Knuckle Sandwich

That's nothing, I hear many passengers either have to be irradiated or have their genetalia fondled just to do their job, or even just to go on vacation.

Wouldn't have expected anything else but incompetence from the thousands standing around. Feel safe yet?

It is pretty hard to pick a tune considering the information that has been released has been less than reliable. I have read damn near every web article on the subject and for the life of me I can't find out what specifically he was convicted of or what specifically happened during trial. Not anyone of the articles mentions HPs or Hicap mags as part of the conviction. Only one article mentioned the "having a party so guns went in the trunk" claim, and that quote was from the no longer Judge Morley. I think it is fair to say that Aitken did not receive a fair trial based on the jury members who came forward after the conviction. He very well may not have been moving, but that was for the jury to decide, not the clearly biased judge. ETA: grammar

The arresting officer also testified that Aitken was moving.

He was moving right? So what he did should have been considered legal, HPs included. The only problem with what he did was the judge not allowing the jury to hear the exemption. The point I am trying to make is some want to call Aitken out on not following the rules. It seems to me he was. Was the hi-cap charge the one that stuck and not the HG charge? Based on what I have read in articles about the case, I was under the impression the conviction was illegal possession of a HG. Trying to find the details on the case is proving to be difficult, so I could be entirely wrong.

What about the hollow points were illegal? I was under the impression the HPs were covered under the transportation between residences clause. Also, with the hi-cap mags, are we sure that they were hi-cap? He was railroaded pretty hard in court, were the mags put through any testing by the defense? Were they entered into evidence? My understanding is they found him guilty of possession of a HG. Did the jury find him guilty of hi-cap mags as well? Many of NJ's citizens are clueless of the laws and find them ridiculous once you outline what they actually are. In my encounters with regular folks it seems the true anti-gunner is a rare breed, and these are usually of the simple minded position that guns should be outlawed altogether. The Aitken case hit pretty close to home for me. My theory had always been that in New Jersey it does not matter if you are within the law to own and use guns. If they want to throw the book at you they will find a way. Aitken's case proved that theory. Most non-gun people look at Aitken's situation with sympathy, and we should be taking advantage of that. He is the test case that proves NJ's gun laws do more to harm law abiding citizens than stopping criminals. We should be standing with him in his fight for an appeal. ETA: Given the way this case was treated by our "justice system" I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Why are you so willing to throw him under the bus?