem as if I am doing what most officers would consider being unfaithful, but over these 26 years, the quality of recruits has steadily been in decline, and for the officer who arrested this military man, if you happen to read this, you are a turd.

          • Kevin
            February 2, 2013 at 4:34 am

            Ken,
            The law is only for 30 rd. mags made after 1994. Anything before that is grandfathered until 15 Apr 2014 when the new law takes affect.

          • Gunner
            February 2, 2013 at 8:13 pm

            Ken….I wore a badge for a long time too. In my neck of the woods we would refer to the arresting offcer in this case as a “jack wagon”. I read the news release from that department, and while the mags are illegal for that jurusdiction, it still don’t make it right to arrest a military veteran under this situation. I have been to NY a number of times, and spent vacation money there. Never again.

          • Rob
            February 3, 2013 at 6:57 pm

            Says also that the law had not been inacted yet. So he can take it for all it is worth,

        • terry prescott
          February 5, 2013 at 3:11 pm

          b.s. the cop had a choice at the time to charge or give a warning on the spot.

      • craig
        January 31, 2013 at 10:27 pm

        He should have performed a citizens arrest as well. There was no exclusion for law enforcement. I’ll bet the police officer that arrested him had more than a 7rd magazine in his gun….

        • Mike
          February 1, 2013 at 3:52 am

          Doc you are correct! If the law isn’t on the books you as an officer can’t enforce it. This is a false arrest and detention. I was in Lawenforcement for many.many years. This officer is not folowing the law. Officers can’t adlib and just do what they want. This man has a legal leg to stand on and should bring suit in the millions for unlawfull detention and arrest. Officers are mandated to know the laws if active and follow through with protocal,this officer did not period. In the end this american hero should make an example to this department and hold his ground and fight this in every way.The next step the DA’s office will try to just drop charges and tell him ,”well we will just drop the charges”, this is when you should send the message and file a class action lawsuit no matter what, they know they are in the wrong but want you to believe your just going to be let off. In the end the fact remains you were illgaly arrested and your freedom was taken away from you on an unlawfull arrest.Do not allow them to get away with this.This arrest and detention is unlawfull period.

          • Jay
            February 1, 2013 at 7:07 am

            I would like to bring up a point…..New York has had a magazine ban for a long time. No 30 rnd mags. Only 10. The new law is seven. I’m sure he was arrested under the old 10rd law. I’m going to go out on a limb and say these cops know what they are doing. That said I still do not agree with this situation, but to jump at law enforcement is not appropriate. That is a law. They are the enforcers. In most states it is illegal for law enrorcement to ignore a crime. Say he oeft the traffic stop with mags and later uses them to hurt someone…everyone comes down on the fficers and they lose their job and get sued. Change the law, but don’t bitch at the officers.

          • SGT Cannon
            February 1, 2013 at 7:27 am

            For all who do not know some military education courses we fake have one item I know of unless changed since 2009 asks that we bring 5 M16 magazines from our own military installations. If I was to have gotten pulled over on my way to one of these schools and had been charged a felon I’d be suing someone for sure.

          • Alex
            February 1, 2013 at 7:27 am

            An unconstitutional law is not a real law

          • rc
            February 1, 2013 at 8:28 am

            hey jay, new york city has had a ban on the magazines but it is still legal to purchase 30 round magazines outside the city limits. the laws differ from city and state.

          • canadianlady
            February 1, 2013 at 9:28 am

            If this is the case, then the guy will get off.

          • Bill
            February 1, 2013 at 9:40 am

            I’m a retired police officer in NY state. How the arresting officer’s supervisors didn’t pick up on the fact that the law was not in effect at the time of Mr. Haddad’s arrest is inexcusable. It sounds like this rink-dink sheriff’s department is comprised of a bunch of buffoons. Even if they didn’t figure it out at the time of the arrest, they had to arraign him before a judge who should have known that the charges they filed weren’t legitimate charges. You can’t plead guilty or not guilty to charge that doesn’t exist.
            I’m certain that when Mr. Haddad finally gets a real day in court, the charges will be dismissed and he can begin his lawsuits. That said, if I were an active police officer, and I encountered a person who had no prior criminal history in possession of empty 30 round clips with the new NY so-called “safe” act in effect, I would find myself in the position of having to balance my sworn duty to uphold the constitution of the United States of America and my sworn duty to uphold the laws of the state of NY. I think I put the Second Amendment ahead of Cuomo and his fascist style of governing our state.

          • Big Dawg
            February 1, 2013 at 9:50 am

            “officers are obligated to enforce the law”….How many CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIENS with gang tattos went cruising through that check point??? BS Flag thrown. It’s selective enforcement. I am retired LEO

          • Robert
            February 1, 2013 at 10:15 am

            “…randomly pulled over for a vehicle check.” Since when are there random vehicle checks allowed? Isn’t that in violation of our 4th Amendment rights? “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

          • Moe
            February 1, 2013 at 10:55 am

            Jay, it is morally appropriate to attack law enforcement for this. No piece of paper, no written law, ever robbed a man of his liberty. Men do that, men who choose to enforce morally unlawful statutes, codes, laws, etc. There’s a very simple guideline in this case; the policeman is allowed to have 30 round magazines in his patrol rifle (and 15 round mags in his service pistol). Therefore, any citizen should be allowed to have the same. If you’re a moral man, you wouldn’t enfore such laws whether or not you’re a cop. If a man meets a policeman’s violence with his own to defend his liberty, so be it. There’s never ANY excuse for ANY man, policeman or not, for forcing his wrongful will (or the wrongful will of the government) on another man.

          • aOd
            February 1, 2013 at 3:07 pm

            The possession of *NEW* 30 rd mags was banned in NY…you could still own PRE ban (pre 1994 AWB) 30 rd mags legally.

          • gary
            February 1, 2013 at 5:56 pm

            Any of the police officers on here know that the law in NY has been 10 rounds maximum. 30 round magazine….or high capacity magazines as the law reads, have been illegal in NY since the Clinton era. The law does exempt police officers from carrying 30 rounds only while performing their official duties. Off duty i cannot carry more than a 10 round magazine for mine. The new regulations that many are referring to, have to do with NY banning 10 round magazines starting March 01, 2013…the max one can have is 7 round magazines, with NO exemptions for police officers….the exemption will change before law goes into effect…..as a police officer, we cannot be biased in who is doing something illegal, otherwise our integrity comes into question. The police astced appropriately and will not be sued.

          • Lenny
            February 1, 2013 at 6:04 pm

            Officer’s are NOT required to enforce every law? I don’t know where you people got that idea. I am a retired LEO (former department commander) and this is not true. A police officer may exercise discretion whenever the officer thinks it is appropriate. IMO, the only exception to the discretion rule would be in the case of a forcible felony…then and only then the officer’s discretion is limited.

          • Mike
            February 1, 2013 at 11:19 pm

            NYS law prior to this new ban is that any 30 rd mag manufactured before 9/94(pre ban) is legal to possess, although you are obligated to only have 10 rounds loaded into it, until now which is 7 lol. Its still unconstitutional either way you slice it. God bless America

          • john
            February 2, 2013 at 4:36 am

            “Random vehicle checks” are legally performed very frequently on the Army Post there called Fort Drum. More than likely, thats where they got him.

          • CJ
            February 4, 2013 at 7:42 am

            The best part is that even when charges are dropped the felony arrest shows up on your record untill you have it sealed. That means jobs, housing, and anyone else will allways see that he had a “felony Arrest” unless he pays to get it sealed…….

        • martinconte
          February 2, 2013 at 4:27 pm

          Yea craig, that is real smart. You are a complete moron if you think that you could ever try performing a “citizens arrest” on a Police Officer. As far as the officer goes, he is EXEMPT from the law while on duty and guess what, he will soon be EXEMPT off duty as the law is being revised to exclude police Officers.

      • Doc
        January 31, 2013 at 10:56 pm

        Do not tempt me in mailing this fool and letting him know what I think of him, his laws, and his state. This is TREASON! Don’t they have more important things to do like…oh…I dunno stop the flow of drugs entering into the country through their ports, finding major drug pipelines, disbanding criminal gangs, the list goes on and on. This is stupid. I have a degree in criminal justice, and if I remember anything from criminal law class…you can’t enforce a law THAT HASN’T BEEN ENACTED! Furthermore you cannot retro-act a charge either. (For those of you that don’t understand that I’ll explain. When a law goes onto the books, there’s an inaction date, this is when the law is able to be enforced. NOTHING before this date can be enforced pertaining to the law. On the same side, if something was done BEFORE the law took effect, the police CANNOT arrest, or bring charges on the person because of the law not enacted when said action was done. So if he bought these mags BEFORE the law took effect, they cannot arrest him for having them in his possession, or on his person. I would sue the state for being a total dumbass, I’d take this sheriff’s badge, his job, his retirement, his pension, and I would bring him and the arresting officer up on charges of false arrest, false imprisonment, and whatever else I could find on these dumbasses.) There’s safeguards in place so things like this DO NOT happen. I would seriously think about a counter suit against the these people for the actions they have done. Because their behavior and actions are a direct violation of his rights, and he’s been subject to many false allegations. Fight’em, give’em hell, and don’t stop until everyone of them feel your wrath. I might have to write this asshole and tell him how bad he really is, and ask him just how in the hell do you enforce a law that hasn’t been enacted? ‘Give some people a little power and they let it run straight to their head.’ They should be reminded that just because they wear a badge, that doesn’t protect them from the laws they are sworn to uphold, they too have to abide by them, or face the trouble when they break them. Good luck!

        De Oppresso Liber,
        Doc

        • Dutchsays
          January 31, 2013 at 11:18 pm

          Our county sheriff knows he would be run out of the county on a rail if he pulled a stunt like that. In our State of Minnesota, there are more guns held by law abiding Americans than there are PEOPLE LIVING HERE, and our law enforceement officers know we are there to back them when they are outnumbered, and to outnumber them when they are in the wrong.

          • Enter your name...
            February 2, 2013 at 5:27 pm

            And that’s what the founders of our Constitution intended when they wrote the bill of rights. The right to bear arms was enacted so that the people could outgun the government when they were wrong and at the same time come to arms for their government when they were outnumbered or wrong. Any law, state or federal, making it where it is illegal to own weapons equally powerful as the military or law enforcement is in direct violation of the bill of rights and isn’t a law according to the constitution.

        • Col. Weeno
          February 1, 2013 at 12:32 am

          We agree.

        • steve
          February 1, 2013 at 12:36 am

          why would you start off by saying “Do not tempt me in mailing this fool and letting him know what I think of him, his laws, and his state.” how about contact him and put your money were your mouth is.

          • Tom
            February 1, 2013 at 4:52 am

            I agree with you Steve. He felt the need to tell us he has a CJ Degree, but does not mention what he does for a living. He sound a bit bitter towards Law Enforcement in general. I am guessing he got the degree assuming he would be hired into the business. I am also betting no LE Agency will hire him ( psy test, anger issues, etc) so he is just bitter and of course knows more about the law than any cop…. Just my shot at statement analysis

          • Aaron
            February 1, 2013 at 8:27 am

            Since he ended his post with

            “De Oppresso Liber”

            I’d assume he is in the army Special Forces, since this is their motto. And he signed off with “Doc” which is a common nickname for line medics. I’d have to say he is a 18D, Special Forces Medical Sergeant.

          • Bang Bang
            February 1, 2013 at 8:45 am

            Aaron, you are correct. He is a retired 18D. Had countless jumps and missions as what used to be a 91B (68W now) Combat Medic and also after being assigned to Group for a couple years, went through SFAS. I personally know that man and think of him as one of my heroes as I do with majority of the rest of my Brothers in Arms. So before you run your mouth Steve, why don’t you ask nicely what he does or HAS done. Its more than 99% of America has ever done. Knowing this hardcore used to be 18D, he will write and or call this Sheriff. If there’s anything he loves to do more than his job, its standing up for vets!!!!

        • Bob
          February 1, 2013 at 9:16 am

          It appears that the entire story and surrounding issues isn’t yet out. Better to wait and objectively assess the matter instead of getting overly upset.

        • ^^^ lying about degree
          February 1, 2013 at 9:35 am

          hey Mr, criminal justice degree,
          it is the District Attorney that decides whether to pursue charges or not, not the sheriff’s office. Maybe they skipped that part when you got your degree.
          ugh….

          #firstworldproblems

          • ditch
            February 1, 2013 at 9:48 am

            The DA didn’t arrest Him Jack ass and no they did’nt skip that maybe You should study the law moron.No lie about His degree.

        • pappyc5
          February 1, 2013 at 10:30 am

          well put!when will we realize what the gov is doing to us ? we will have no rights left if we ignore this fact .

        • Steven Tidd
          February 1, 2013 at 2:30 pm

          I like the fact everyone keeps saying ‘This or that’ is the law and we should just obey it. Once upon the time it was the “Law” that you could own another person. Should we not have opposed that “Law”? Just because something is a “law” or “legal” doesn’t make it right. This country was founded by people looking for “Rights” not “Legal”

          • Wani
            February 1, 2013 at 8:39 pm

            There are “Constitution-Free Zones”, a 100 mile-wide area that forma a perimeter around the USA, a zone in which our Constitutional rights do not apply.§ 287 (a) (3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 66 Stat. 233, 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(3), which simply provides for warrant-less searches of automobiles and other conveyances “within a reasonable distance from any external boundary of the United States,” as authorized by regulations to be promulgated by the Attorney General. The Attorney General’s regulation, 8 CFR § 287.1, defines “reasonable distance” as “within 100 air miles from any external boundary of the United States.” Jefferson County falls into this area.‘The 100-mile zone absolutely is not a Constitution-free zone,’ said Jason Ciliberti, a supervisory border patrol agent with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. ‘Those 100 miles are what is said to be a reasonable distance from the boundary from the United States, and the Supreme Court has come down firmly on our side and said that what we’re doing is not unreasonable.’”

          • Jeffrey Dorfman
            February 3, 2013 at 9:33 pm

            Well Steven, you are absolutely correct about owning another person, but the law was changed at the Federal level before that law could be enforced. I agree with that law that ALL men are equal, etc. but just because you (or I) think something is right, doesn’t make it “illegal”. This country was founded by people set out to protect our “rights” by making it law. If it’s not a law, “rights” is meaningless. What the Federal Government’s legislation body needs to do is make a federal law, one way or the other, and not leave this item up to the states to decide. All states control their motor vehicle laws, except they all have to meet Federal Dept. of Transportation rules in order to receive federal funds. If they choose to let federal funds go, then they can make their own state laws that conflict with the federal law. This is not true for all laws the state comes up with. Some still must conform to federal law and follow federal rules.

        • navydoc83
          February 1, 2013 at 5:19 pm

          HOO RAH DOC, THEY have no clue what they are doing, they are making us look like the enemy, this administration is opening the door for a foreign military to invade and US vets to take the fall as the bad guy!

        • John
          February 1, 2013 at 5:40 pm

          pre ban mags are still legal in NY until april 2014. you are only allowed to have 10 rounds in the mag until april 2013. if these mags are not date stamped then they are hard to identify as pre ban. althought i completely disagree with the ny safe act i have done my homework. if anything else i would love to see the reason of searching the vehicle these cops had!

          • Jefff
            February 1, 2013 at 8:54 pm

            Thanks john. Was looking for someone to say this. One of the nazis above wants to say the mags are illegal. Shows not all Law knows the law. There lies the problem.

      • Kyla
        January 31, 2013 at 11:00 pm

        It would be the DAs office you would call since they are the ones to decide to charge or not. The sheriffs office just made the arrest.

        • gary
          February 1, 2013 at 5:58 pm

          Kyla….The Da’s office are the ones who decide what happens to the charge, the police in NY are the ones who charge…he is charged by the police, and then prosecuted by the Da’s office, if they decide to not prosecute, then the Da’s office drops the charges…it does not mean it was an unlawful arrest

      • Bob
        February 1, 2013 at 6:22 am

        Typical F***ING YANKEE in my opinion.
        I would have ALL military personel leave that POS state.

        • Mike
          February 1, 2013 at 11:26 pm

          Bob, NY has one of the largest military Bases in the country, FORT DRUM. Ny is a big piece of shit state though, thanks to NYC

          • ticci
            February 7, 2013 at 2:40 am

            Hey heres a novel idea:

            Everybody in NY—and I mean EVERYBODY in the entire state of NY who disagrees w/ all this Obeyme Admin. gun bullshit….MOVE. I dont care where, MOVE. TELL them WHY YOURE MOVING. SEE how fast they cow down!

      • Roy Tyson
        February 1, 2013 at 7:16 am

        This Country Is Becoming A Joke! Combat Veteran’s Being Arrested For No Real Reason What So Ever! What Is Wrong With You People! What Was He Going To Do With Empty Magazines Throw Them At People?

        • Christina
          February 1, 2013 at 11:08 am

          Roy, my thoughts exactly! Still trying to figure out when it became ok to do random stops and search people without probable cause.

        • Jeffrey Dorfman
          February 3, 2013 at 9:49 pm

          No, Roy, he was not going to throw them at people. What a totally stupid thing to say. I believe we should all have (and probably do have) the right to carry any magazine capacity we want. That said, if he were going to load them up and fire on innocnt people, then, of course he would be in violation of the law. At that time, he had no such piece of equipment and had no ammo in his possession. From everything I read, carrying or transporting such a clip is illegal in that geographic area, not just owning them. As for CHRISTINA, random stops have always been legal for the protection of the community. It would be discrimination, if the stopped and searched person was the only one that it happened to, or was of the only type of person it happened to. My local police have resumed randomed traffic stops for the purpose of DUI and other legal reasons that the Judge authorized after a document depicting the reason(s) of the random stops. The police must have permission from a judge to do that. In my case here, they have it. I can not speak for the area this veteran was traveling through. It appears that every Jurisdiction may make it’s own laws and rules and can enforce them if the proper paperwork and Judge, if necessary, agrees.

      • just sayin'
        February 1, 2013 at 10:13 am

        This Sheriff and his department are most likely going to be investigated by the NY attorney general’s office. Recently one of the Sheriff’s was found in his patrol car with an open container of alcohol and appeared to be drunk.

        http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20130130/NEWS07/701309850

        As for the gentlemen that was arrested, when it appeared in the local news, I was shocked. If he truly thought they were pre-ban mags and they in fact were made before 1994, they definitely arrested him for no reason. Until this crap law was passed, it is my understanding, you could own the large capacity pre-ban mags in NY. Not to mention – if they were part of his go bag that he is supposed to have on him at all times, I fail to see the validity of this arrest. It is such an embarrassment for the department – not like they need anything else embarrassing, especially something that is making national headlines. They have enough internal troubles to worry about.

        • Jeffrey Dorfman
          February 3, 2013 at 9:58 pm

          TO JUST SAYING: I personally believe it was incumbent upon the police officer who stopped the veteran to contact his Commanding Officer first to find out if he was, in fact, supposed to, or had permission, to have those ammo clips in his possession at that time. If he was, he should never had been arrested. If the C.O. said no, that would be a different story and the circumstances would have changed. How would an officer know when the subject had purchased the clips that held over 10 rounds in the first place? No one normally carries receipts like that with them.

      • Albert Anglo-Saxon
        February 1, 2013 at 3:42 pm

        The sheriff did not make the arrest. There are 26 deputy sheriffs and 5 sergeants in Jefferson county. Sheriff Burns is not the guy you need to attack.

        • Dennis
          February 2, 2013 at 5:01 am

          Random traffic stop, where were the mags? in the glove box, trunk? They would need a warrant to open the trunk or open a bag etc. Or where they laying on the seat? Do they think they are the TSA?

      • Jo B
        February 2, 2013 at 9:04 am

        Is his last name Haddad or Hassad? In the beginning of the article it is Haddad and the last paragraph it is Hassad? The aresst was wrong but why different names????

      • James V Courtney
        February 2, 2013 at 11:08 am

        He needs to be released immediately, How is any citizen suppose to know what laws are to follow. He didnt sign anything saying that the law does not allow you to have 30 round clips. I think goverment and city should mail every citizen new laws that are passed on a yearly basis.

      • Fred T
        February 3, 2013 at 2:38 am

        Facts:

        1. Mr. Hassad was not currently engaged in active military service, respectively.

        2. Mr. Hassad was not on a military installation at the time of the arrest.

        3. Mr. Hassad was in possession of Five: 30 (Thirty, Three Zero, 10+20) round magazines, which were outlawed in 1994.

        4. The magazines were marked “Restricted LE/GOVT Use Only” which proves they were issued after 1994 (post ban and illegal since 1994 in NYS) and they also had date of manufacturing proving they were made after 1994.

        5. The new S.A.F.E. law Cuomo jammed down the peoples throats does not take effect regarding 7, SEVEN round magazine capacities until April 2013.

        6. A police officer in NYS has Zero, Zip, Nada, 000, discretion in making FELONY arrests, an arrest HAS TO be made when a FELONY crime is observed regardless of his beliefs about gun laws.

        7. Mr. Hassad was not randomly stopped, NOR at a roadblock, checkpoint etc. He was seen PARKED on the side of a back road, during the night time.

        8. Mr. Hassad was determined to be waiting for a guy to meet him on this back road to sell him the illegal magazines. Why didn’t they meet at a gun store?

        Speculations:

        1. Mr. Hassad is attempting to raise money and profit from his crime and utilize the anger over Cuomo’s new laws and exploit Hassad’s former military career by gaining support from military servicemen and women.

      • Ken
        February 6, 2013 at 2:34 am

        This would be an excellent test case for the courts. Hopefully the Supreme Court would put a stop to this nonsense once and for all. I’m sure that if he set up a fundraising website to hire an attorney he would get plenty of money.

    • Fred
      January 31, 2013 at 9:58 pm

      315)785-3075
      This is their county’s government main office px#.

    • brett
      February 1, 2013 at 2:06 am

      What a crock of Shit!Empty magazines??Tax dollars hard at work again no doubt,good grief!How Stupid!

      • Amber
        February 1, 2013 at 7:23 am

        I agree Brett, even if they were fully-loaded magazines, hes a combat veteran. He fought for all of us and who knows if it weren’t for him the world we live in may have been worse than it is now. Come on Law enforcers REALLY????

        • protectthechildrentoo
          February 1, 2013 at 3:04 pm

          are you kidding me. So every person who has been in the military can do what ever they want because there is NO WAY that they would ever plan to do harm to innocent people. Not sure if you have heard of Fort Hood military base shooting? Just because you were in the military, once you are out, you should have no need for an assult weapon. You are not in the war when you are retired. get a clue you people and protect our children from these assult weapons that every tom dick and harry can buy-and for no good reasons.

          • Enter your name...
            February 1, 2013 at 4:23 pm

            you are one of the cry babies that dont have a clue,if you want to keep children safe how educating yourself before you open you pie hole,16 years in the Armed Forces and 4 combat deployments make me more of an expert then damn near any cop,including being a personal security detail for one of the highest ranking members of the State Department in Iraq,what the hell do you know about keeping people safe ?

          • Philip george
            February 2, 2013 at 9:23 am

            Too protectthechildrentooo……..what do you mean “we are not at war”? Remember the twin towers? That event brought a war to U.S.soil and in my opinion gave every American citizen the right to have whatever weapon he feels is capable of keeping him safe.

          • JD
            February 2, 2013 at 1:13 pm

            To protecthechildrentoo – it’s people like you who are a danger to our children. Your ignorance makes you very dangerous. Let’s see – the police have assault weapons and the criminals have assault weapons. The only balance here is for citizens to have them also. Otherwise we become victims – sitting ducks. We cannot defend ourselves, therefore, not our children.

            Get a gun and get properly trained on how to use it.

            I pray to God that the citizens of this country wake up and realize that the government is systematically taking control over us.

            People like you with your ignorance are helping them.

            God Bless us all.

          • mama
            February 2, 2013 at 9:41 pm

            to protectthechildrento he is a combat veteran and you should not disrespect him because in doing so you are disrespecting all veterans which so happens includes my father! my brothers and sisters and I grew up around all kinds of rifles handguns etc we learned how to us them and respect them. now I am teaching my children the same that is how I am protecting my children

        • Albert Anglo-Saxon
          February 1, 2013 at 3:45 pm

          No American is above the law. Whether combat veteran or civilian plumber, we all have the right to bear arms. This is not an argument that he is wrong to have the empty magazines in his possession but that his military background is no justification. Being American is the only justification we need to express our constitutional rights!

    • twan
      February 1, 2013 at 2:55 am

      only 5…he was missing 2, for the basic combat load out…just saying.

      • SGT Browning
        February 1, 2013 at 8:14 am

        My exact thoughts. I bet they were part of his kit… This whole thing is ridiculous.

        • pappyc5
          February 1, 2013 at 10:38 am

          they were voted in and we can vote them out ! next thing they enact puting us to the wall and shoot us ! a sad state of affairs ! did i spend 37 yrs in the mil for this to happen?

          • Jim
            February 1, 2013 at 5:22 pm

            Unfortunately it is almost impossible to vote any of the liberals out since they have enough paid voters on welfare and other government programs or government contracts. Those folks are afraid they will loose if they dont reelect those that gave it to them.

      • gpix
        February 1, 2013 at 10:37 am

        Ummm…missing three for basic load out. 8 mags, 30 rds each for the M4. I know many military members who’ve been pulled over and searched with full kit and let off because it’s military issue.

        • SGT Low
          February 2, 2013 at 9:07 am

          A full combat load is 210 rounds…7 mags. The 8th is extra for the weapon.

    • Robert Beecher
      February 1, 2013 at 4:23 am

      Sounds like a 4th Amendment violation. Cop’s have to have probable cause to pull a person over and a warrant to search (unless permission given)I hope he finds an attorney willing to push back.

      • Brutal Chief
        February 1, 2013 at 7:40 am

        While you are correct in theory, that the 4th and the 5th allow a citizen protection against wholly “random” or discretionary searches, random vehicle searches are often conducted by warrant or authorized by statute. Lots and lots of states, counties, and even municipalities have such ordnances, and it has been heard by SCOTUS on a number of accounts and never been deemed unconstitutional.

        That said, I think it’s just as likely that he consented to the search, as 1) the vast majority of searches are conducted based on consent (very few people understand that you must invoke your rights against search, and nothing prevents you from voluntarily waiving that right), and 2) if he didn’t think the mags were illegal, he would probably openly consent.

        • gunnerdogg
          February 1, 2013 at 3:34 pm

          Brutal Chief

          “random vehicle searches are often conducted by warrant or authorized by statute”.

          Where did that come from. I’ve never heard of that. I always thought that you needed PC, consent, a warrant or inventory. Sorry, no more incident to arrest.

    • Mickey
      February 1, 2013 at 7:58 am

      He should raise the funds for his defence himself, just like everyone else has to if they were in the same situation.
      All of the information in this article is from one side. What’s the information from the other side of all this?
      Nobody commenting here is making informed opinions, because they are basing those opinions from one side only.
      It’s funny to see all of the hostile comments, knowing they are making themselves look idiotic in the process.
      Ok, you may now start your unimaginative, uninformed, 2nd ammendment-toting comments now! Oh, and maybe use all capital letters. That will indicate to everyone that you are right, and your comments are more important than anyone elses.

      • vette
        February 1, 2013 at 9:58 am

        Fact is if he was charged before the law was enacted then the officer unlawfully arrested him if i am wrong please correct me sir

        • protectthechildrentoo
          February 1, 2013 at 3:21 pm

          wrong!
          They said that it was a law back in 99 for that high of a mag- read the others. The new law is for even lower mags restricted but 30 has been restricted a long time ago. And I agree with Mickey- seems like this story is all one sided. And it doesnt even say if he is an Active Militant? If he isnt active-he would not have a need for these in a go-bag. Do I think he should have 5 yrs in prison,no, but I dont think if you want to break a law you can go cry…I am in the military, let me go, either.
          I like how they jump all over the arresting officer when you have no clue what the guy was doing to get searched. How do we know he wasnt being a prick and all cocky to the officer. Again, there is no other side of the story. He doesnt even say what he was doing or why he ‘needed’ to have them in his vehicle. He just thought they were made before the law passed , so he knew there was a law but still chose to break it.
          And get real people. If it wasnt a law that was clearly already in place and he broke it, the case with any lawyer would never of even gone this far. He clearly broke a long standing law and he knows it.

      • Albert Anglo-Saxon
        February 1, 2013 at 3:50 pm

        You are right. People forget that individuals join the military for economic gain rather than patriotism. He got in to trouble so he needs to get out of it on his own. Individuals are wrongly charged daily. I was such a case and it took over two years to get the BS charge dismissed. No one made a fund for me nor did I ask for such assistance. He took risks with such paraphernalia such as I did by being in a wrong crowd (e.g., party) which got us both in trouble regardless of how harmless we are as people and what we were doing at the time.

      • ticci
        February 7, 2013 at 3:04 am

        I find it hilarious how all these Obayme Administration “drones” down talk every Pro-2A American, because Obama after all is far more intelligent than any of us. Even the Framers of the Constitution….dream on….

    • Art Ahrens
      February 1, 2013 at 8:39 am

      We in New York State have lived under a No Magazine greater than 10 Round Ban since sept. 1994. I’m sure he has been arrested under this Law not the one that was just written, passed and that goes into effect April 15, 2013. If you have ANY (Rifle, Pistol doesn’t matter) Magazines over 10 rounds that are not dated prior to Sept. 1994 you can be arrested for them. Starting April 15, 2014 the ONLY Magazines you can have on you or in your home will be either 7 or 10 round, if it’s a large body maginze it has to be “not easely converted” back to the original (20, 30..etc) holding capacity. If he needs Defense help he should apply at his arraignment for a Public Defender, thats what they are for, someone who can’t pay for his Defense.

    • SGT Feller
      February 1, 2013 at 8:43 am

      He doesn’t need a legal defense fund. He needs to contact JAG. Every active duty military base has one, along with every state headquarters.

      • Jeffrey Dorfman
        February 3, 2013 at 10:06 pm

        Who said he was active duty? No one.

    • kettle black
      February 1, 2013 at 10:05 am

      there was already a ban on 30 round magazines prior to the new law signed 2 weeks ago. only pre-1994 30 round magazines were legal during that time. were these magazines pre-1994? the man broke the law. what’s the problem with him being punished for it?

    • bill
      February 1, 2013 at 10:28 am

      so my question is was he high on meth? was he drunk? why would police pull him over and do an illeagle search and siezure? you have to have probable cause to perform a search or get a search warrent. based on just being pulled over randomly i have to call bullshit on this storey.

      • Albert Anglo-Saxon
        February 1, 2013 at 3:59 pm

        They stopped him cause they can. Unfortunately, this is common of law enforcement. Only thing different is those who are stopped are usually profiled and include poor Anglo’s, African-Americans and Hispanics. So they usually cant afford to fight the charges and take a plea bargain or are convicted of a crime from a stop that itself was illegal. That is police corruption for you and it is the norm. We must police the police. Put cameras in your car, your house, everywhere to protect you from the people whose job it to ‘protect’. When you see a peace officer do you feel safe or scared? Well there you go. I rather have MPs on every block than these opportunistic, power hungry cops who are thugs in uniform.

      • Bruce
        February 1, 2013 at 7:11 pm

        Law enforcement in northern NY is not interested in anyone’s 4th Amendment rights. There are roadblocks set daily. The Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) and the NY State Police man them jointly. They claim that the Patriot Act gives them the power to deny those rights to us. Normally these inspections are brief-they usually wave me through. There must have been some reason to search his vehicle, but this article doesn’t mention it. The new gun laws are not popular in northern NY.

    • Travis
      February 1, 2013 at 10:46 am

      I use to work as a police officer there 4 years ago. Everyone knows there’s a base there and I have no idea how many times I have seen 30rd. magazines and ammo in vehicles. As long as there isn’t a loaded gun its fine and most officers have no problem. Simply tell them, if it is their personal magazine, not to have it and go on with your business.

      Most of the time these 30rd. mags were located on the soldiers gear. The Army (at least my old unit) issued 30rd. magazines and we were held accountable for them, so there could be a reasonable explanation for it.

      I will say this about the Watertown, Carthage, even the DA police/security there. Those who never served in the Military do not understand what it takes and tend to be dicks to these soldiers.

    • Reyna
      February 1, 2013 at 10:47 am

      When its time for my ownership of my weapons to be a crime is the day I become a outlaw……USMC.

    • Travi
      February 1, 2013 at 10:50 am

      I use to work as a police officer there 4 years ago. Everyone knows there’s a base there and I have no idea how many times I have seen 30rd. magazines and ammo in vehicles. As long as there isn’t a loaded gun its fine and most officers have no problem. Simply tell them, if it is their personal magazine, not to have it and go on with your business.
      Most of the time these 30rd. mags were located on the soldiers gear. The Army (at least my old unit) issued 30rd. magazines and we were held accountable for them, so there could be a reasonable explanation for it.
      I will say this about the Watertown, Carthage, even the DA police/security there. Those who never served in the Military do not understand what it takes and tend to be dicks to these soldiers.

      • I could not agree with you 100%. I was a soldier there for 4 years, and have seen and experience some crazy sh!t from the LEOs there

    • John Franceskino
      February 1, 2013 at 11:46 am

      Ny old law was 10 round mags except buffalo rochester and albany limit you to 5 round mags.

    • James
      February 1, 2013 at 11:49 am

      This is the kinda shit that starts a revolution.

    • richard r densmore
      February 1, 2013 at 2:37 pm

      I have been a sworn fulltime police officer for over 30 years and I have preached discretion every year. Apparently discretion is not a main topic in police training any more. Neither is common sense.

    • Jim B
      February 1, 2013 at 5:08 pm

      This entire law is unconstitutional both State and Federally. The law was Improperly passed, The Gov. Cuomo kept all of the citizens out of the process which is against NY STATE LAW. ALl these guns and clips were bought legally and are in fact OUR property, yet another Constitutional issue; the Right to our property.ALL of the people in NY need to rise up in peaceful and strong situations to let NY State know we are not complying.These new laws serve no other purpose than to make criminals out of law abiding citizens.

    • Jai
      February 1, 2013 at 8:17 pm

      Heck I’m a LEO and hope he sues to make a bank!!! Common sense in NY is GONE!!!

    • Enter your name...
      February 1, 2013 at 9:07 pm

      Seems to anyone with half a brain, the sheriff violated 4th amendment which protects AMERICANS from illegal search and seizures from the government.

    • Joy Shivers
      February 1, 2013 at 11:02 pm

      Maybe this will be helpful.
      Applying this principle, the Court has ruled that U.S. citizens maintain a reasonable expectation of privacy in the “curtilage” immediately surrounding their home, but not in the “open fields” and “wooded areas” extending beyond this area (Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57, 44S. Ct. 445, 68 L. Ed. 898 [1924]). A person may have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the automobile that he or she is driving, but not in items that are in “plain view” from outside the vehicle (Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 91 S. Ct. 2022, 29 L. Ed. 564 [1971]). Nor do people have reasonable expectations of privacy in personal characteristics (United States v. Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1, 93 S. Ct. 764, 35 L. Ed. 2d 67[1973]). Thus, the police may require individuals to give handwriting and voice exemplars as well as fingerprint samples, without complying with the Fourth Amendment’s warrant or reasonableness requirements.

    • artie o.
      February 1, 2013 at 10:12 pm

      This has got to stop!

    • Rich
      February 2, 2013 at 6:57 am

      This is only the beginning of the halfassed law Cuomo has inflicted on the citizens of NY. Then to think about the legal ramifications on the citzens of NY. Then the cost the taxpayers of NY will incur to defend Cuomo’s knee-jerk, senseless and bullying law. Maybe, the spoiled brat will reconsider his foolish and cockey attitude and suspendthe law until a reasonable, practical law can be created.

      • ticci
        February 7, 2013 at 3:19 am

        Rich: Your Governor will not stop knee-jerking, not even when he’s elected President. Theyre grooming his little insignificant ass right now…keyhole turdball that he is

    • SARDOG79
      February 2, 2013 at 2:37 pm

      Wait a minute, NYC council voted to make it one of the Sanctuary Cities in America. Basically telling DHS and ICE agents to beat it, there’s no illegal aliens here. But a citizen with so called banned magazines is the crook??

    • Rich
      February 2, 2013 at 6:09 pm

      Unfortunately, prior to the recently published NY Safe Act, NYS PL section 262.02 Sub 8 made possession of high capacity ammunition magazines manufactured AFTER September 13, 1994 a class D felony. There are exemtions to this but this has been in effect for several years now. A magazine alone in a persons possession is not threatening or dangerous to others. What rationale could have been used by lawmakers to make a non threatening weapon part the legal equivalent to possessing a loaded firearm causes me concern. I became aware or this change in the law around 2008 or so. Maybe the law should exist for people who are found to be in possession of HC magazines while committing an underlying criminal act. For example, if a person is found in possession of an illegal, loaded firearm containing a HC magazine then it should apply and they’d be charge with two counts of CPW. Currently, if the individual involved in the Jefferson County incident was found in possession of 3 switchblade knives instead of 3 empty magazines, he would have been charged with 3 misdemeanors instead of the felonies he was charged with. Laws need to make sense. They are supposed to protect us, the citizenry, not to make us paranoid and assist law makers to feel like they’ve made some great accomplishment with a toothless piece of legislation.

    • jack magat
      February 2, 2013 at 11:45 pm

      Sheriff Burns should have been upholding the Constitution instead of arresting good Americans.

    • Scully
      February 3, 2013 at 11:23 am

      I find this whole story a bit confuseing ,This law has not been fully enacted in my opinion ,not to mention the last ban like this was a joke because everyone still had pre ban mags and could buy them easily . 5 felony charges ! I would show up for court and tell the whole place they are out of order ! I would defy them to charge me with anything ! And dam sure have every media outlet in the world there filming live ! there is also a 1 yr. grace period to register said guns or get rid of them etc . this whole thing stinks and is either not true or has a lot more to it than reported here . If this guy does not walk on this whole stupid ass deal truely there is something totaly wrong with our world ! Oh and being charged with 5 feloneys ….so he went strait to jail right ? You don’t just get an apearance ticket for that …..

    • rich peabody
      February 3, 2013 at 12:10 pm

      Ignorance of the law is no excuse….
      There is no reason for high capacity clips in a civilian’s hands.
      Jail him.

    • Bob
      February 3, 2013 at 7:01 pm

      Notifying the Sheriff is a waste of time notify the District Attorney.

    • Chris
      February 4, 2013 at 2:28 pm

      I’d be even more concerned about why he was “randomly” pulled over? New York seems to have an aversion to the Bill of Rights as they search people randomly in the streets in NYC already… i just don’t understand how they can justify that kind of thing.

    • Herb
      February 5, 2013 at 11:02 am

      Check out “The Battla Of Athens, TN.”

    • walter
      February 5, 2013 at 11:51 pm

      Funny this happens often to blacks, illegal searches
      possession of fire arms even if they are legally owned in another state and nobody cared.. Now a war hero gets caught up and could end up like Plaxico Burress for similiar charges and everybody wants to fuss.. Let him do his time like everybody else who gets charged with illegal possession of firearms in NY

    • David
      February 10, 2013 at 3:50 pm

      Actually, in NY there was already a Ban on large capacity clips that had been around for years. The new law in NY changes the law from 10 bullet clips to 7. So, the law was in effect and was valid. Whether you agree with it or not, it was the law. People complain that gun control laws are stupid because criminals will ignore them. What law-biding citizens? Who gets to decide which is a valid law and which isn’t?

    • Mary
      February 19, 2013 at 2:18 pm

      What if I had empty shell casings or empty amo boxes, etc? This is just another example of the stupidity of anti-gun activists. What possible harm can empty clips do?

    • ted
      April 6, 2014 at 1:22 pm

      How bout reading in the paper next year. Decorated man goes crazy with AR 15. Kills 30 people in 20 seconds. Was stopped a year ago with 30 round AR 15 magazines on him.

  2. J Babin
    January 31, 2013 at 1:40 pm

    He needs a military lawyer!

    • FUBAR
      January 31, 2013 at 2:38 pm

      He needs his country back. When VETS become treated like common criminals, it’s time to admit this country is in distress.

      • Travis
        February 1, 2013 at 12:22 am

        Just because he’s an accomplished veteran doesn’t mean he’s above the law. Not even the president of the united states is above the law.

        • promethious
          February 1, 2013 at 12:29 am

          “not even the president is above the law” ….i think someone needs to remind him of that ;)

        • Joe Rocket
          February 1, 2013 at 12:30 am

          Yeah, Travis- that’s why he breaks it all the time with unconstitutional Executive Orders, illegal appointments, and generally treasonous and traitorous behavior. Pull your head out, already.

        • firemanice
          February 1, 2013 at 12:45 am

          Travis, this vet is NOT above the law, this is true. But this lot has NOT been enacted. HE’S BREAKING NO LAW. You can’t enforce a law that does not yet exist. And if the law is given an 11th hour repeal, what then?

          • protectthechildrentoo
            February 1, 2013 at 3:38 pm

            omg people! NY-no mag over 10rd is the law since 1994! he had 30rd mags!!! he broke the law and he knew it and now he wants people to help him pay to get out of it. Really, like it was said before, if he is an active militant (which it never states), then any military lawyer would get him off if it was in his go-bag and it is required for them to have them, which again, it doesnt state that as a fact either. To be honest, it seems like this article was put in the paper to just get people to do just what they are clearly doing here! Bash on the goverment and on the right to bear arms because it is a hot topic right now. They are doing what the media always does, gives one sided stories and tries to get ratings by people getting pissed off by it all. Way to contribute to the very thing you all say you hate-media drama :)

          • michael713
            February 1, 2013 at 7:31 pm

            your just like these pussies what right do you have to tell a man not to have a gun. the fort hood shit happened bc a crazy Muslim.. protect our children ? the best way to do that is to either trap them in a kennel or buy a gun and let them live life.

        • PensacolaEd
          February 1, 2013 at 3:31 am

          He needs to be David Gregory, then he can get away with it.

          • Ken D
            February 3, 2013 at 7:37 pm

            Hitler was all about protecting children to..nice name there dumb ass LIBTARD.Here’s a fact, this administration has pissed on all of our Warfighters and OUR Country.fuck ’em I say be a real American and stand up for whats proper, fuck any law that limits our 2nd ammendmend rights…Semper Fi

        • Darrell
          February 1, 2013 at 4:17 am

          Just a thought, but how would he think he is above a law that is not in effect?

          • Brutal Chief
            February 1, 2013 at 7:53 am

            The above article is very misleading, the new “ban” doesn’t matter, 30 round mags have been illegal in NY for a very long time. The old “ban” illegalized magazines with a greater than 10 round capacity manufactured after September 4, 1994 under NYS Penal Law § 265.02(6). While the federal assault “ban” was in effect, all magazines with greater than 10 round capacity were stamped with a date of manufacture, and since the federal “ban” has sunset, many manufacturers still use a coded date, and agencies can readily identify the date using identification charts.

            What it comes down to, is he mistakenly possessed 5 illegal magazines in his vehicle. There is a reason we base our law system around an “ignorance of the law is no excuse” standard, people need to know the law. We are all subject to it, we are all responsible for protecting ourselves from it. No attorney will be able to get the case thrown out unless there was procedural error. He broke the law. It’s a pity that he’ll be penalized for a mistake, but veteran or not, the law is the law. There are plenty of people behind bars for 1 mistake.

          • John
            February 2, 2013 at 9:59 am

            He was apparently arrested under the old law as the article states that he thought the mags were pre-94. My problem with this is for one, it is a technicality. What is the difference between a magazine made before 94 and one made after. Well one is legal and one is not. That is the only difference. The law in and of itself is obviously unconstitutional, which should be the main issue. However, the arresting officers lack of discretion illustrates that some officers do not strive to “protect and serve” as much as to make technically legal arrests for any reason. Surely there are better things for an officer to do with his time. Especially given the fact that the mags were empty.

        • kira
          February 1, 2013 at 4:26 am

          to bad the president doesn’t think so , but then if his stupid ass is in there any longer our rights and laws will mean even less to a selfish dictator than they do now

        • Mark
          February 1, 2013 at 5:20 am

          Your right he is not above the law. The law was not in effect yet though. Now the reporter in D.C that had the mag was illegal but no charges ever filed against him and he did it on public television. Is he above the law or an exception??

        • Scott
          February 1, 2013 at 5:21 am

          Hell if he isn’t our dam president isn’t in jail now is he?
          Our government including the president should be locked
          Up for selling full automatic weapons to the Mexican cartel. That killed the boarder agent. But NO one went to jail for that they are above the law. So don’t say they aren’t. They make laws but don’t have to fallow them. This country is going to Hell and fast.

        • Kevin
          February 1, 2013 at 6:07 am

          Travis a nation built on the rule of law is one where laws are not designed to disadvantage one person over another and where law is predictable and thereby will not be violated due to innocent action. We no longer live under the rule of law but under arbitrary action by legislatures and executive who have overstepped their bounds. Sheep like you who follow the powers that be blindly making stupid statements like the one you just made will end up as the first ones in the gas chamber when those same powers that be decide it is you who needs arbitrary punishment and the punishment chosen for you is elimination.

        • Bob
          February 1, 2013 at 6:26 am

          OHHH I must call BULLSHIT on that statement, Travis.
          Call Obumma and ask HIM if he is above the law, or not.

        • Jim B
          February 1, 2013 at 5:11 pm

          You cant just pass a law in secret at 11:30 pm and start arresting people right away without sufficient notice and time to implement it in the very least.

        • Don't be an idiot
          February 1, 2013 at 9:57 pm

          Don’t make asinine comments like that. Everyone knows the POTUS acts and carries himself as if he is above the law. Do you really want examples of such activities?

        • J. Emerson
          February 5, 2013 at 8:26 pm

          Obama thinks he’s above the law. Look at Fast & Furious, now he’s flying around the country trying to get the states to infringe on our 2nd amendment that he has sworn an oath to protect. The 2nd amendment is the law of the land. How many people died because of fast and furious? Why is no one being held accountable? It seams to me Obama is above the law…

    • SNIPER
      January 31, 2013 at 2:48 pm

      He needed the rifle and rounds to help clean the gene pool. How much of a dumbass do you need to be to get the job that those not yet a LAW enforement officers have. I allways thaught that to be in law enforement you had to be able to think,,,guess i was wrong.

      • greg
        January 31, 2013 at 7:46 pm

        Being able to think isn’t one of the major requirements to be in law enforcement.

        • Gregyoudope
          January 31, 2013 at 11:04 pm

          Cops don’t make the laws, they take an oath to enforce them. Dip-shits like you elect the dip-shits that make these laws. Cops don’t have discretion when it comes to enforcing felonies. Keep the blame where it belongs, on the politicians and the fools who elect them.

          • DreDay
            January 31, 2013 at 11:27 pm

            Um… Cops have a TON of discretion when it comes to enforcing laws when nobody is being hurt. Cops turn a blind eye to crimes like this every day.

          • promethious
            February 1, 2013 at 12:32 am

            they ALSO take an oath to serve and protect… to uphold the constitution.. and by arresting him, he broke that oath! point blank, he doesnt deserve to wear that badge
            a law that goes against the constitution, is not a legal law and cannot be enforced… therefore that officer chose to break the law and violate that vets rights

          • Saarebas
            February 1, 2013 at 4:28 am

            In this case, most, if not all, the blame lies on the cop who arrested someone for a law that was not yet enacted.

          • Constitution Gal
            February 1, 2013 at 4:35 am

            promethious – (cops) take an oath to “serve and protect…to uphold the Constitution”? While I would agree that they’re supposed to, and there are in fact many “good cops”, there are also many that are just as ignorant of the Constitution, and in fact the very laws they are supposed to be upholding. In your own comments, can you explain to me where the rights of the individual exercising his CONSITUTIONAL rights are? The 2nd Amendment protects the citizens right to bear arms — not specific but rather any and all (that would include up to the very same that the government itself owns and for the reasons of protection against tyrannical government). The Constitution restricts GOVERNMENT from infringing on those rights — READ IT! So, who was the arresting officer “protecting”? Certainly NOT the Constitutional rights of the citizen — which is after all, HIS TRUE JOB!

    • Rico M.
      January 31, 2013 at 8:00 pm

      As a retired veteran I can tell you the military lawyers will not represent him in this case as it’s a civil matter. Military will only represent you for military legal matters concerning work or disciplinary actions and such.

    • Mark Williams
      January 31, 2013 at 8:23 pm

      No, military lawyer can’t or won’t touch it. He needs the lawyers that love taking apart the wrong doers and winning.

    • Dutchsays
      January 31, 2013 at 11:20 pm

      Or an infantry company.

  3. John A.
    January 31, 2013 at 1:52 pm

    That is SOOO moronic!! Arrested for having five empty mags despite not having a rifle in the vehicle to put them in!!?? Did the idiot police think he might throw them at someone? All the best on this being thrown out of court asap, Sarge!

    • DEB
      January 31, 2013 at 2:43 pm

      Moronic and N.Y. Goverment,,same word spelled differant.

      • joe
        January 31, 2013 at 3:08 pm

        Ironic is that a “reporter” recently had the same exact magazines in his possesion on a tv show. The public made a stink and he was not charged. Talk about an elite class.

  4. wellington lemmer
    January 31, 2013 at 2:40 pm

    Another example of the devaluing of veterans. First DHS announces that combat veterans should be considered potential domestic terrorist (appox spring 2012). So this kind of activity will continue.

  5. F&CK SOETOR F&CK HIM!!!
    January 31, 2013 at 2:46 pm

    we’re going to take it back. we’re sending Soetoro back to Indomesia where his sorry CIA belongs..

    • akabar
      January 31, 2013 at 5:01 pm

      What the hell are you talking about?

      Soetero + Indomesia + CIA

      If you’re talking about the conspiracy theorist belief that our president wasn’t born in the US, then you may want to consider “Obama + Kenya” as your statement. I’m not sure where the CIA has anything to do with this, nor, I’m guessing, you mean indo*N*esia, which is not part of Africa in any way. It’s between the Philipines and Australia. You might sound a lot less like a FUCKING MORON if you read a map once in a while.

      • John Klem
        January 31, 2013 at 6:35 pm

        akabar, please suck pork bones.

      • That Guy
        January 31, 2013 at 6:39 pm

        actually, there is a long connection between Obama’s family and the CIA. it includes both Kenya and Indonesia. Want some dots to connect? Try Tom Mboya and a bank named Bishop, Baldwin, Rewald, Dillingham and Wong… good luck with the bank, all the records have been sealed on ‘national security’ grounds. Obama’s grandmother was a VP at that bank.

        If you had done some research, you might sound a lot less like a fckin moron too.

        • jay
          January 31, 2013 at 10:35 pm

          Nailed it!

  6. NWO Slayer
    January 31, 2013 at 2:49 pm

    Dox that fucking traitor sheriff.

  7. Edward J. Palumbo
    January 31, 2013 at 2:52 pm

    Has NY State lost all semblance of justice and judgment? Mere possession of 5 empty magazines by an active duty military man results in 5 felony counts? It is stupidity like this that convinced me to relocate from New York to the west coast, a decision I never regretted for an instant. Is this what Sgt. Haddad risked so much for? I doubt it.

  8. John
    January 31, 2013 at 3:05 pm

    David Gregory not even charged …

    Some pigs are more equal than others.

  9. Enter your name...
    January 31, 2013 at 3:52 pm

    Since when did it become constitutional to stop someone without probable cause?

    • akabar
      January 31, 2013 at 5:01 pm

      Patriot Act pretty much threw all our rights out the windo,

    • Eleanor
      January 31, 2013 at 5:08 pm

      The reason he can be pulled over with no probable cause is due to the “constitution-free zone.” Look here: http://www.aclu.org/constitution-free-zone-map
      (No Fourth Amendment rights for the majority of Americans.)

      • Jay
        January 31, 2013 at 11:10 pm

        Well that is something I did not know. Time to move.

        • DreDay
          January 31, 2013 at 11:31 pm

          You actually believe anything the ACLU says?

        • SNIPER
          February 1, 2013 at 8:57 am

          Costa anywhere nice this time of year.

      • Tam
        January 31, 2013 at 11:48 pm

        There is a constitution-free zone of 100 miles, however; despite the federal law allowing certain federal agents to conduct suspicionless search and seizures within 100 miles of the border, the Supreme Court has clearly and repeatedly confirmed that the border search exception applies only at international borders and their functional equivalent (such as international airports).

        So, the sheriff was not within his rights, according to the US Supreme Court, as not only was it not at an international border, he is NOT a federal agent, merely a state officer.

        • Drumette
          February 1, 2013 at 3:11 am

          Depends on where in Jefferson county. Watertown is about 30 minutes from the border.

    • Eleanor
      January 31, 2013 at 5:40 pm

      I have spoken to a few (6 or 8) Americans about the constitution-free zone. None of them knew about it, and what is more disturbing, none of them particularly cared once they did learn about it. “I don’t need to worry since I’ve nothing to hide,” or “It’s for our own good – protection from terrorism.” I conclude that most Americans have not read enough history to extrapolate living without the protection of the American Constitution. Heaven help them – they will have to learn by experience…

      • Dawn Star
        January 31, 2013 at 5:49 pm

        Ok now that is something I actually have not heard of! Where is the(se) constitution-free zone(‘s)? And of course that’s what its called too right haha put the word free and people just except it no thoughts about it :-\

    • Dawn Star
      January 31, 2013 at 5:41 pm

      They are potential threats because they were there and many of them saw the real truths and realize our government is more like a Mob then a government for the people by the people and we need to get out of there already! Oh ya and that (“Patriot Act”) haha how could they even call it that for Any reason other then a JOKE and so it sounds good to the truly uninformedsheep in our country. Sad people can’t see what’s going on and just get their info from government news channels :-l

      • JrFlipp/USMC
        January 31, 2013 at 10:36 pm

        I agree with what you said in your comments Dawn Star. However, there is a difference between then and than. Then denotes time within a sequence: I read your post, then I wrote a response. Than is used in comparisons: I would rather write this post than let you continue to misuse words.
        http://grammar.about.com/od/words/a/thangloss.htm

    • Doc
      January 31, 2013 at 11:08 pm

      Police can randomly stop anyone they choose for any reason they choose. I know in the state of KY, just because you’re stopped does not mean that you consent to a search of your person, or vehicle. In order to accomplish this, there would have to be probable cause, or reasonable suspicion that he had, or was in possession of said items. If they weren’t in plain sight, and were say..in the trunk, and he did not give permission to the officer to search his vehicle, (this includes the trunk) or the officer didn’t have a warrant specifically stating that they were searching for ’30 round or military style assault weapon magazines’ then he cannot be arrested. If said items were found upon a ‘lawful search’ or if he gave the officer permission to search then they can be use as evidence against him.

      My guess is that when he was pulled over, for whatever reason (I don’t buy the random bullshit) when asked if they could search the vehicle, he consented thinking that he’d be ok, or forgot about them being in there. Either way I don’t think this will stand in court, and if it does, I’m pretty sure it can appealed and overturned. There’s just too much that doesn’t sound like SOP going on here. Just POV.

      • YippIDidIt
        January 31, 2013 at 11:25 pm

        You dont get it you have no rights they have been removed and most these assholes are thugs controled like puppets…

      • DEB
        February 1, 2013 at 9:15 am

        Doc I can not believe that you have never been pulled over at a traffic stop,,i allways see them set up here in Alabama they check for DUI,insurance,registration,etc.

  10. Drutch
    January 31, 2013 at 4:09 pm

    This is a direct violation of the second amendment. The people of Jefferson county need to arm themselves and mount and march into the sheriff’s office and eject his ass from office. If the sheriff and his deputies resist then the people must do what is necessary to remove by force.

    • john
      January 31, 2013 at 9:31 pm

      Also a violation of the 4th

      • Walt
        February 1, 2013 at 7:36 am

        Yes, 4th Amendment prevents search and seizure without a warrant. If New York allows searching a vehicle without a warrant, that violates probable cause to search. It’s a wonder no one has questioned this in the past.

    • Jrflipp/USMC
      January 31, 2013 at 10:41 pm

      This has nothing to do with the second amendment since absolutely no firearms were involved. Illegal search and seizure, maybe. Ridiculous, definitely.

      • asllepinthealley
        February 1, 2013 at 11:55 am

        This has everything to do with the 2nd Amendment. We have a God given right to possess any weapon the government has and the 2nd Amendment makes note of this. We are the ones in charge and all we have to do to insure it is to exercise our rights. Stand up for what is yours. Stand up against what you know is wrong and most importantly stand up now for our countrymen as they come under attack from our own government.

        • protectthechildrentoo
          February 1, 2013 at 3:55 pm

          I believe it says ‘right to bear arms’ I do not believe is says anything about you having the right to any size magazines, unless I missed that. I believe that each state can make that law no matter how they want to. But yes you can have a gun, doesnt mean you get to have bullets to go in it! Especially in 30rd mags.

        • protectthechildrentoo
          February 1, 2013 at 4:05 pm

          by the way, it does not say any and all weapons that the gov’t has access to. Please try to order a nuclear bomb and tell me how far the 2nd ammendment gets you on that one.

  11. Bunky
    January 31, 2013 at 4:18 pm

    Let’s have the N.R.A. lawyers bail out the Sgt..

  12. John Smith
    January 31, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    That is what you get for traveling or living behind enemy lines —Blue coats run that part of the country— Pack up and run for a “free state”

    • Jeff Botts
      February 1, 2013 at 7:30 pm

      Sorry, but I prefer to stay and fight! I will not run from the Libs…..

  13. Enter your name...
    January 31, 2013 at 4:37 pm

    On Jan 27 a retired gun dealer on Long Island was arrested and guns confiscated and police still have not given a reason as to why they arrested him. This is just the start of goverment coming to take our 2nd ammendment away.

  14. Apostle
    January 31, 2013 at 4:56 pm

    And the sheriffs say; Oh we’re the good guys! Pulleeezzze, If you wear the enemies uniform, you are the enemy.

    • VetCop
      January 31, 2013 at 5:43 pm

      Apostle,
      I served my country for six years, I spent 3 years, 2 months and 8 days of that in the Middle East. I am now a licensed Peace Officer in Texas and your comment thoroughly pisses me off. I wear a police uniform and to have someone like you pop off with some off the wall shit like that, is just completely unfounded. Check yourself.

      • Tim Carroll
        January 31, 2013 at 5:55 pm

        Thanks for your service VetCop! The vast majority of Police and Sheriff Deputies I have spoken to, fully support our rights to be armed, although that is here in Sunny SoCal. Politicians, are of course way different and should be immediately fired, but thats another topic.

      • Mike
        January 31, 2013 at 5:57 pm

        He is talking about “Blue Coats” —-Texas is a Red state —Law men serve the ppl— In Blue states they are bad guys —that refuse to move or to help the common man

      • John J. Potts
        January 31, 2013 at 8:18 pm

        Mr. Texas Police Officer,

        I have a spotless record. I retired twenty-two years US Army Infantry. The way I have talked to by police has been amazing. I have been cursed at for politely refusing to give my SS#. I have been screamed at in California, forced to pull up an anchor that I could not lift as I was awaiting a new Windless. Cops have come up to my boat and turned on search lights as my Wife and I were sitting enjoying a class of wine. In New York, two water cops harrassed me for two hours. I broke no law. Once, many years ago I was punched in the kidney by a cop. He did this infront of my son, wife, in-laws, and friends. All I said in a friendly manner was, “Isn’t this private property Officer?” Two weeks back from Nam. If I had been armed, I assure you I would have been put to death. I would have shot them. May I assure you, I will never be beaten by the Police again. Not a blemish on my record.

      • ninjaguy
        January 31, 2013 at 8:25 pm

        Thanks for serving, but fuck off with all of the other crooked left Texas peace officers.

      • Craig R
        January 31, 2013 at 9:37 pm

        I thank you for your service VetCop, but you need to understand our Sheriff Association recently wrote a letter saying they stand with the citizens of NY and support the Constitution and the 2A. I don’t trust anyone that wears an LE uniform anymore, regardless of what they say their beliefs are. Most are nice guys while you are sitting around having a beer with them, but as soon as they don that uniform something changes in them. I’ve witnessed that first hand. I live in NY and at a recent gun show you could buy those 30rd mags for $65 all day long. No one was saying anything to the contrary. Last year they were limiting them to LE only. Why does LE get a free pass on all this type of armament? Are you guys and gals some sort of special class of people? The laws in NYS are so confusing that even lawyers who are well versed in 2A case law can’t figure them out. Before you go getting all high and mighty, you should think what we are dealing with from the other side of the badge. It isn’t a good time to live in America and try to be a law-abiding gun owner.

      • VetCop
        February 1, 2013 at 8:45 pm

        Whoopdedo VetCop…I served my country for over 20 years. Your knee-jerk, tough guy, “pissed off” reaction is exactly what folks here are talking about. So you wear a police uniform, so what…that doesn’t make you above the law. In fact, perhaps a little of the old fashioned humility and “protect and serve” attitude would go a long way to restoring some of the respect law enforcement has lost. Oh, yeah, I forgot … you don’t protect and serve anymore. Us, low life, civilian, citizens are on our own.

  15. Barry McClung
    January 31, 2013 at 6:13 pm

    This is the obvious railroading of a decorated hero by pea-brained, badge-wearing thugs is a state where the Libtard politicians have been allowed to ride roughshod over civil rights and to defy all logic in their race to the deepest part of the cesspool. Somebody get this man the best lawyer possible and shout loudly your support for him and his family. Mister Cuomo needs to be unemployed. Soon.

  16. JEFFREY WESTBROOK
    January 31, 2013 at 6:15 pm

    ARE WE SERIOUS HERE? Look if you range shoot your gonna have at least 7-10 magazines for the range. I say this because the military has us train for a full combat load. What is a full combat load you ask???? Hmmm… 210 Rounds. And that is 7 magazines. So I’m guessing that he practices with what he can afford, transitioning from the military. If there is anyone to blame for him wanting to protect himself and his neighbors, It’s you, the one’s who have a problem with this individual. An individual, I might add that has had Military experience, knows what is right and wrong, through military standards, and is who defends your country while you sleep. Lets do the right thing for once and say ” NOOOOO, THIS IS WRONG”. Lets arrest those who deserve it, Hmmm, Like the damn criminals that you don’t have a face for. Do not make him your face for revenge.
    Ranger1/75

  17. Dave
    January 31, 2013 at 6:24 pm

    I hope that not too many of you LEO’s are this pathetic & this much of a pushover to follow through with arresting citizens for this nonsense.
    What the hell are you thinking?
    Just don’t do it for gods sake!

  18. Bruce p
    January 31, 2013 at 6:25 pm

    This is an outrage. The govt. is turning this country to crap.

  19. grayfox114
    January 31, 2013 at 6:30 pm

    This is the problem we will all be facing, or are now facing: The thick headed goons that will do whatever they are told without thinking it through!< I was a deputy, 30+, was always looking at the law in the intent vs the letter manner. Just because it was written did not make it right. These cops and others like them are what Obama and this administration need and like. They should not be wearing a badge, but since they are, I hope it's a big one, because it will hurt a lot more when it gets stuffed up their ass! They are a blight on true law enforcement officers everywhere.

  20. rev. dave
    January 31, 2013 at 6:44 pm

    A good reason to spend as little time as possible traversing that state, or in it. New Jersey is notoriously gun-unfriendly too.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*