Inna Vernikov Carrying Gun Photo in Palestine Protest at Brooklyn, Violated Laws

Inna Vernikov Carrying Gun Photo in Palestine Protest at Brooklyn, Violated Laws

Inna Vernikov Carrying Gun Palestine protest

Council Member Inna Vernikov Carrying Gun – A civil rights attorney told City & State that New York City Council Member Inna Vernikov’s presence at a pro-Palestine protest outside of Brooklyn College on Thursday while carrying gun may have broken various state gun laws. Vernikov is a member of the New York City Council.

Vernikov opposed the protest, which she characterized as being anti-Semitic, and she collaborated with the City University of New York to transfer it off the campus of Brooklyn College and onto a public street that runs between the various college buildings.

Vernikov said, along with Council Members Farah Louis and Kalman Yeger, in a joint news statement that she and the other council members would be present at the demonstration to assist any students who felt like they were in danger there. Photos and videos taken of her at the rally reveal that she has a pistol concealed within the front of her trousers, with the grip of the weapon being plainly clear.

Also see: Gambetta HS Knife Attack Arras, Man Killed Teacher & Two other wounded

Vernikov, who was recently highlighted in a New York Post piece on new gun owners, carries a state concealed carry permit for her firearm. This permit allows her to carry her handgun in a concealed manner. However, permit holders in the state of New York are still subject to a number of restrictions.

According to M.K. Kaishian, a former public defender who now operates her own civil rights practise, publicly carrying a weapon to a protest in front of a college could have been a violation of various state gun laws. Ms. Kaishian is now the owner of her own civil rights practise.

In situations involving gun control, Kaishian has successfully defended scores of individuals. A significant number of them were guys of African American and Latino descent who had minimal resources. Given the political and institutional power of council members, Kaishian feels it is doubtful that Vernikov will be charged with anything. However, she stated that if one of her clients had done what Vernikov is alleged to have done, there are a variety of felonies for which they would certainly be charged. Kaishian believes it is unlikely that Vernikov will be charged with anything.

One of them is a rule that forbids the ownership of firearms at certain “sensitive locations,” which include protests and rallies and was passed during a special legislative session last year. “Under the current law, it’s illegal to carry a handgun at a place where people are gathered to rally in accordance with their First Amendment rights, even with a concealed carry licence,” Kaishian said.

Also check: St.louis football youth coach shot in back by son’s father over his playing time

Colleges and universities as well as schools are listed as “sensitive locations.” There may be two distinct counts of breaking the same sensitive area statute if a person was found to be carrying a pistol during a rally outside of a school. Another distinct, mainly similar law expressly forbids bringing a gun on school property.

Prosecutors have been known to bring charges first and ask questions afterwards, even though the Brooklyn academic protest was place on a public street between academic buildings. Kaishian said prosecutors normally charge someone with anything that could stick when they’re discovered with a gun in public, even if it’s not visible or just became visible after an illegal search.

It is also against the law to openly carry firearms in public. Handgun permit holders in the state of New York are only permitted to carry their firearms in a concealed manner since the state only provides permits for carrying hidden pistols. Someone may be charged with “menacing in the second degree” if they were seen carrying a gun in their waistband with the grip in plain view. The act of displaying a lethal weapon in front of another person while inducing a level of fear that is considered reasonable is considered “menacing” under the law.

“There’s a strong argument that would constitute menacing,” Kaishian said, adding that poor nonwhite defendants are routinely charged under the menacing law for doing less than what Vernikov is allegedly guilty of doing. “I think if you’re showing up with a visible gun to intimidate a group of college students who are gathering legally, there’s a strong argument that would constitute menacing,” Kaishian said.

Vernikov could argue that she was just carrying the gun for self-defense and not with the intention of harming anyone else at the gathering by doing so. However, such a defence has very little chance of being successful. At the very least, it is not effective for the types of individuals that Kaishian is supposed to represent.

“Almost everyone that I represent has a legitimate self-defense argument about why they would want to carry, and that argument is no different than that of any other American who owns guns,” Kaishian said. “That argument is no different than that of any other American who owns guns.” “Except in many cases for people in New York City who do not have the entitlement and privileges that the council member has, those concerns are not taken seriously at best, and they are laughed off and denigrated at worst.”

Must see: Damaris Milton Atlanta Airport Stabbing Today, Woman Stabs Police Officer Driver, 3 People Injured

The other crimes are considered to be Class E felonies, which carry a maximum punishment of four years in prison, although the menacing in the second degree is considered to be a Class A misdemeanour, which carries a theoretical maximum sentence of one year in jail. Because none of these are regarded as violent offences and none of them are eligible for bail, a person who is charged with violating any of these statutes will not be held in pre-trial jail time at Rikers Island.

Assuming they accepted a plea offer, they would be unlikely to face any prison time at all. “I would anticipate for a client who was charged with a top count E felony like possession of a weapon in a sensitive area that you would get an A misdemeanour and avoid any sort of potential jail exposure,” said Kaishian. “This would be the outcome I would hope for for that client.”

Source: cityandstateny

Leave a comment