Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Follow PostSports on Twitter and Facebook  |  Newsletters: Redskins and Sports  

Plaxico Burress' punishment doesn't fit the crime

My former teammate while with the New York Giants Plaxico Burress was denied a work furlough Tuesday. The state Department of Correctional Services said the serious nature of his November 2008 crime led them to turning down his request for a second time. Burress can appeal but otherwise can't reapply for a work furlough until June 6, 2011.

This was a disappointing piece of news to me; he was my teammate and we are family friends. I'm still confused as to how our legal system operates sometimes. I know I'm sounding like a Plaxico apologist, and I'm okay with that. Burress, in my opinion, is not a criminal.

I find it strange that an area of New York City full of popular night spots, where you can easily see the biggest names in entertainment and sports pulling up to these places, allegedly has had tons of robberies and shootings, some inside the clubs some outside. I clearly recall, during the short time I was there, my then-teammate and Giant safety Gibril Wilson getting robbed at gunpoint for all his jewelry before he even got out of his car to go into the club.

Think it can't happen to you? Well, not long before Plaxico's night club incident, Ahmad Bradshaw, a Giants running back, was robbed at gunpoint right in front of his apartment.

Look, I understand Plaxico was breaking the law when he decided to enter the city limits with a firearm. I get that, and I'm of the thought process that if I feel like I have to carry a weapon somewhere, that's a place that I do not need to be. But let's face the facts: Muggings and robberies take place in big cities all the time, and for what it's worth -- although I didn't agree with Plaxico's decision to carry the gun -- I understand completely that some people do not believe in being victimized by these miscreants of our society.

Again I know Plax. He came from nothing, and when I mean nothing, his mom was all he and his two brothers had and she supported three boys with a gas station clerk paycheck in Norfolk, Va. Someone who knows what that feels like to be "po" -- not poor but "po" -- would clearly understand why he was illegally carrying a gun while out in the city.

I believe that people know and understand that we all are targets of thieves one time or another in our lives, and although Plaxico Burress did indeed break the law, we all know he was carrying that gun to protect himself not to rob or hurt somebody, my question to you would be this: Does a person that clearly had no criminal intent while bearing arms deserve two years of prison time?

In a society where people commit worse crimes and get little to no jail time, my answer would be no -- regardless of whether the person in question is a former teammate.

By Lavar Arrington  |  September 1, 2010; 11:59 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: DeAngelo Hall speaks his mind, but is this good?
Next: Redskins Insider Live webcast

Comments

True. He should have probably invested in a holster though.

Posted by: CarterHutch | September 1, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

I agree completely. It's true, you can be robbed anywhere, at any given time. Look at former Giants, as you said. Or look at the botched robbery IN THE HOME of the late Sean Taylor. A player shouldn't be restricted from having any kind of life... even the best and safest clubs are targets to get hit. Plaxico could have been robbed shopping in his own neighborhood, or traveling to practice. I do believe he needed to be punished for his breaking a crime, but the punishment doesn't fit the crime, like you said. A fine, community service, public speaking... those would have all been suitable... but two years for carrying a gun out of fear of ending up like countless other athletes who get robbed (and oftentimes with their wife and children right there with them)... I understand completely his desire to carry a gun for protection and self-defense. It's an amendment... we have the right to bear arms for the same reasons Plaxico wished to bear his.

Posted by: SlyStilla | September 1, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

LaVar,

The same circumstances that make Plaxico a target, mean that Plax has to hold himself up to a higher standard.

I agree that 2 years is harsh, but it is an example of the system holding Plaxico to the higher standard that he should have imposed upon himself.

Unfair? Yeah, but he the scrutiny comes with the fame and money.

Thanks for the thought-provoking post.

Posted by: Wemiss21 | September 1, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

I understand the need to stay safe due to being a target. However, there are laws and rules in place for a reason. Just b/c an athlete or other famous person feels threatened, does not give them a free pass to circumvent the law. If Plax was that concerned for his safety, then why go to a bar in NYC? Why not invite some friends over to his house and drink? Why not go to a more low-key establishment? Why not hire a bodyguard? Why not go to a nightclub outside NYC where he could have an armed body guard?

There were just so many other options he had. His negligent behavior darn near killed someone. If that had happened would you still be so quick to say he shouldn't have gotten in trouble b/c he felt he could be a victim of robbery? I hope not.

If you choose to ignore the law, then you are subject to pay the consequences just like the rest of us. Po, rich, athlete or regular citizen- we are all subject to follow the law and are all subject to the punishments if we break that law. I don't feel sorry for Plax at all, and I sure don't feel like the punishment is too harsh.

Posted by: LJ331 | September 1, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

your so off base here, insane. He shot himself, what a dope, goes to show he shouldn't have had it on him, get a body guard.

Posted by: shnooogen | September 1, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Wemiss21

I would agree with you if this was not the same NYC that had no problem aquitting a group of police officers who open fire on an unarmed man in his car and shot over 50 rounds into his car and him coming from a strip club. What standard are the NYC police department held to? Apparently a lower one than an NFL football player. We all need to be held to Plaxico's standard.

Posted by: ged0386 | September 1, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Dick Cheney shot a man in the face while hunting. It was not even investigated. I guess Plaxico is held to a higher standard than the former Vice President of the United states.

Posted by: ged0386 | September 1, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Didnt Plaxico bring a gun to a NYC night club and shoot himself with it? How did he shoot himself? Did the gun just go off by itself? He is a dummy. Who shot Plaxico? Oh Plaxico shot Plaxico. He is too dumb to be out of jail.

Posted by: timruiz | September 1, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

I haved to Agree 2 years is harsh, and it seems like to me Big BEN gets away with everything.

Posted by: teddywjohns | September 1, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

LaVar, I love you, but please get a good proof reader - "barring" arms - *bearing arms* ...

Rules are Rules - but NYC authorities are not catching the ultimate criminals packing and robbing citizens. Detente is a powerful tool - concealed weapon permits should be permitted to those going through many hours of training to go along with a stringent need to carry.

Posted by: terptek | September 1, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

I agree with you 100%! They held Plax at a higher standard because of his public statue, which is unfair. People always point out don't go if you have to carry a weapon. But this guy is a young man and I don't feel he should be a prisoner of his own success. Everyone judges these guys as if they were not 22 or 25 years old before. As if they never wanted to go to a club and have a little fun. It is completely unfair to act as if because someone has money and fame that they can not make a mistake because after all these guys are still human beings. Who will make mistakes as we all do on a day to day basis.

Posted by: troach1800 | September 1, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Excellent post, LaVar. While I don't agree with all of it, your larger point that Plax didn't have any violent criminal intent and the oftentimes unfair disparity in sentencing is well taken. While I also generally agree that one should follow the precept of "don't go to places where you need a gun," sometimes that's just not possible. I'm a Virginia concealed carry permit holder and a third-year law student at the University of Louisville in Kentucky (Virginia and Kentucky have reciprocity of laws when it comes to concealed carry so my license is good here just the same as a Kentucky license-holder's would be good in Virginia). I have participated in the shooting sports for 20 years and take the rights and, just as important, the responsibilities of gun ownership seriously. I carry a concealed firearm everywhere I go - where it is legal to do so. The rub lies in the fact that the one place I spend the majority of my time - campus - does not allow me to exercise those rights. In fact, I can't even secure my sidearm in my truck safe before walking to class because the parking lot is part of the university. Without getting into a full debate on banning lawful carry on campus, my point is that my walk from that parking lot to the law school is about a third of a mile and often in the early hours of the morning or late hours of night. I can count on half of one hand the number of times I have seen a campus police officer in that vicinity. And, on average, once every three weeks or so my cell phone buzzes with a text from our campus security notification system saying there has been yet another armed robbery right in that same vicinity. While infuriating though, I have never once brought my sidearm onto campus property because it's against the law. The irony that those laws only seem to prevent law-abiding people like me from carrying firearms on campus would be comical if it wasn't such a potentially deadly situation. But the thing to do is get such idiotic laws changed - not break them. Lobby your politicians, join a local firearms advocacy and/or shooting sports group or a national one like the NRA. I respect and understand that high-profile athletes are at a higher risk of having a crime committed against them. And I feel that unless the government is going to guarantee my safety I shouldn't be denied the means to ensure it myself. But these issues have to be resolved through a combination of your common-sense "steer-clear" advice as well as changing the laws to let us protect ourselves - with the proper training and sense of responsibility to do so in the correct manner. Unfortunately for Plax he failed to do any of those and now he finds himself subject to both the justice system and the politicians that want to make him an example within it.

Posted by: birk1666 | September 1, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Well, an already messed up society would be even more messed up if everybody were permitted to carry guns around to protect themselves. I've always been skeptical of that guns to protect myself idea. A man needs a gun to protect himself and his family unless he's a convicted felon then his family dosen't count. What a crock!!

Posted by: MHEDRLT | September 1, 2010 2:42 PM | Report abuse

No a person with no criminal intent does not deserve two years in prison for carrying a firearm.

Furthermore, the reason why you see the kind of crime rates that you do in places like New York City is because of these insane laws that severly punish people who are doing nothing more than trying to protect themselves.

Posted by: CapsNut | September 1, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

News flash you are wrong and it could have easily been someone dead because of what Plax did.

When someone does something illegal and pleads guilty to the charge there is no middle ground - they are a criminal.

I strongly suspect one of the reasons he is being turned down for work furlough is the poor logic and attitude that what he did was no big deal.

This was not just that he was carrying a gun illegally. It was not properly registered and due to poor handling of the gun it was fired. This could have easily killed Plax or anyone else nearby and that is what makes this a very serious crime. He is lucky that they did not charge him with reckless endangerment or some other crime.

Your sad commentary that this is no big deal and the BS excuses you give for why it is understandable are predictable. The he's a victim of his up bringing and fears for his riches because he was blessed with athletic talent are laughable excuses if they were not so pathetic.

It's the same BS over an over about how society is trying to punish the ENTITLED celebrity - so we should look the other way.

With thinking like that it's no wonder you failed to come close to the hype you received when you were drafted. Instead of working and studying hard you must have felt entitled to a Hall of Fame Career - or does this warped thinking come from one too many hits to the head on the field?

Posted by: Hornet77 | September 1, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Totally agree Lavar. The punishment does not fit the crime. Also, no matter how you paint the picture people who do not come from those environments will never understand. As for the proofreader comment, that was just plain ignorant. Keep up your honest comments.

Posted by: CharlesDRoberts | September 1, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Lavar, while I agree that justice isn't always fair, I must vehemently disagree and take exception to your comments that, "Someone who knows what that feels like to be "po" -- not poor but "po" -- would clearly understand why he was illegally carrying a gun while out in the city." There are plenty of "Po" folks that would disagree. Don't sweat it, your still the man that ended Aikmans career. I'll always love you.

Posted by: frankjomama | September 1, 2010 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Never thought I'd say it but Plax should have been released to pursue his livelihood. He served enuff time to get the message that what he did was wrong. Another year isn't gonna mean much. It certainly isn't gonna make him smarter. Hopefully others will learn something from this.

Posted by: VBFan | September 1, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

I agree with you. I thought at the time that he should have been able to negotiate probation, or something, but that the sentence was too hard handed. Justice, in this case, was to harsh, period.

Posted by: 189AROD | September 1, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

I think he deserved some time because of the law and the blatant disregard of it. But, this is excessive. Specifically tied to the details of this case the result should have been no more than 6 months and a heavy fine. That sends the message.

This is now just costing taxpayers money. And what is it really gonna do? Stop him from shooting himself in the other leg?

Posted by: MDterpfan | September 1, 2010 4:15 PM | Report abuse

There is a whole lot more to this than Lavar's emphasis on being "po". Plax had a chance to get back every dollar they took but he refused. Soon thereafter, it all came down by way of prosecution. I think if he wasn't a blab,blab,cry baby, (much like Lavar and his phantom money whining that was not in his contract) it would all be fine now. You can't use being "po" as an excuse to do stupid things and then try to make other people responsible for our own ignorance. Maybe Plax hasn't learned that part yet, but what is Lavar's excuse?

Posted by: amaledemocrat | September 1, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Lavar,

Plaxico not only carried an illegal gun into a crowded night club - he did it unsafely. But for the grace of God his childish handling of the gun that led to its discharge could easily have hit, injured or killed someone else. Reports at the time indicated that the bullet just missed hitting another person. And when somebody robs you at gunpoint, having a pistol in your jock strap - a pistol that you don't know how to use - is not going to save you. It's more likely that if you tried to use it you'd be killed.

I have a gun and a concealed carry permit, so I'm not at all against guns, but Plaxico was also stupid. I'm a lawyer as well and your whole argument about "criminal intent" is misinformed. He knew the gun was illegal and he intentionally took it there. So he intended to commit a criminal act. He didn't intend to shoot himself or anyone else but that wasn't his crime to begin with.

And as far as intent goes - drivers who are so drunk they black out don't have actual intent when they run over and kill someone. But it's such bad judgment to put yourself in that situation that the courts equate that to criminal intent.

Public figures have different lives than private people. As a public figure yourself, I'm sure you've gotten to see that some good things come from being a celebrity and some bad things come. AND celebrities ESPECIALLY don't get to skate in NYC on gun laws when the person shot themselves in a crowded bar with an illegal gun and could have killed someone else.

Posted by: thinker11 | September 1, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Lavar conviniently doesnt mention all of the other off teh field issues Plaxico had prior to shooting himself on the thigh. Here Lavar, let me help you:

*****

Legal troubles
[edit] Domestic disturbances
In August and September 2008, Totowa police responded to two domestic disturbance calls at the Burress household. At both times temporary restraining orders were issued that were later dismissed by state court.[14]

[edit] Civil lawsuits
In January 2009, Burress was the defendant in a civil lawsuit brought against him by a Lebanon County, Pennsylvania car dealer, who claimed that Burress was given a leased Chevrolet Avalanche in return for promises to appear at publicity events for the dealership. The dealer claimed that Burress never returned the car and never attended any publicity events; the damaged car was eventually returned after being impounded by the New York Police Department. Burress acknowledged that he was responsible for some of the damage to the car, but asked a jury to determine the amount.[15] On January 15, 2009 the jury returned a verdict awarding only $1,700 to the dealer, who had asked for damages of up to $19,000.[16] According to the Associated Press, Burress has been sued at least nine times since he joined the NFL in 2000.[17]

He has a civil lawsuit pending against him in Broward County, Florida, where a woman claims that his $140,000 Mercedes-Benz collided with the back of her car. The suit, filed on December 8, 2008, claims that Burress was liable for causing permanent injuries to the woman. It is noted that because Burress failed to pay his car insurance premium his policy was cancelled 3 days before the accident.[18]

[Driving violations
Burress was pulled over by Florida police on March 1, 2009 and ticketed for four separate moving violations: speeding, improper display of tags, improper lane change and for improper window tinting. [38] The charges were subsequently dismissed by a Fort Lauderdale magistrate "because the officer ... didn't supply information on how to pay the tickets."[39]

***********

I think all of those issues came into play when he was given the 2 years. Dunno Lavar, what do you think?

Posted by: vmrg1974 | September 1, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

At the end of the day, he only harmed himself, so the punishment is too harsh. Yes, someone else COULD have been hurt, but they weren't.

Posted by: loux24 | September 1, 2010 4:34 PM | Report abuse

That was an excellent post, LaVar. You understand the need for the gun law. You know that Plaxico shouldn't have been frequenting places where he was likely to have been assaulted, and you understand the justice of the sentence, which told the world that celebrities should be held to the same standard as the rest of us.

But you also recognize that justice has already been served, and that it's time to temper justice with mercy. Again, very well reasoned and very well put.

Posted by: andym108 | September 1, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Lavar,

I thought it was comical that the Washington Post, a world reknown newspaper would actually allow you to post your random thoughts on sports news. I anticipating reading your blog because you seem to fail at everything that you've done in life. I and countless others would love to see you fail in your latest venture, sports journalism.

You were a disappointment to Redskins fans (although you did have a few memorable plays and a pro bowl selection.)However your career was cut short because of your poor attitude and work ethic. But we all know it was due in part to your poor motorcycle safety and riding skills. You were and are a terrrible business man (i.e. the Sideline.) After reading a couple of your posts I now can say you are a FAILURE at being a journalist. How is that for a hard hit?

Posted by: dedicato | September 1, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

dedicato got his girl stolen by Lavar.

That said, I agree that the law is harsh and the law is dumb but the law is the law. Plax should have hired someone who could legally carry a weapon if he felt so much danger. I know that bodyguards and off duty cops are available for hire.

Posted by: dtysko | September 1, 2010 5:22 PM | Report abuse

"The state Department of Correctional Services said the serious nature of his November 2008 crime ..."

What is so absurd about this is that at some level, the right to carry guns is guaranteed not to be infringed. I realize the constitutionality is still being worked out ... but it's far more that Burress has far more authority to bear arms than the state of New York has to ban him from doing so.

This whole issue is turned on it's head. Any government calling what is arguably a guaranteed, fundamental right a "crime of serious nature" is absurd.

Posted by: ambiguae | September 1, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Although I took the time to read LaVar's 'random thoughts' it was rather obvious that his column would be slanted in favor of "My former teammate while with the New York Giants Plaxico Burress ..." to quote LaVar. Give me a break. So if a guy is born 'po' (which loosely defined, 'po' refers to a butt cheek in Turkish slang), then the po guy should be allowed to break the law and get leniency because he's a pro athlete? This is one time where a rich athlete has to suffer as all the rest of us would.

If Burress hadn't been a 'po-po' (an ass) in thinking that he was above the law, none of us would be writing about him and he would be preparing for the upcoming NFL season.

BTW, does LaVar actually get paid for having someone help him to write this dribble? I remember when the Washington Post was known for having the finest sports writers and it was a pleasure to read the sports section. Thank God for Tom Boswell and Sally Jenkins, the occasional Wilbon sighting and even Mike 'What, Me Tweet?' Wise. Instead of grooming more quality sports journalists, now we've got the likes of LaVar and his 'random thoughts' -- sad how this once mighty newspaper has fallen so low.

Whoever thought of giving LaVar a byline should be shown the door.

Posted by: RLJComm | September 1, 2010 8:13 PM | Report abuse

Let's count Plax's mistakes:

He was drinking while carrying a gun.

The gun was not holstered, it was carried in the waistband of sweat pants. (unbelievable.)

He kept a round in the chamber of a semi-automatic. In experience hands, this is okay. In his hands, disaster.

He should never be allowed to go near a gun again.


Posted by: sschlein | September 1, 2010 9:16 PM | Report abuse

LaVar, unfortunately, it was not his first offense... the story boys and girls is that not all animals are equal.

Posted by: samiismoni14 | September 1, 2010 9:38 PM | Report abuse

I'll be upfront and say I'm anti-gun. However, I'm pro-fair and agree that the full 2-years probably doesn't fit the crime. However, even if I concede the larger issue of the 'need' to carry a gun, even if I concede the 'right' to personal protection. Heck, even if I forgive his violation of interstate firearm license and registration laws. Even if I give Mr. Burress the benefit of every doubt that he should have been able to have that gun in that place at that time, he still deserves severe punishment, and possibly jail time.

Why should he be punished? His reckless irresponsibility in how he possessed that lethal weapon put the lives of every person in his vicinity at risk. If I were that reckless with a car, or hazardous materials, or heavy machinery I would be punished. So, too, should he be.

Posted by: fpuocskt | September 2, 2010 7:42 AM | Report abuse

I am amazed that know one has questioned the logic of carrying a handgun to defend a robbery. I have received concealed handgun training in Va and the one thing that is stressed the most is the handgun is for the protection of you and your immediate family in case of "fear of death" situiations.

I would be curious to know how many of these NYC nightclub area robberies resulting in deaths. Is your wallet or jewlery (bling) worth someone's life, yours or some one else's. I think not!

The law allows sentencing guide lines, apparently for Plax's crime, 2 years was allowed. Bottomline, don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

Posted by: DigitalManSKL | September 2, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

Plax should do what the rest of these guys do and hire a bodyguard. Or stay home. He chose the least intelligent (and most risky) option.

Posted by: FrancoNiell | September 2, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

The Supreme Court struck down anit-firearm laws such as the one in NYC, D.C, and Chicago as unconstitutional. An unconstitutional law is a law which has no authority. The only thing Plaxico is guilty of is unlawful discharge of a firearm. He should have received probation.

Posted by: maew | September 2, 2010 9:22 AM | Report abuse

Only by the grace of God did that bullet not hit somebody.

If you have deadly weapons going off in crowded public rooms, as far as I'm concerned you need to go to jail. We can debate the amount of time, and maybe 2 years is too long, but it's a very serious offense.

Not to mention the fact that NYC has very strong anti-gun laws (which probably have something to do with record low crime rates). If they just igored the protocols for Plax, it would take away all credibility. It's an unfortunate situation, but Plax could have avoided it.

Posted by: AdamCr | September 2, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

He discharged an unlicensed firearm in a crowded room. Regardless of intent, that is pretty serious.

In the situation of being robbed at gunpoint, if someone is threatening you with a gun and you try to pull your weapon, how far do you think you would get before being shot (especially if the weapon is in your sweatpants)? We're not talking about Wild West showdowns where each person has an equal chance of winning. In the examples described by Mr. Arrington, a weapon is nothing more than a security blanket.

loux24: "Yes, someone else COULD have been hurt, but they weren't."
That's called reckless endangerment, which was one of the charges brought against him.

Posted by: BigJ5 | September 2, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Only by the grace of God did that bullet not hit somebody.

If you have deadly weapons going off in crowded public rooms, as far as I'm concerned you need to go to jail. We can debate the amount of time, and maybe 2 years is too long, but it's a very serious offense.

Not to mention the fact that NYC has very strong anti-gun laws (which probably have something to do with record low crime rates). If they just igored the protocols for Plax, it would take away all credibility. It's an unfortunate situation, but Plax could have avoided it.

Posted by: AdamCr | September 2, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

maew: "The Supreme Court struck down anit-firearm laws such as the one in NYC, D.C, and Chicago as unconstitutional."
The DC law that was struck down was a total ban on handguns, not a licensing law. To my knowledge, the NYC laws have never been challenged on constitutional grounds.

Posted by: BigJ5 | September 2, 2010 9:37 AM | Report abuse

Here is the thing, this case was about more than illegally carrying a handgun. Not only did he knowingly break the law, he did it in a ridiculously unsafe manner.

Gun safety is not something to take lightly, if you make the choice to carry a loaded weapon you have a responsibility to carry it in a safe manner. The fact that the gun was not secure and not only fell but fired off a live round in a crowded nightclub is incomprehensible to me.

What if that round had hit someone besides Plaxico?

On top of all that he tried everything he could to cover up all the crimes. If he had come clean right away then there is no way that he would have faced the same level of consequences.

Posted by: guinness4health | September 2, 2010 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, right Lavar, Burress is no more of a criminal than you are considering the way you left all your employees. Why is it that we always have bums like this running their mouths in the newspapers and throughout the media?
Role Models, yeah, right...............

Posted by: burro2 | September 2, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Punishment fits the crime as soon as the gun went off.

Imagine the bullet killing or injuring your young daughter. A very likely scenario once the gun goes off.

Fact is, if he had been responsible with his gun, no one would have known he even had it. He'd be free.

His crime is that it went off in a tightly packed place and could have killed someone.

Also agree, don't go to those places. You get millions to play... don't go to a few places. Now that you got out of the 'po' house STAY OUT.

Posted by: jspin77 | September 2, 2010 9:55 AM | Report abuse

While I agree with you, the law is the law. If you disagree, maybe you should try to change the law in NYC. Go against politicians who are against carrying guns. The NRA will certainly support you.

Posted by: trumeau | September 2, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

I kind of agree with you LaVar but the problem here is he dropped the gun and it went off. Someone, even himself could have been seriously hurt or killed by his recklessness. If he is going to carry a gun in the city he needs to do it responsibly.

Now is the time excessive in light of what actually happened? Yes I think it is this young man's life is ruined over poor judgment and it is interesting to note that his actions would not constitute a crime in much of America.

Posted by: cleancut77 | September 2, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe Lavar was allowed to post this!!!! This is nothing more than thug mentality. What if instead of shooting himself he shoots someone else by accident? What if he shoots your sister by accident? Would it be different then? That's the point. IT's NOT. You are not supposed to be carrying guns around PERIOD. If you need protection to go to a bar, then do not go to that bar. As Lavar actually eluded to, Plax is a little thug having a hard time letting go of the thug mentality just like a lot of his NFL counterparts. I love the NFL but these guys really make me wonder sometimes. Why doesn't the NFL try to educate, counsel, and guide these kids better? Should be part of the package deal. "You want to play in the NFL, then you must go through this counselling program." It's not rocket science and in a way, it's not Plax' fault. He literally, like Vick, just doesn't know any better.

Posted by: mustang_johnny1 | September 2, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

"Don't do the crime if you can't to the time."

Hey, don't be all gangsta one minute and then boo hoo like a baby and beg for leniency when you're treated just like the gangsta you were pretending to be.

You're right LaVar, Plax deserved to protect himself. He failed to exercise common sense though in chosing what way best to exercise it. DON'T GO IF YOU MUST CARRY. THIS AINT THE WILD WEST.

So Plax, succeeded in not getting "robbed of his jewelry, car , or cash". BRAVO, Job well done. (spattering of applause). INSTEAD, he, hmmmm, SHOT HIMSELF IN THE LEG AND CAUGHT A CASE. If you want to carry a gun, illegally, and not knowing how to properly carry it so as not to have the thing go off accidentally, then you deserve what ultimately happens. HE'S A BIG DUMMY.

HE'S NOT "PO" ANYMORE, JUST STUPID. Thankfully he didn't hurt anyone but himself. He ought to be bending down every name and praying to Jesus for that instead of looking for sympathy.

Posted by: shelley514 | September 2, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Also, who are we to second-guess the legal system; the jurist who decided on Plax's time. Plax should have thought about these sentences instead of worrying so much about someone stealing something from him.

Hey, at least his jewelry and cash is safe!!! And that's what he really wanted, right? Don't lose sight of that in all this Lavar. :) LMAO.

Posted by: shelley514 | September 2, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

charlesdroberts - "As for the proofreader comment, that was just plain ignorant. Keep up your honest comments."

Uh, it's not ignorant to suggest a proofreader. There's a big difference to "barring" arms and "bearing" arms. Please do not tell me you are so ignorant to not know the difference between "barring" and "Bearing" in the context of Lavar's sentence.

Posted by: terptek | September 2, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Having the gun isnt the issue for me. I understand wanting to protect yourself. The gross negligence of not properly and safely storing the weapon so it doesnt accidently discahrge is the major problem... That level of stupidity should be ILLEGAL.

Posted by: vlp1983 | September 2, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

The misguided and heavy-handed gun laws in NYC are ridiculous and do not serve the purpose of reducing crime and violence. They would never withstand a "strict scrutiny" review as they are not narrowly-tailored or effective meet any compelling state interest. Any law that impacts a fundamental right must withstand strict scrutiny.

Still, a Glock in the waistband of sweat pants!?!? Seriously!?!? Get an IWB holster and wear proper attire for CCW.

Shesh! "Mexican" carry should be redubbed "Plaxico" carry. If you are going to exercise your Constitutional rights (in areas where said fundamental right is still upheld), do so with the proper training, accessories, and attire...

Posted by: pasifikawv | September 3, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

The misguided and heavy-handed gun laws in NYC are ridiculous and do not serve the purpose of reducing crime and violence. They would never withstand a "strict scrutiny" review as they are not narrowly-tailored or effective meet any compelling state interest. Any law that impacts a fundamental right must withstand strict scrutiny.

Still, a Glock in the waistband of sweat pants!?!? Seriously!?!? Get an IWB holster and wear proper attire for CCW.

Shesh! "Mexican" carry should be redubbed "Plaxico" carry. If you are going to exercise your Constitutional rights (in areas where said fundamental right is still upheld), do so with the proper training, accessories, and attire...

Posted by: pasifikawv | September 3, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

He got off easy. The minimum is 3 years - he broke the law. He is very lucky that nobody but his stupid ass didn't get hurt. He's a thug and a fool. Always has been - always will be. You should not defend people like this Lavar.

Posted by: bighockeygoon | September 5, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company