“No matter if we have a record, it should be exempt,” Whitehead said. “So we should be able to bear arms as the Constitution says.”
That’s Bishop Lamor Whitehead in the quote above, saying that even though he spent five years in prison for past crimes, he, as a member of the clergy, should receive a special dispensation for a concealed carry permit in New York City. When asked if preachers should receive special treatment in NY, where carry permits are as rare as hen’s teeth, Whitehead’s long-time friend, Mayor Eric Adams, said — and this is apparently the entirety of his answer — “No.”
The thing about it is . . . well, look, first and foremost if he isn’t a danger to others he should damn well be able to carry a firearm for self defense if he wants to. NYC violates the Constitution and its citizens’ natural, civil, and Constitutionally-protected Second Amendment rights every darn day by making permits effectively impossible to get, and I cannot and do not agree with it.
BUT . . . Whitehead has no reason to seek special treatment as a man of the cloth. He wasn’t targeted because he’s a pastor. He was targeted and robbed at gunpoint, along with his wife, because they are notoriously ostentatious — driving a Rolls Royce, rocking custom and designer clothing, and wearing massive quantities of jewelry.
In fact, they apparently lost one million dollars of jewelry in the armed robbery, which happened during a live streamed church service. One million dollars, as in $1,000,000, of jewelry that, from the sounds of it, was literally on their persons at the time of the robbery, which occurred while Whitehead was in front of his congregation preaching about lord knows what.
You’ll find no love for Whitehead over at BlackSportsOnline. The NY Daily News has more info on Mayor Adams’ rejection of his long-time pal’s special request, and the AP has more details on the robbery.
He says he was in prison for five years. That means he’s a felon. The law is the law. Felons cannot own firearms. Period! Am I wrong? Did I miss something?
“Felons cannot own firearms. Period!”
See my comment directly below, that might change, depending on the type of crime…
“See my comment directly below, that might change, depending on the type of crime…”
Are you completely aware that your comment puts you squarely in the “I believe in the Second Amendment, but….” crowd?
Any exception to “Shall Not Be Infringed” is as valid as any other exception (constraint/restriction/prohibition).
BTW, “it’s the law” means Bruen was wrongly decided, because all gun control laws are “the law”.
Not true Sam. There have always been exceptions. You give up your rights when you become a criminal. How many rights do you have in jail? You aren’t allowed to say whatever you want without repercussions either. That doesn’t mean you don’t believe in the 1A. Violent criminals should be locked up for as long as possible. Then they should be scrutinized for a period of time if they get out. This sort of 2A purity test is counterproductive IMO.
Sam, you probably have the same POV on felons voting as well(?).
I’m a bit torn when a convict actually serves out an entire sentence with no time off for various deals, AND if said now ex-crook has made restitution for all financial considerations to both the victim and the taxpayers for providing lawyer and “room and board” while serving sentence.
Honestly, however, few convicts either serve a full sentence or are even charged for the severity of their crime due to plea deals to move our clogged courts. (Well, unless you go into the US Capital only on Jan 6, 2021, as the Colbert show jerks showed us…) And I can’t think of any situation where any restitution was paid to make victims “whole” again.
Sorry SIA, convicted felons have been found guilty of actively subverting the intent of ‘We the People’, working AGAINST the formation of a ‘More Perfect Union’.
It’s right there in black and white.
Felons don’t get to work AGAINST the will of ‘We the People’, than retain all the rights that group enjoys.
So yes, there is a legit ‘I support the 2nd A, but…’
But, iconoclast on you iconoclast.
Isn’t it technically a form of rehab though? So if served, then you should be able to earn your “rights” back? Just sayin… But project some more you projectionist.
Hey! I’m proud of myself… I didn’t call someone a bootlicker this time!
Yes, you can earn rights back.
Spend a few years behaving like a responsible and law abiding citizen, then petition the court for an expungement.
I don’t think they should be punished indefinitely just because they’re a felon. Unless they’re serving life in prison, they need a defined path back to losing the felon tag and everything that goes with it. I’m fine with a probationary period after they get out of prison. That could be an extra incentive not to break the law. Fake it til you make it. This assumes they served a reasonable time for the crime. The current strategy from the Left is to go out of their way not to imprison violent criminals.
Baby steps, Montana, baby steps. The journey of a thousand miles starts with that first step.
“Isn’t it technically a form of rehab though?”
Yes, but not the only form. There is nothing in the Constitution or, for that matter, common law, which states that incarceration is the ONLY punishment\rehab allowed for a crime committed.
If one commits a felony for which the suspension of gun rights was previously laid out in law (i.e. not ex-post facto), and is not found to be cruel and unusual, there’s very little legal leg to stand on.
“The People” under the auspices of the state can punish with a suspension of gun rights no less than they can punish with an active prison sentence or fine.
Look the point is more basic than that.
If the preacher is a felon, FEDERAL law says he can’t own a gun.
So the point is that Adams couldn’t accommodate him, even if he chose to want to.
Should felons get their 2A rights back? That’s a separate question. But right now, it’s out of Adams’ hands.
So to be marked felon you must carry that all your life? We have all sinned and fell short and deserve to go to hell!!! Have you been saved? I rest my case!!!
Wouldn’t matter after September 1st (unless injunction granted) churches are full on sensitive locations so no guns unless cop so any permit he could be exempted to have would be worthless within however far of his church anyway.
I bet the thieves wanted to get their robbery in before that went into effect.
“…churches are full on sensitive locations so no guns unless cop“”…”
Not in Iowa.
My church will allow and even encourage anyone to attend and makes no judgments regardless of background, sexual perversion/identity/whatever, race, color, age, personal appearance, etc. If someone comes in with a weapon and tries to do damage, however, they will likely not get many rounds off before they meet their maker, so to speak.
Craig that is absolutely the way it should be and I can think of 3 churches and 1 synagogue off the top of my head that will have “security guards” whatever the law says here in NY. Not sure one of them will keep doing it’s AR giveaways given the new license requirement for semi auto rifles but we will see what shakes out in court.
(Read above)
Larry, Romans 3:23-24: ” 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.”
Not all sins are felonies; but, all felonies are sins. It stands to reason that a non-violent felon should not lose their right to own guns.
Note: There is no mention of whether a person is “deserving” of hell or not because “redemption came by Christ Jesus”.
“So to be marked felon you must carry that all your life?“ (See my comments above)
Larry, I’d remind you that the Apostle Paul (Romans 13, among other books and chapters) commands believers to submit to both the authorities of government and to their laws as they have been put in place by God. So…
‘So to be marked felon you must carry that all your life?.. ‘
Not at all. Spend a decade or two without being convicted of more felonies, then go before a judge to have the infraction expunged from your record.
We have not all sinned enough to have it be considered felonious and spent 5 years in prison. We have not all swindled or grifted enough to be convicted as a felon and sentenced to those 5 years. We have not all gotten out of prison after 5 years and continued to appear to swindle as a “preacher” wearing designer clothes, owning a stable of luxury autos, living in million dollar apartments, draped in a million dollars worth of jewelry, and continuing to fleece your flock for more money. There is a process for felons to regain what they have lost due to their actions against society. I would like to see the good preacher investigate those processes. I do not have much sympathy for this “man of god”.
But he’s a Preacher AND a long time “PAL” of the newly minted Mayor. Besides the 2nd amendment does not specify who cannot have a gun it only “codifies” (THEY love to use that word) the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms. The preacher and his wife might be money-grubbing assholes and he might be a common criminal taking advantage of those who look to him for guidance and trust him to lead them to the light, but he’s still a “people”. All that “prohibited” stuff is in violation of the 2nd and maybe someday someone will come along with the nads to fix it. In the meantime, he should just do what every other New Yorker does, don’t ask permission, get a gun and IF he needs to use it, he can ask for forgiveness.
“But he’s a Preacher AND a long time “PAL” of the newly minted Mayor.“
Shouldn’t make much difference to me, sarc or not. Wonder how people would feel if our “man of god” was a Muslim Imam?
“Wonder how people would feel if our “man of god” was a Muslim Imam?”
My thinking is that Muslims (like Texas Aggies) are a threat to everyone, and should be tightly controlled. The freedoms and rights protected by the constitution make no provision for such sentiment, so….any person, under our constitution is a person with immutable (in/unalienable) rights. Thus, my thoughts have no meaning regarding the free exercise of natural, human and civil rights. The Imam, if a “felon”, should have all rights restored after serving the applied jail sentence. The Imam should have no need of asking for special consideration.
Such is the price of maintaining freedom in our nation.
Seems many here are staunch proponents of MUCH longer felony offense sentences, life without parole, and the death sentence.
It simple, returning 2nd A right when felons are released will require longer and more severe penalties to keep the public safe.
“It simple, returning 2nd A right when felons are released will require longer and more severe penalties to keep the public safe.”
That could work without the radical state attorneys letting them off the hook.
The law is unconstitutional.
Note that the Second Amendment DOES NOT READ: “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, unless you pass a law making them a felon.”
Whatever his crime, his natural right to self defense CANNOT be permanently taken away by a government that did not give him that right in the first place.
His right to arms can be suppressed while he is in custody, on trial, or incarcerated, that makes sense, but the right is not TAKEN AWAY, only suppressed due to his own actions.
Once released from jail or prison I can see no Constitutional reason for continuing to suppress his natural right.
A prior felon has as much right to personal defense as any other person, otherwise we are arguing the same thing the anti-gun fanatics argue – it is the gun that is the problem, not the person.
An prior felon in possession of a firearm is still a person. It is what he does with that firearm that is the issue, not the gun itself. If he uses it as intended – for defense – there should be no issue. If he uses it to commit more crimes then the State has the right to defend itself and its citizens and put his ass back in prison for a LONG time where they can logically suppress his right to arms while incarcerated.
Concur 100%.
If someone is such a danger to society that the Government (or even society) determines they cannot possess arms (for any *lawful* purpose!), then why are they part of society in the first place?
🤔
Exactly.
Longer sentences, more life without parole, more death penalties.
This will become the new method to maintain public safety. All because when a felon is released, he can legally go purchase a firearm.
I’m not a Constitutional scholar, nor do I play one on the net. With that being said, they could argue it’s part of their punishment. However, courts don’t like for things to be indefinite. If they argued this, they may have to layout a specific path for the felon to be able to rejoin free society. That would be for the best.
Conversation with Sam continued below for more on this.
“Once released from jail or prison I can see no Constitutional reason for continuing to suppress his natural right.”
Ok.
Now let’s apply the return of ALL rights to felons upon their release from prison to the penalty phase of sentencing.
I see an incredible increase in life without ANY chance of parole and death sentences.
The hard truth.
It will significantly raise the bar for felons to get released.
Peter,
What you are missing–along with too many duped people–is that the firearms prohibition ‘law’ mandated for ex-felons was the greatest step in the Totalitarian Mardxist agenda for sooner or later disarming all of you ‘upstanding’ citizens of law, order, and super sanctimonious morality dispositions.
And you don’t have to doubt it anymore, you can see it happening right now as they are die-hard determined to go forward with ‘Laws’ that will ban your guns outright along with more and more laws–like these ‘domestic terrorist’ ploys they are gearing up for that make almost anyone a felon who can then be disarmed by default if they plea out not to do time. Which virtually everyone would do.
Coincidentally, there’s a prestigious Constitutional attorney also by the name of John Whitehead who wrote several must read books (The War Against the American People) and articles for FFF) Who points out experts who can prove that the average citizen commits at least one felony and several misdemeanors a month if the engage in any normal activity because of all the laws and statutes already on the books. These simply are ignored because it is impossible to prosecute so many violations. They simply don’t come across the radar of any investigative agency unless specifically pointed out in a complaint.
You know how a simple criminal case you get caught on turns into several other charges because when you are under the microscope something always comes up to link to other things in your past or present you may have done.
So now all they have to do is target focus their efforts a bit more a general scale with firearms and they win another battle in the war against your 2nd/Ad uninfringeable rights.
If you are so dangerous to the safety of society with your current behavior that can be immediately observed, then YOU should be ‘prohibited’ from doing that behavior by being taken into custody and simply kept there until you are Not a danger anymore? The extent of of your incarceration, which depends on your history, violence levels, etc. to be adjusted accordingly. There should be concurrent rehabilitative behavioral treatment and evaluations and if you can be determined ‘safe’ enough to proceed back into society, then All rights should go along with that. A clear and effective alternative to having otherwise average non-criminal citizens not having to live in fear of being punished for life for anything might do?
That’s not America. The G is out of control. It’s laws like this that started the death spiral of our Freedoms.
Otherwise, the whole concept of crime and punishment in the Criminal Justice system is one big fraud to facilitate Power elite’s totalitarian purpose of ultimate complete control of the sheeple. Anybody who doesn’t see and understand that fact in these transparent times is one ‘nit’ short of their own ‘wit’!
Yeah, this Pastor is ‘peculiar’. But that’s none of our fucking business. If he’s ‘safe’ enough
currently to be out and making money, he should be able to arm himself with a firearm.
And nobody should be able to prohibit him from doing that in a truly free Constitutional America as the visionary Founders tried to establish. Otherwise, we will never succeed, and only decline into extinction.
He appears to have enough money to hire the best legal representation, so I hope he contacts Attorney Matt at the Firearms Policy Coalition for some direction on a possible Class Action Federal Lawsuit for Deprivation of Rights.
This insidious idea of permanent firearms prohibition derives its proactive roots in LBJ’s political Racism with his ’68 GCA.
Very good article topic, Jeremy, that desperately needed attention. Keep up the good work.
Legality doesn’t equal morality. If he’s not on probation or parole he should absolutely be allowed to carry.
True,but being off probation/parole doesn’t erase the felony conviction. He’s a convicted felon for life.
You didn’t miss anything.
apparently religion is a lucrative profession….
it would appear he could afford to hire his own security….
“No matter if we have a record, it should be exempt,” Whitehead said. “So we should be able to bear arms as the Constitution says.”
In a federal court dissent, Justice Coney-Barret argued that losing 2A rights should not be universal for felony convictions. Crimes of physical violence could result in loss of rights, but not all felonies.
It will be very interesting to see if any cases are in the pipeline that may give an indication the current Court is interested in addressing the issue…
Yeah, I’d like to see SCOTUS throw it out. Then, for the folks worried about recidivism, write something like a 3 strikes = life in prison law for violent felonies. Can’t take Roscoe in with you, but if you stay out you should be able to keep him.
The five boroughs of NY had a ’10/20/Life’ policy while I worked and went to school there. Mid/late ’80s.
If an unlicensed person (during commission of a crime)……
Presented a firearm: 10 years minimum.
Discharged a firearm: 20 years minimum.
Injured someone with a firearm: Life.
You couldn’t walk into a business without seeing the 10/20/Life sign posted on the door.
I don’t recall it being enforced very much.
A lot of this may depend upon just how much more criminally violent the blue cities and states are allowed to become by their “masters”. Self preservation for some of us is even more than a natural right. It is an instinct that we were born with.
Gotta love the gangster rap/clergy crossover phenomenon. Which came first the gaudy preacher or the bling clad rapper?
Even Mr. T took off his trademark jewelry as he concluded it was “unChristian” to wear it.
“Even Mr. T took off his trademark jewelry as he concluded it was “unChristian” to wear it.”
And his ‘ropes’ were made of hollow tube gold, so they were far less impressive than they looked at a distance.
I used to see a lot of that hollow tube low-carat gold crap walk into the pawnshops I worked at years back. The tubing was often so thin, it dented very easily. That, of course, killed its resale value, and that tended to severely annoy the ‘rapper-in-training’ trying to sell it back to the shop he bought it at.
Yes, your dented and kinked crap is now scrap, and melt value is worth even less… 🙂
Coins bars and modest cars, it’s like they don’t want to acquire wealth.
This man is a Man-of-the-Cloth, for my sake. Even if he was a felon, he’s found me, gold, jewels, and a Rolls Royce. He needs to protect himself, his wife, his flock, and his stash of golden booty.
J, Christ–That’s exactly Right! Why is it that all the ‘Holier-than-thou’ Die-Hards don’t understand about modern Religionism? First and foremost it’s a Business? A (so-called) Non-Profit Biz to be correct.
It also never ceases to perplex me how so many of the so-called ‘Holier’ Christian sects among the 4000 or so world knockoffs who so rabidly enjoy visceral punishment of bad sinners especially ‘Heathens’, but disregard and ignore the forgiveness factor that JEEsus himself exemplified when He became ‘eternal’ blood bros with a convicted criminal next to him at the crucifixion? Not only was the ex-convict Not prohibited from owning ‘arms’, but he was also guaranteed a parking space in Heaven!
I hope, for Christ’s sake, that the Marxist lawmakers don’t make Hypocrisy a felony?
Not sure if you know this, but I was joking. Even I have a sense of humor, look at Joe and the hoe.
This guy is a piece of shit that believes in money, not God.
The poor people he swindles are getting used by this total a-hole. He’s fucking people over in the name of God.
“He’s fucking people over in the name of God.” Which means some non-criminal activities are justification for denying natural, human and civil rights?
The pastor is not guilty of a crime (fraud?) unless and until he is charged and convicted. Barring that, he should have all his rights restored.
Trying to protect people from themselves is a fool’s errand, and a not insignificant cause of egregious government intrusion/suppression of the liberty of individuals.
Learn to read. I never said anything about his right to own a gun.
But since you asked…. The guy lost the right to own a gun because of the crimes HE committed. He deserves no special consideration because he now calls himself a man of God.
He’s still a piece of shit.
Pearls before swine, man.
👍
Exactly.
“In fact, they apparently lost one million dollars of jewelry in the armed robbery, which happened during a live streamed church service. One million dollars, as in $1,000,000, of jewelry that, from the sounds of it, was literally on their persons at the time of the robbery, which occurred while Whitehead was in front of his congregation preaching about lord knows what.”
A convicted felon ‘5 year prison sentence’ preacher up in front of the congregation composed of over 60% that make less than $40,000.00 per year putting their tithes in the collection plate, and has among its ‘members’ 20% ‘criminal gang’ type members.
I wonder where a convicted felon ‘5 year prison sentence’ preacher gets the money to live so notoriously ostentatiously?
He was a wanna-be politician.
Religion is where politics started.
.40 Cal- Actually, my friend, it is none of your business. But are you kidding me? Do you know how many ex-felons are millionaires? Legally achieved? There could be a lot of perfectly legitimate answers. Everything from somebody gifting him a large chunk of their multi-million powerball winnings or not understanding power of the tithe from a large flock, especially over years. But if you were a cop, I could understand the curiosity of the situation. If there was anything ever ‘shady’ in his lifestyle that could rise to a level of the current commission of a crime I’m sure others were equally suspicious and already looked into. All you have to do is have a good accountant and follow the well-established business model of the Church.
And just because he’s a man of the cloth doesn’t preclude him from owning a Contruction business on the side with lucrative city contracts. Lots of money there. And he was already deep into politics and if his flock voters loved him, and his ‘connections’ protected gim, he could do no wrong?
Again, it’s none of anybody’s business unless you have an OCD with extreme predictive crime prevention. Who is he hurting if nobody is even complaining?
Legally achieved? There could be a lot of perfectly legitimate answers.
Could be but there are not. Asshole ripped off parishioners, took one old lady for over 90 grand (her life savings) with the promise to renovate her home, never fixed the house, when she asked for her money back, he told her he considered it a “campaign contribution” to his run for Brooklyn borough President… Guys a scumbag, went to prison for fraud and identity theft. Some people believe that Whitehead’s “robbery” was an elaborate insurance scam while others believe this is just God’s way of making things right.
@jfkjr
Apparently you missed the sarchasim and thought I was really wondering.
‘The Leaders of Tomorrow International Ministeries Inc.’ (he is the owner). He has a reported net worth of ~$2,000,000 but has $1,000,000 in jewelry and a life style that’s valued at over $6,000,000.00. Has no other visible signs of income that accounts for the affluence supporting a life style of over $6,000,000.00.
There have been numerous lawsuits accusing him of walking off with large amounts of money from people he knew. Court records from New Jersey show he owes more than $400,000 in judgments to a construction company that built his house and the credit union that financed his Mercedes-Benz and Range Rover – he has dismisses these as victim-shaming and racist.
In 2005 he had a girlfriend that had access to customers’ credit reports through her job at a Long Island car dealership. Using personal data he pulled from her computer, he stole the identities of at least a dozen people and took out loans in their names and bought cars and motorcycles.
While waiting for trial (which happened in 2008) between 2005 and 2008 he engaged in a bunch of scams and grand larceny. He was supposedly working as a ‘mortgage broker’ but in 2006 filed for bankruptcy citing an income of $10,000 per month.
During his lengthy sermons at his small church he invites worshipers to “sow” with donations, starting at $1,000 or $500. When those amounts are not flowing he starts lowering the amounts, so apparently one can ‘sow’ for a lesser amount and reap the financial blessings he has except the only one that seems to be reaping such financial blessings in his church is him. But even at those amounts from his small church its unlikely to support his $6,000,000 life style. But he has also said he does not make money in his role as bishop, and it is unclear how he earns a living
He was convicted of 17 counts, mostly identity theft, and sentenced to 10 to 30 years in prison. He served 5, in July 2013 he was released with a glowing behavioral record. He had no income report-able since he filed for bankruptcy in 2006 until a few weeks later after he gets out of prison in 2013 the Leaders of Tomorrow Ministries was born, and suddenly a few months after that he is rolling in money.
‘The Leaders of Tomorrow International Ministeries Inc.’ is predicted to make less than $500,000 per year in revenue, but they will not publicly disclose its accountability and financial standing. It is, according to ‘The Leaders of Tomorrow International Ministeries Inc.’, funded by the public (donations).
In 2020, when a woman who had recently visited the church was recovering from surgery, Bishop Whitehead offered to help her buy a new home. The woman, Pauline Anderson, sent him $90,000 that she had withdrawn from her retirement account, according to a lawsuit. He texted her “I am a man of integrity and you will not lose”. She asked for her money back, but he said it was too late – it had already been invested. At the same time, according to the lawsuit, Bishop Whitehead was in contract to buy a palatial, $4.4 million house in Saddle River, N.J., with a pool, a gym and a wine cellar. In an interview he was asked about his income streams, he was vague saying “I’m in real estate investment and a pastor”. But how can that be? The only money he invested in real estate happened to have been $90,000.00 that was the same amount that Pauline Anderson had given him and he has said previously that he does not make any income in his Bishop role (pastor – he gave himself the title ‘Bishop’) and his only ‘real estate’ investment on record at the time was the contract to buy him a palatial, $4.4 million house in Saddle River, N.J., with a pool, a gym and a wine cellar.
So, no income streams that can support his financial affulence (at least non he wants to talk about and report for taxes), no explanation of his financial affluence over $6,000,000.00, a history, even recent, of apparently scamming and stealing from people, ignoring his debts … kinda makes me think there is a possibility his money is, well, I’ll just say, from ‘other sources’ not from the Lord.
So when a convicted felon, who has served a five year prison sentence, for ID theft and grand larceny, and has unexplained (and relatively dubious in terms of time span) financial affluence, and is still maybe doing some hanky panky with others money, attempts to use ‘political influence’ ‘friendship’ to get a firearms permit – it does kinda make one wonder.
Do you think I’m actually wondering?
The thieves got: A $75,000 Rolex watch, a $25,000 Episcopal ruby and diamond ring, a $75,000 Cavalier watch, a pair of $25,000 earrings, a $20,000 Episcopal diamond ring, a $20,000 diamond and emerald cross, a $10,000 Episcopal gold cross, and a $20,000 Episcopal cross were among the goods they stole. Total loot taken was valued $1,060,000.00.
A “pastor” losing 1M in jewelry makes me think he’s still a criminal.
Somehow a lot of “pastors” that serve underserved communities get very wealthy compared to more traditional preachers. We have the white non-felon version of this guy in Albany and well similar car much less jewelry but same seemingly self serving attitude. Little bit of nonprofit funding and political endorsement goes a long way.
A lil respect. Tht bro is a BISHOP. I guess he out ranks Rev Al, Jesse and Jeremiah Wright. I wonder if that title comes by purchase, trade, education, or do you have to wack the previous “Bishop”? Rank among whores.
See also Chief d Popo wearing multiple stars on their collar.
Well I guess he has insurance on the “Family Jewels”. Good thing they didn’t steal the Rolls Royce or might have had to take public transportation with all those sinners that ride it daily.
I know Jesus wants him to be rich on Earth as a reward for his faith, like it says in the Bible, “And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a ‘poor’ man to enter into the kingdom of God”.
I wish I could say, “Only in New York”, but Pastors who use the faithful to personally enrich themselves seem to be everywhere. The fools that give them money, need to had their head examined.
“No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.” – H. L. Mencken 1926
than for a ‘poor’ man to enter
Pretty sure that’s “RICH” man…
“Pretty sure that’s “RICH” man…”
The ” ” means snark, irony, intentional twisting of the words to make a point.
The ” ” means snark,
Sorry, must have been napping in creative writing the day the covered that one… I was told the preferred versions are italics, capitalization or quotes (not exactly 2 quotes AFTER the remark). You can use italicization when you want to convey sarcasm quickly in writing. You might also prefer to put the sarcastic word or phrase in quote marks to highlight that you are not being sincere about it. So, now I am aware of YOUR way to show sarcasm and I “DEFINITELY will pay CLOSER attention in the future”
Note that at the time, “eye of a needle” was a figure of speech for a narrow passage between two boulders, a tight squeeze for a laden camel.
So a rich man entering Heaven is a very difficult feat, not an abject impossibility.
Yes. The camel can fit through more easily when unladen. Hence, Acts 20:35 saying that there are more blessings for giving, rather than receiving.
This dude, though slender, appears to be one heavily loaded camel.
Another DGU by an ordinary citizen stopping an ‘active shooter’. They rarely make the news but…
80-Year-Old Store Owner Defends Against Multiple Armed Robbers With His Trusty Shotgun
https://concealednation.org/2022/08/80-year-old-store-owner-defends-against-multiple-armed-robbers-with-his-trusty-shotgun/
Nationwide, ordinary (not law enforcement or armed security) law abiding citizens stop an ‘active shooter’ ~ 38,000 annually in public places like stores or other mass-people gathering places.
The FBI defines an “active shooter” as one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area. Implicit in this definition is the shooter’s use of one or more firearms. However, the FBI does not apply the definition except for mass-shootings or where the shooter was stopped by being shot even though under the definition ordinary (not law enforcement or armed security) law abiding citizens stop ‘active shooters’ overall on a pretty routine basis across the nation with most stopped before they can fire.
Glad to see the owner is expected to make a full recovery from the heart attack. Shotgun wasn’t an ideal choice (multiple people) but seems it was effective enough for the situation (known and available to the user).
Blew the dudes arm half off, ideal choice in THAT situation.
The others ran is what I am getting at. So long as 1 attacker or the others run a shotgun is awesome it’s when you need to keep shooting that the limitations of equipment and amount of training to overcome them start becoming issues.
The video is all over the internet, it hasn’t been suppressed.
Watch it with the sound turned up, very satisfying squalling from the wounded perp. The cops probably heard it in the station before the phone call.
Even by GVA’s bogus definition, it’s not a potential active shooter, mass casualty event, mass shooting, etc. I don’t even think there were 4 people in the store — his accomplices remained outside.
It was a failed armed robbery, and good for the owner for defending his life. It’s a rare hold up in that an AR was used. Not very subtle walking into a store with one, but the robbers probably weren’t valedictorians. Watch with the sound on so you get to hear the robber scream, “He shot my arm off!”
mass casualty event, mass shooting are different definitions.
It is an ‘active shooter’ though under the FBI definition. To anti-gun its not an ‘active shooter’ unless the shooter is stopped in place or killed, if the shooter runs off its not an ‘active shooter’ to anti-gun.
Most of these are stopped by ordinary (not law enforcement or armed security) law abiding citizens simply brandishing/presenting so the bad guys run off and no shots are fired by the defender. Defenders in all annual DGU (about 7,000 times daily nationwide) only actually fire less than 5% of the time, most DGU the bad guy runs off when the defender brandishes/presents/(sometimes warns).
The store owner firing is a rare occurrence.
The strangest part is that bass track playing in the background. The robbery wasn’t surprising.
Sue the stinking Democrat.
And this so-called “pastor” exposes(as if the world didn’t know)why the black church et all is so effed up. A church on every block & nobody preaches the real gospel(at least in Chiraq). Yer pal da mayor won’t give you a special dispensation. Tough. Hire bodyguards😃🙄
I can submit the paperwork and become a fully ordained minister for the Flying Spaghetti Monster what other federal laws should I be able to bypass. I mean My deity fly’s so maybe I just ignore inconvenient FAA rules I don’t like.
Now in New York all animals are equal but some are more equal than others, so maybe if the Pastor in question took that 1 million and rather than buy jewelry he donated to certain people he would already have his exoneration and his permit.
Rookie mistake, he just needs to pay off the proper authority in the permitting process. And use the tried and true, under-the-table bribery stream that has been set up, easy peasey.
With that kind of wealth, he could follow Bloombucks’ example and hire some armed, retired cops to follow him around. If that’s too rich for his blood, he could follow Chicago antigun priest Michel Pfleger’s method of hiring local thugs as armed security. https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/former-staffer-of-father-michael-snuffy-pfleger-charged-with-murder-in-chicago/
It is illegal for a convicted felon to be protected by armed guards. A decade ago, the feds arrested a bunch of off duty cops who where hired by some rapper thug in Las Vegas. The feds arrested them, called theirs bosses and let them go. Lesson Learned.
That being said, For a long time, New York Police ran a “Taxi Service”, where they would get paid to drive around criminals in their police cars, so they could conduct their business under police protection while visiting New York. Probably still happens today?
This guy is a moron you don’t publicly ask for a favor like that. He obviously knows nothing about how NYC corruption works. You keep things like that on the down low.
Looks like the good Reverend was convicted of robbing people. He just didn’t use a weapon. Is that poetic justice, or what? And it was in a church. I’d like to think even God smirked a little at that one.
Smart Guy, he figured out the correct equation; Rob a Church, go to jail, Own a church and rob everyone.
I do agree, that after you serve your time and complete parole/probation, you should be able to have all your civil rights restored. The rich who are convicted of securities fraud still get to keep their gun rights and can still get a passport and travel abroad. One rule for me and another rule for thee.
Clearly, I spent way too many years in the wrong business since my chains are rusty instead of gold, but my conscience wouldn’t let me fleece my flock like that anyway.
On a separate note what kind of idiot buys the worst-built BMW on the market?
Someone with more money than brains.
Pick your friends wisely sir.
All this article says to me is that BS is part and parcel (and pastor) of the type of prevailing thinking that permeates NYC. This is exactly why they cannot see the evil of the Democrat party right in front of their faces. It’s been engrained. This is a place where they cheer for killing children AS they are born.
“… he, as a member of the clergy, should receive a special dispensation for a concealed carry permit in New York City.”
I see what you did there Jeremy!
Well played my friend. Well played.
So much for the Supreme Court Decision on concealed carry in New York, they have just ignored it.
Chicago tried to ignore the court for a while. Now they have shall issue. NYC will fall in line. They’ll have no choice when we go constitutional carry nationwide.
Face it, dacian, you Nazi’s lost. Again.
Felons are prohibited first under federal law. Mayor has nothing to do with it. Talk tot he governor about a pardon for his crimes.
No blanket FEDERAL ban on felons having guns until 1968 . States did have some. Back in the day, you did your time and got ALL your rights back .
It mighta been reasonable to bar only violent felons – lotta nit picky laws make a misdemeanor in one state a felony in another .
I don’t claim a religion. I’m not opposed. Every one should make their own choice. But I am a cynical person by nature. I don’t trust any .org that is man made and man lead.
The only .orgs I have ever joined are the NRA(sorry I ever did) the VFW and the American Legion. The last two I joined for the cheap drinks. I haven’t been in a ‘meeting’ in decades.
@MADDMAXX”
So, now I am aware of YOUR way to show sarcasm…”
It’s not “my way”, but “a way”. Difficult to demonstrate air quotation marks in a written document. To be clear, I rarely, if ever, use sarc/snark symbols or punctuation.
BTW, I was not being critical, but pointing out a reasonable explanation for the substitution of words being intentional.
Chill, buddy, chill.
Truly – it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God.
@Dude
“You give up your rights when you become a criminal.”
We aren’t discussing loss of freedom during incarceration, but after. The Constitution doesn’t provide “except for” exclusions bearing on free citizens. Every gun control law restricting free citizens is an exception to constitutionally protected human rights; none more valid than any other (all exceptions are predicated on “common sense”).
Carving out exceptions for felony convictions is, indeed, “I believe in the Second Amendment, but…” There is no valid logic in making a conviction a stealth life sentence (one for which the politicians avoid the cost of permanent incarceration). Doing so is simply pre-crime punishment based on “might do something illegal in the future”. Everyone “might do something illegal in the future”.
There is zero authority in the constitution for crippling a persons natural, human and civil rights after a person has completely served the adjudicated sentence and probation. Doing so is evidence of a tolerance for creating and maintaining second-class citizenship for some people. Make everything a felony, and the public is effectively disarmed (and don’t think the left isn’t contemplating that).
“The Constitution doesn’t provide “except for” exclusions bearing on free citizens.”
If they’re still being punished for their crime, then they aren’t free citizens. Just because you’re forgiven or did some time in the slammer, doesn’t mean you avoid future consequences. You reap what you sow.
“Make everything a felony, and the public is effectively disarmed (and don’t think the left isn’t contemplating that).”
Then wouldn’t it be a good idea to be more specific about what type of felony was committed?
“The Constitution doesn’t provide “except for” exclusions bearing on free citizens.”
‘If they’re still being punished for their crime, then they aren’t free citizens.’
– Agree. We have been talking about people who finished the complete sentence applied, or modified.
“Make everything a felony, and the public is effectively disarmed (and don’t think the left isn’t contemplating that).”
‘Then wouldn’t it be a good idea to be more specific about what type of felony was committed?’
– Why should the type of felony be considered? Once the punishment is complete, the person is a free citizen, or not; nothing in between. As the saying goes, “if someone has completed a jail sentence, and are too dangerous to possess firearms (or vote), such people are too dangerous to be freed from prison; the applied sentence should be ‘life without parole’.
When we say there should be “common sense” infringements on the Second Amendment, then we are just the same as the anti-gun mob; we pick the infringements we like, they pick the infringements they like. The reach of the infringements are merely distinctions without a difference.
“Why should the type of felony be considered?”
Because some are worse than others. The reason they can’t vote is because (for example) when there’s a district attorney race, and one of the candidates promises not to prosecute criminals, who do you think the criminals would vote for? Who would the sex criminals vote for when a governor promises men can share a public bathroom with girls?
Being imprisoned is not for the purpose of rehabbing the criminal. It’s for the purpose of segregating them from law abiding society and punishing them for their crimes. Getting out of prison means getting a second chance to participate in free society. In my opinion, they should have to prove themselves. They can’t prove themselves while they’re in prison. There should be a specific path laid out for them to do so. That should be an incentive for them to behave. Another crime should result in a longer sentence.
@J. Christ
“Learn to read. I never said anything about his right to own a gun.”
Owning a gun is not the only matter at issue. There are also loss of voting rights, and restrictions from positions of trust. No matter the restriction, there is no constitutional justification/authority for it.
“But since you asked…. The guy lost the right to own a gun because of the crimes HE committed. He deserves no special consideration because he now calls himself a man of God.”
Agreed, he deserves no special consideration, and should not be left with asking for special consideration. After completing the adjudicated sentence, all his natural, human and civil rights should be restored.
“He’s still a piece of shit.”
A statement Jesus Christ would never make. Your statement seems to boil down to, “People whom I believe are pieces of shit are not deserving of full rights under the constitution.” Do you have an objective standard that defines, without manipulation, what, exactly constitutes a “piece of shit”? If I consider everyone but me to be a POS, is that justification for denying any of them their rights guaranteed under the constitution?
Sam I Am
Why did you post your reply as a new post?
When he committed a felony he proved he was untrustworthy and should not own a gun. Have you been paying attention to the high crime rates especially in the big cities? You sound like the DAs that believe there should be no consequences for criminals.
Criminals should pay a price for their criminal actions or they will continue to create more victims. Committing felonies has consequences, no more guns for you.
You want to own a gun, don’t be a fucking criminal. There are already too many criminals running around with guns fucking it up for everyone else.
And a piece of shit is someone who scams people in the name of God.
“Criminals should pay a price for their criminal actions or they will continue to create more victims. Committing felonies has consequences, no more guns for you.”
Didn’t intend to use a new “reply”; my bad.
Yes, crime should have consequences. Those are called “sentences”, the details of which vary.
Freedom and liberty are not safe; shouldn’t be. If a criminal is to be dealt a life sentence, then the public should have the guts to put all the life sentences into law, not backdoor punishment with a stealth punishment.
As to soft DA’s…I am a 2A absolutist, and recognize the implications. If crime is to deny full rights to anyone, then that person should be made to be locked away for life. Pre-punishment laws (laws that punish someone for acts they may commit, but have not) should not be permitted, condoned, or endorsed. I can build a case that the Second Amendment should be abolished, because anyone could commit a crime at anytime in the future; there is no possible guarantee they will not. I could also build the case that all persons should be assigned a jail cell upon birth, because they might commit a crime at some point in life.
The overall message is “Be consistent” in thinking. If “Shall Not Be Infringed” is to have meaning, it applies all the time (unless incarcerated…which I disagree with), everywhere, or it doesn’t. To claim that there are “common sense” exceptions is to declare that we approve of our exceptions, but not the exceptions of political opponents (whose “exceptions” are infringements on 2A).
If consequences for committing a felony can wiped away, there is no incentive to do the right thing. Part of sentencing results sometimes in restrictions for life.
Getting arrested and let go the same day produces recidivism and more (and escalating) crime. The people that suffer are innocent victims of a system that does hold criminals accountable.
There is a contract between citizens and society that protects citizens and maintain order. If you break that contract, you lose certain rights. The idea that every crime requires a life sentence or those rights are automatically restored is foolish.
No one is infringing on anyone’s rights when a criminal CHOSES to commit a crime.
The FBI director, just yesterday, warned of rising violent crime and attacks on police. Now is not the time to be soft on crime, it’s time to fuck some bad guys up.
I believe Matthew 7: 15 – 23 applies here.
It appears to be so, especially if you read it in Peterson’s Message, a rather lively paraphrase.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%207&version=MSG
Additional advice if you attend a church like this don’t just walk away, run, Run like your soul depends on it because it does.
@Craig in IA
“Sam, you probably have the same POV on felons voting as well(?).”
Correct. If the public wants a life sentence, then make that the punishment, and keep “dangerous” people (dangerous because they are bad guys, and might commit a crime in the future) in jail.
“I’m a bit torn when a convict actually serves out an entire sentence with no time off for various deals, AND if said now ex-crook has made restitution for all financial considerations to both the victim and the taxpayers for providing lawyer and “room and board” while serving sentence.”
Jail sentences are like the constitution; amendable. If law provides a mechanism for modifying criminal sentences, then address the law. The person in jail is not responsible for the modifications being part of the law. Once completing the applied sentencing requirement, a person is a free person once again. Otherwise, we are creating second class citizens, and feeling good about ourselves.
“Honestly, however, few convicts either serve a full sentence or are even charged for the severity of their crime…”
A “deal”, or later amendment of the adjudicated sentence becomes the “full sentence”. As above, it is illogical, to blame the person serving the sentence for the fact that amendments to a sentence exist. Go after the politicians who created the sentencing rules.
The conflict between justice and revenge has been problematic for humans since “like forever”.
“I’m a bit torn when a convict actually serves out an entire sentence…”
That sentence would be way longer (possibly life) if 2nd A rights were returned to felons upon release from prison.
I would bet if felons we’re given a choice of ‘return to society with full rights’ or ‘return to society with restricted rights’, most would choose the latter. Knowing the release with full rights’ would be a much more severe sentence.
Not exactly the sort to get much sympathy if he decides to be Bernie Goetz 2.0.
I don’t think that scam artist con men should be carrying weapons around. The dude is no more a ‘man of the cloth’ than I am. He is a convict, though. We already know it’s usually a bad idea to allow a convict to have deadly weapons.
TWO SIDES TO THA COIN .
FELON NOW WANTS PERMIT TO ARM HIMSELF , DON’T DO THE CRIME IF DON’T WANT TO DO THE TIME .
JUST REWARD GOT ROBBED . KNOWS WHAT FEELS LIKE . GO GET A REAL JOB.
EGGHEAD PERSON .
How cool.
Just because you’ve served your time and walk out of the prison doesn’t mean your a free man.
Being a felon means more then not just getting a gunm.
It means denial for most employment, housing, voting rights, loans.
So what’s a felons options?
Your sentence is 10 years imprisonment and a life sentence in society.
Yet so many roll those dice and take their chances. 🤔
The big city Dems love to perpetuate it too.
Kick dads out of the homes, overwhelmed moms let the streets raise the kids.
“Your sentence is 10 years imprisonment and a life sentence in society.”
Then why not just keep felons in jail. That will prove useful when almost all “crime” is declared a felony.
And while in prison, each person should have an organ inventory taken, and prisoners be the first source for organ harvesting to feed the need for transplants. Some prisoners may never be harvested, some only a little, some completely harvested.
Such a system will see to it that free individuals, free family members, and even free strangers will not have to sacrifice themselves that others might live.
Even the above, however, doesn’t get at the root cause of crime…criminal law. No criminal law, no crime. It is as simple as that.
So what’s a felons options?
Apparently return to crime or join the clergy, which based on this story might be basically the same thing.
Oh well, if he gets nailed on tax evasion next I’ll know he’s at least keeping with the gospel in terms of Caesar…
@ James Campbell
“Felons don’t get to work AGAINST the will of ‘We the People’, than retain all the rights that group enjoys.”
Yes, that is the way things are; doesn’t make it “right”. If people are to be denied rights, after completing an applied sentence for crime, then such persons should be removed from society, permanently.
I point again…the Second Amendment doesn’t contain a word of exception.
Let’s push this to the next logical point….a person who commits “hate” speech, should be denied the right to speak, anywhere, on any subject, via any means, because they committed the felony of “hate” speech. Persons who are convicted for the felony of “hate” speech, “…don’t get to work AGAINST the will of ‘We the People’ (hate speech laws are the will of the people), then retain all the rights that group enjoys.”
Maybe this….persons who commit the felony of arson against a dwelling forfeit their 3rd Amendment right against quartering troops in their home because persons who commit the felony of arson against a home, “..don’t get to work AGAINST the will of ‘We the People’ (arson laws are the will of the people), then retain all the rights that group enjoys.”
Maybe this….a person who lies to authorities (police, grand jury, DA, Congress, etc.) commits the felony of lying to authorities. Such persons forfeit their 5th Amendment right, because those who commit the felony of lying to authorities,
and “..don’t get to work AGAINST the will of ‘We the People’ (laws regarding lying to authority are the will of the people), then retain all the rights that group enjoys.”
The life sentence of a felon creates a category of second class citizens, and makes possession of firearms, voting, and several other legal pursuits second class rights. A life sentence should be straight up a life sentence, not some sort of backdoor evasion of the responsibility to declare that a life sentence is actually a life sentence.
Yeah, but who else is gonna be one of Kamala’s slave laborers?
@Montana Actual
“Isn’t it technically a form of rehab though? So if served, then you should be able to earn your “rights” back?”
Seems that if rights are to be earned, then those “rights” are merely privileges granted by government.
(did not quite understand some of the rest of your comment; BTW, how is being an absolutist about rights also equated to bootlicker?)
@James Campbell
“Spend a few years behaving like a responsible and law abiding citizen”
Isn’t that what happens with time in jail/prison; acting like a law abiding citizen? What is the justification for demanding an additional period of being law abiding? What is the unassailable standard for the length of additional time?
@Dude
“Unless they’re serving life in prison, they need a defined path back to losing the felon tag and everything that goes with it.”
Isn’t that what serving an adjudicated sentence is all about? Behave while incarcerated and on probation? Doing so should be the path tor restored rights; the end of it.
Crappy DAs are a political matter, subject to vote count. If the people of a jurisdiction permit DAs to screw around with bail, trial, convictions, it is because it is the “will of the people”. Refusing to vote out a corrupt system is also the “will of the people”.
It’s not simply a local political matter though.
Convicted in NY, move to AZ, right or wrong AZ still sees you as a felon even though they had nothing to do with the original adjudication nor any political hanky panky that might have gotten you that status undeservedly.
And I rather doubt AZ would be keen to right the scales for you right-quick just because that would be a solid thing for them to do.
“And I rather doubt AZ would be keen to right the scales for you right-quick just because that would be a solid thing for them to do.”
Yeah, there’s that dual sovereignty thing. Reckon I always think in terms of national legislation to prohibit stealth life sentences.
A clergyperson wearing $1,000,00 in jewelry????
Speaking as one myself, there is NO reason for someone of the collar living that lifestyle!
Unfortunately, This is one of the outliers (or out LIAR) that gives the man or woman of the cloth a bad rep in the world.
Wonder when the last time he rubbed elbows with the poor or outcast???
🙁
A clergyperson wearing $1,000,00 in jewelry????
He wasn’t wearing a million in jewels, his ol lady was sporting about 400 grand of the total.
Goldlyness is next to godliness, I guess.
Does NY not have a way for this guy to petition a court for restoration of rights?
So BISHOP WHITEHEAD has reverted to type and now want’s a license to kill people, because thar t’s what license for SELF DEFENCE is rather, than as a CHRISTIAN and Man Of The Cloth, ‘Turn the Other Cheek as his Holy Book demands. I am reminded of ‘Leopards and Spots’.
I see from mother comments that there w exceptions to ccovicted felons not being allowed license. Why should being a rather wayward, and not very Christian, BISHOP be an exception.
” …now want’s a license to kill people, because thar t’s [sic] what license for SELF DEFENCE is… ”
I know that this is your schtick, but you’re wrong again, as usual.
A concealed weapon is used to defend oneself from a threat of deadly force. Most DGUs in the US do not involve firing the weapon; in the relatively few cases where shots are fired, they do not result in fatalities. In the fewer cases that do involve bodily injury or death, the chances of the defender being injured are greatly reduced over those where he is unarmed.
These are easily researched statistics and are not open to your interpretation or alteration to suit your purposes of discussion. But they do bear repetition, as long as you continue to promote your falsehoods and speculation.
Correction: “in the relatively few cases where shots are fired, they most often do not result in fatalities.”
@Hannibal
“The People” under the auspices of the state can punish with a suspension of gun rights no less than they can punish with an active prison sentence or fine.”
I think you just put strength in the legitimacy of the gun-grabbers: guns are too dangerous for “the people” to possess and use.
The idea of a stealth life sentence is not justice; it is revenge.
@J. Christ
Yes, “catch and release” programs do nothing to interfere with crime. We are, instead, discussing stealth revenge against a citizen. However, many support the idea that a convicted felon is a second class citizen (which is not a citizen at all).
If “we the people” want life sentences for crimes, then let that be a sentence recommendation for government to defend. Stealth life sentences are the coward’s way of imposing a life sentence, without having to prove that such is justified.
As it is, we might just as well re-institute the scarlet letter.
Any sort of appeal to government to “restore rights” lowers a “right” to a privilege. Government cannot issue a person “rights” at birth. How is it that government should be in a position to “restore” (re-issue) those rights it couldn’t grant in the first place?
There seems to be a couple discussions going here, so I am going to make a couple comments and then let it go.
first, I ran across this incident a couple days ago on another news site. It was reported there as $500,00 in jewelry stolen. Now it’s claimed as a million or more. Insurance scam?
Next is the issue of gun permit because he is buddies with the Police Chief, or Mayor. Guess political connections don’t always work in NYC.
Next issue is his status as a convicted felon. He was originally sentenced to 25 to 30 years. Released after 5 years. Guess being a self styled preacher has it’s advantages. Should have done the full sentence as required by the court. Do the crime, do the time. Every day of it.
On the issue of felons being returned to full civil rights status, for non violent crimes, no problem. You paid the assessed price, restitution, court costs/fines, you get your civil rights restored and you are square with the world. for violent crimes, same deal with a small addition of a couple years of probation after release from prison to prove you can live within the basic rules of civil society, and you get your full civil rights restored. Record closed.
Or so I believe it should be.
@Henry
“Should felons get their 2A rights back? That’s a separate question.”
Actually, the question of getting 2A rights back is at the heart of the incident. If felons did/do automatically get their 2A rights back, there would be no bar against felons seeking to purchase a firearm. As such, the incident reported would not have happened, or, at worst, the request to have a firearm would depend on the state law regarding either “may issue” (pre-Bruen), or “shall issue”, post-Bruen.
guy sounds a bit like Reverend Rich from “Car Wash”…..
Comments are closed.