How Peanut the Squirrel Might Get Revenge on New York’s Gun Control Laws

Skip to comments.

Posted on 11/26/2024 1:22:23 PM PST by george76

A few weeks ago, Peanut the Squirrel was murdered by New York state officials. The great minds who run the Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) would probably object to me saying this and perhaps even claim that I’m libeling them for expressing my opinion, but let’s be real here. They took an animal that wasn’t harming anyone and killed it. Killing without some good reason is murder.

Sure, the law in New York can and no doubt will be used as an excuse, but if the goal is to protect wildlife, killing a tame squirrel makes no sense. Hitler’s concentration camps were “legal” too, so let’s not pretend that law is any substitute for morality here.

If that act of naked aggression and intimidation wasn’t heinous enough, now New York state officials are trying to charge Peanut’s owner, Mark Longo, with a firearm crime. Details are still pretty sketchy, but while conducting a search using with their morally illegitimate warrant, agents of the government who were ostensibly there to seize a couple of wild animals (don’t forget about the over victim in this sad story, Fred the raccoon) came across a firearm in the home.

The way it the gun has been described in media, it’s likely an AR or AK pistol of some kind (short barrel, no stock). Under New York law, that constitutes an “assault weapon.” Now, the state is considering charging the owner with a crime for possessing it without permission.

You can learn more about this in this video by attorney Mark W. Smith at the Four Boxes Diner

. . .

As Smith points out, search warrants for a squirrel aren’t supposed to allow a for a search for weapons, but if in the normal process of searching for the animals, agents of the state come across evidence of another crime, it can be used as evidence. But there needs to be a presumption of unlawfulness to begin with before there’s any basis for seizure, further search, or further warrants. The mere presence of a firearm can’t be presumed to be illegal and checking on whether the firearm is legal could violate the Fourth Amendment.

Legalities aside, though there’s a bigger question here: is it smart for New York law enforcement officials to pursue a gun charge against Longo? It seems the state is wondering the same thing and has, at least for now, tapped the brakes on little PR disaster.

There’s no way cops to charge every person who’s ever committed a crime. That would be impossible. Resources are limited and we expect the government to exercise basic prosecutorial discretion to focus on crimes and conduct that are really important. That discretion can be used for just about any reason, with good cops almost always choosing to not bring the legal hammer down on individuals over small, inconsequential things like possessing a squirrel without a permit.

With all of the bad press the state has already suffered for the immoral act (again…my opinion) of murdering an innocent squirrel, it makes no sense to kick this hornet’s nest. After all, they can expect not only the squirrel’s 500,000 fans to pitch in on Longo’s legal defense, but because they’d be trying to enforce a law that plainly violates the Heller and NYSRPA v Bruen opinions, bringing in just about every pro-gun organization in the country. So, even more bad press heading into a fight that could go all the way to the Supreme Court…all because of a squirrel.

...

The smart move here be to enforce the state’s ludicrously restrictive firearms laws very carefully, use them only against dirtbags, gang-bangers, murderers, and people who talk on their phones in movie theaters. That wouldn’t keep those plainly unconstitutional laws on the books forever, but it might make them last longer than if they go up against a sympathetic defendant like Mark Longo. But, rushing into this action against Peanut’s family while screaming, “LEEEROOY JENNNKIIINNNNS!” doesn’t make a lot of sense strategically.

If New York’s powers that be really are stupid enough to go after Peanut’s family on this — and there’s no reason to believe they aren’t — they not only will get their anti-gun butts handed to them in court, but they’ll deserve to be ravaged by all of the furies of PR hell they’ll raise along the way.

Either way, it seems that Peanut may get the last laugh.

Hey! FReepers!
Help Fill The Tank!
How About It? Huh?
It Ain't Askin' Too Much
Ya Know....

Click here: to donate by Credit Card

Or here: to donate by PayPal

Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794

Thank you very much and God bless you.

1 posted on 11/26/2024 1:22:23 PM PST by george76

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson