12/22/24
August 20, 2009
Burress Pleads Guilty in Weapons Case: Plaxico Burress, the former New York Giants receiver, pleaded guilty on Thursday morning to attempted criminal possession of a weapon, in a deal with Manhattan prosecutors that will send him to prison for two years. Justice Michael H. Melkonian of State Supreme Court accepted the guilty plea. Under the plea agreement, along with the two-year prison sentence, Mr. Burress, 32, is to be sentenced on Sept. 22 to two years of post-release supervision. With good behavior, he will be eligible for release after slightly more than 20 months.
posted by tommytrump to football at 01:33 PM - 29 comments
It seems like a really harsh punishment to me. I live in a state (Virginia) where Burress would have been facing a misdemeanor. And, really, no penalty if he would have had the gun exposed instead of concealed.
posted by bperk at 02:11 PM on August 20, 2009
Two years from now, what better place for him to spend his post-release supervision period than Oakland?
Favre will have just re-entered the league again and will be there waiting for him.
posted by beaverboard at 02:13 PM on August 20, 2009
I live in a state (Virginia) where Burress would have been facing a misdemeanor.
Well hopefully you're smart enough not to bring your legal-in-Virgina gun to NYC where it is decidedly not legal with strong penalties for violation. You know, smarter than Burress.
posted by inigo2 at 02:30 PM on August 20, 2009
God forbid (and thankfully) the dude didn't kill himself with his own gun. Otherwise they would have given him the death penalty.
posted by THX-1138 at 02:31 PM on August 20, 2009
It seems like a really harsh punishment to me
Yes, I hope Judge Draconian Melkonian is as hard on all the other gun carrying thugs in his district as he was on Burress.
And, really, no penalty if he would have had the gun exposed instead of concealed.
In Texas, carrying a firearm into any establishment that serves alcohol (even if you are licensed for concealed carry) carries up to 10 years in prison.
That said, Plax has no one to blame but himself.
posted by mjkredliner at 02:47 PM on August 20, 2009
as hard on all the other gun carrying thugs in his district as he was on Burress.
Wasn't it supposed to be 3.5yr minimum, and he allowed Burress to plead down to get just 2 years?
posted by inigo2 at 03:21 PM on August 20, 2009
Yes, I hope Judge Draconian Melkonian is as hard on all the other gun carrying thugs in his district as he was on Burress.
The judge didn't do anything but OK the plea.
In Texas, carrying a firearm into any establishment that serves alcohol (even if you are licensed for concealed carry) carries up to 10 years in prison.
As someone who lives in Texas, I have never heard anyone serving anything remotely close to that (unless he had priors).
Fact is, it's an extremely harsh sentence (in NY, Texas, or wherever). We have a people who take others lives (Leonard Little and that other guy whose name escapes me now) who don't do 2 years. We have guys who rape little kids who don't do 2 years (I see their dots all over the sexual offenders website and read bio after bio of guys who did 6 months, 8 months, etc.). This guy brought a gun to a club and didn't even pull it out to use it, and he's doing 2 years. Too harsh.
I say 6 months and a year suspension from the NFL is more in line with what I would have expected.
posted by bdaddy at 04:35 PM on August 20, 2009
Sounds fair to me. He committed a crime, pled guilty to a lesser charge, and was given the mandatory sentence without special treatment.
Lets also not forget the bullet narrowly missed a security guard. Sure he shot himself but someone else could have easily been killed also. They take weapons violations in NYC pretty seriously.
Why on earth would he bring a loaded gun to a club in the first place. In the second place why did he not have the safety on or the gun properly secured. Sounds like an idiot to me. With gun handling experience like that he should be counting his lucky stars he is only doing 20 months and just got shot in the thigh. He could have be doing 40 months and shot his balls off or shot his femoral artery and been dead. Some say too harsh I say extremely lucky.
posted by Atheist at 05:48 PM on August 20, 2009
Tell me why Burress gets 2 years in prison for carrying a gun and shooting himself, and Stallworth spends 24 days for killing a man while driving drunk.Don't get me wrong,I don't approve of either. Apparently Roger Goodell saw it different too.He suspended Stallwoth for the season and was suspending Burress for 8 games. I think a drunken driver behind the wheel is a bigger weapon than a pistol.
posted by Doehead at 07:18 PM on August 20, 2009
Fact is, it's an extremely harsh sentence (in NY, Texas, or wherever). We have a people who take others lives (Leonard Little and that other guy whose name escapes me now) who don't do 2 years. We have guys who rape little kids who don't do 2 years (I see their dots all over the sexual offenders website and read bio after bio of guys who did 6 months, 8 months, etc.). This guy brought a gun to a club and didn't even pull it out to use it, and he's doing 2 years. Too harsh.
These other situations you describe are examples where the criminal justice system failed (2 years for raping a kid? That's beyond obscene). Burress' case is a success.
The law was clear and he violated it. Plus anyone stupid enough to shoot themselves in the leg could have just as easily shot someone else in the head.
posted by cjets at 08:23 PM on August 20, 2009
Its a message, pure and simple, for all the other NFL and NBA playahs that feel the need to carry a loaded weapon into a public social environment. If you feel threatened, hire a bodyguard with a license to carry a firearm. A hell of a lot cheaper, and, you don't get suspended or do time if he shoots himself in the leg.
posted by irunfromclones at 11:25 PM on August 20, 2009
Tell me why Burress gets 2 years in prison for carrying a gun and shooting himself, and Stallworth spends 24 days for killing a man while driving drunk.
Aside from the simplification of the cases, it's because thanks to federalism, NY and Florida have different laws, and enforce things differently.
posted by inigo2 at 08:02 AM on August 21, 2009
I agree it is hard to reconcile this sentence with Stallworth's, but as inigo points out its because the two states have different laws. NY has an emphasis on gun control and cracks down very hard on offenders. The judge in this case is not draconian, but you can make the argument that the law is.
posted by curlyelk at 08:39 AM on August 21, 2009
NY and Florida have different laws, and enforce things differently.
It is still useful to discuss how very differently our criminal justice system metes out punishment for things. Burress's crime was victimless, unless you count him as a victim. Stallworth's crime was not. Both of them were engaged in risky behavior that could cost lives. Killing someone with a car while drunk somehow deserves much less punishment than carrying a loaded gun into a nightclub and hurting only yourself or than killing dogs. No victims or victims are animals = really bad. Victim = not so bad. Our criminal justice system makes no sense.
posted by bperk at 09:31 AM on August 21, 2009
The law was clear and he violated it. Plus anyone stupid enough to shoot themselves in the leg could have just as easily shot someone else in the head.
This is the kind of attitude that explains why our prisons are overflowing. Let's punish him severely because something bad could have happened. Did he hurt anyone? No. Did he intend on hurting anyone? No. Wouldn't some probation, fine, and house arrest be ample punishment? I think so. Jails should be filled with violent and dangerous people, not anyone who breaks a law.
posted by bperk at 09:34 AM on August 21, 2009
What Burress did was wrong, but this sentence seems excessively harsh to me. If I lived in New York I would not want him taking up a prison cell for 20 months when my state already struggles with prison overcrowding. How many murderers and child molesters go free early while non-violent drug offenders and people like Burress are taking up space in prison?
Burress is a high profile athlete at a time when athletes have been subjected to home invasions and shootings, including the ones that killed Sean Taylor and Darrent Williams. He was reckless and stupid for not ensuring the legality of carrying the gun he legally owned in Florida, but I don't think he deserves two years in prison for it.
posted by rcade at 09:55 AM on August 21, 2009
Plus anyone stupid enough to shoot themselves in the leg could have just as easily shot someone else in the head.
Under that logic, anyone who ever drove drunk should be prosecuted because of the lives that could have been lost. The justice system doesn't punish people for crimes that might have happened but didn't.
posted by rcade at 09:56 AM on August 21, 2009
Under that logic, anyone who ever drove drunk should be prosecuted because of the lives that could have been lost. The justice system doesn't punish people for crimes that might have happened but didn't.
Well, people who drive drunk and get caught are punished based on drunk driving laws. People who illegally carry guns and get caught are punished based on weapon laws. Not sure I see the inconsistency here.
posted by inigo2 at 10:38 AM on August 21, 2009
The judge didn't do anything but OK the plea.
Yes, that is how it usually works. Right after he decides whether or not the punishment the prosecution offers fits the crime.
As someone who lives in Texas, I have never heard anyone serving anything remotely close to that (unless he had priors).
As a native Texan, I can assure you that the full 10 years has been imposed, particularly if the gun was used in the commission of a crime. Please note however, that I said it carries up to 10 years.
My sarcasm did not come across well, apparently. I felt the punishment was a bit extreme, and hope that the authorities in NY prosecute and punish other gun crimes with equal zeal. Was Plax made an example of? Maybe. The bottom line is it was his decision to carry a gun, in his pants pocket, into a nightclub, with the safety off, and a round in the chamber. As noted above, his injury could have been much more serious, or he might have injured someone else.
posted by mjkredliner at 10:47 AM on August 21, 2009
Did he hurt anyone? No
I thought that Plax shot himself in the leg? Doesn't that qualify as him hurting someone?
If someone attempts to commit suicide and the police are called and gets to the person before they commit suicide, the individual will be arrested and sent to a psychiatric facility for observation.
With Plax, he took a loaded pistol with him to a night club where there were probably hundreds of people socializing and having a good time. I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with the verdict but the guy could have not only shot himself (which he did), but he could have shot & killed someone that went to the club looking just to have a good time out.
I personally don't ever go to any place where I feel I need to bring my heat with me.
Friend: Hey BI!! You going to the BBQ today?
Me: Hell to the yeah!! Just let me grab my keys and .45 and I'll be set to roll.
posted by BornIcon at 10:56 AM on August 21, 2009
I personally don't ever go to any place where I feel I need to bring my heat with me.
Oh, but you're not a professional athlete, you just don't the understand the tough tough lives they lead. Plax can't afford a bodyguard, so he HAD to carry the gun. Cough.
posted by inigo2 at 11:20 AM on August 21, 2009
Dammit! You got me there.
posted by BornIcon at 11:47 AM on August 21, 2009
I carry a loaded gun in my pants everywhere I go, especially to night clubs. Don't worry though, its not a big gun, nobody has ever shown fear when they see it or been hurt by it, and it has never gone off while still in my pants.
posted by Atheist at 12:12 PM on August 21, 2009
So you've never gotten a champagne dance at the Crazy Horse II in Vegas, then? Wait, what were we talking about?
posted by tahoemoj at 04:56 PM on August 21, 2009
Under that logic, anyone who ever drove drunk should be prosecuted because of the lives that could have been lost.
Isn't that why the criminal justice system has decided to punish drunk drivers whose only crime was driving drunk? Because of the potential harm they might have done?
If a drunk driver actually does kill someone, his sentence would be much stiffer. And if Burress would have accidentally shot someone, his sentence would have been much greater than two years.
posted by cjets at 03:35 AM on August 22, 2009
This is the kind of attitude that explains why our prisons are overflowing. Let's punish him severely because something bad could have happened. Did he hurt anyone? No.
As BI points out, he did hurt someone. Himself. If you want to release non-violent offenders (such as anyone arrested for possession of a controlled substance), I'm all for that. But this guy was clearly being reckless with a dangerous weapon in a public place.
NYC has decided that it is the best interests of the city to keep guns off the street. From Wikipedia:
From the Gotham Gazette:
It seems that the city's plan to limit gun violence is working. So if the trade off is that some knucklehead like Burress gets two years in exchange for saving fifty to one hundred lives per year, that is one trade I would make for Burress.
posted by cjets at 09:38 AM on August 22, 2009
Isn't that why the criminal justice system has decided to punish drunk drivers whose only crime was driving drunk?
I was thinking more of the vast majority of people who drive with alcohol in their system and don't get caught. If we are punishing people based on what might have happened, then all of them go to prison too. At some point we should just put the people who *haven't* committed crimes in prison, to keep them safe from all of us criminals.
posted by rcade at 09:40 AM on August 22, 2009
I was thinking more of the vast majority of people who drive with alcohol in their system and don't get caught. If we are punishing people based on what might have happened, then all of them go to prison too. At some point we should just put the people who *haven't* committed crimes in prison, to keep them safe from all of us criminals.
Vast majority of drunk drivers don't get caught = Jail everyone?
I'm not following the logic. Drunk driving is illegal. It's illegal because of the potential for great harm if one drives drunk. It's a choice society has made to cut down on drunk driving.
NYC has made the same choice about handguns. It's a well publicized law. Burress not only broke the law by having an unlicensed handgun, he brought it to a club where alcohol was served, and accidentally discharged it and injured himself. He's the equivalent of a drunk driver runs into a tree and injures no one but himself.
posted by cjets at 10:28 AM on August 22, 2009
Plax is a another sad case. So glad the Steelers cut their ties with him.