But isn’t it saying the act of the robbery will be charged under the new guidelines?
No.
You posted the whole thing your self just a few posts ago.
There are separate charges for Residential Burglaries and Commercial Burglaries.
Those are still Felonies.
What you are referencing is the use of a weapon during a burglary being downgraded to a Claas A misdemeanor if the weapon never posed a credible threat.
You cannot have that charge without the Felony Burglary charge also.

Jezcoe:
johnwk2:
Jezcoe:
johnwk2:
In essence, an armed robber who now engages in First, Second and/or Third-degree Robbery, is to be charged with Petit larceny, given a DESK APPEARANCE TICKET, and be back on the streets in a few hours to repeat Armed Robbery.
You are reading it wrong.
Stop with the baloney! From the actual policy:
a) An act that could be charged under PL §§ 160.15 (2, 3, or 4), 160.10(2b), or 160.05 that occurs in a commercial setting should be charged under PL § 155.25 if the force or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.
PL § 155.25 is Petit larceny and is a class A misdemeanor for which a Desk Appearance Ticket is issued, and the perp is out and about in a few hours.
Why must you make stuff up?
JWK
Correct.
But the act of the robbery itself is still a Class D felony.
Which will be charged under “PL § 155.25 [Petit Larceny] if the force or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.” As such, the perp is issued a Desk Appearance Ticket and is back on the streets in a few hours.
So basically you don’t think DAT should be given nor bail and everyone should be held in jail until trial?

But isn’t it saying the act of the robbery will be charged under the new guidelines?
A burglary will still be charged as a class D felony.

johnwk2:
Jezcoe:
johnwk2:
Jezcoe:
johnwk2:
In essence, an armed robber who now engages in First, Second and/or Third-degree Robbery, is to be charged with Petit larceny, given a DESK APPEARANCE TICKET, and be back on the streets in a few hours to repeat Armed Robbery.
You are reading it wrong.
Stop with the baloney! From the actual policy:
a) An act that could be charged under PL §§ 160.15 (2, 3, or 4), 160.10(2b), or 160.05 that occurs in a commercial setting should be charged under PL § 155.25 if the force or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.
PL § 155.25 is Petit larceny and is a class A misdemeanor for which a Desk Appearance Ticket is issued, and the perp is out and about in a few hours.
Why must you make stuff up?
JWK
Correct.
But the act of the robbery itself is still a Class D felony.
Which will be charged under “PL § 155.25 [Petit Larceny] if the force or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.” As such, the perp is issued a Desk Appearance Ticket and is back on the streets in a few hours.
JWK
No.
You posted the whole thing your self just a few posts ago.
There are separate charges for Residential Burglaries and Commercial Burglaries.
Those are still Felonies.
And under Bragg’s new policy those felonies [PL §§ 160.15 (2, 3, or 4), 160.10(2b)] “should be charged under PL § 155.25 [Petit Larceny] if the force or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.”
JWK

And under Bragg’s new policy those felonies [PL §§ 160.15 (2, 3, or 4), 160.10(2b)] “should be charged under PL § 155.25 [Petit Larceny] if the force or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.”
I don’t know how many times I have to repeat it.
That is a separate charge from the Class D Felony Burglary.
You cannot charge someone with use of a weapon during a Burglary and not charge them with Burglary.

Dem:
Mountain_Soldier:
You feel the same way about, say, rural Virginians and their gun control opposition?
I’m probably the only progressive on these boards that don’t support many of the gun control options coming from the left.
The right severely underestimates the number of pro 2A folks on the left.
the left, as it is presently, is not an advocate for people defending their selves. At one time they may have been but I can’t remember that in my lifetime.

fallenturtle:
Dem:
Mountain_Soldier:
You feel the same way about, say, rural Virginians and their gun control opposition?
I’m probably the only progressive on these boards that don’t support many of the gun control options coming from the left.
The right severely underestimates the number of pro 2A folks on the left.
the left, as it is presently, is not an advocate for people defending their selves. At one time they may have been but I can’t remember that in my lifetime.
That’s the right wing meme, but its not true. Among the left, opinions on gun rights cover the full gamut.
They sure went balls to the wall in VA a couple years ago. I didn’t see any pushback from the left when that happened.

They sure went balls to the wall in VA a couple years ago. I didn’t see any pushback from the left when that happened.
I’m not sure what you mean by “balls to the wall” in regards to VA.
There are liberals who are into hunting. There are liberals that believe in owning a gun for self defense.

Mountain_Soldier:
They sure went balls to the wall in VA a couple years ago. I didn’t see any pushback from the left when that happened.
I’m not sure what you mean by “balls to the wall” in regards to VA.
There are liberals who are into hunting. There are liberals that believe in owning a gun for self defense.
They passed 8 gun control laws the second they got into power and the republicans couldn’t stop them. They got their dream list. That’s how liberals treat gun control. They want it all, not just so-called “common sense” (whatever the hell that means) measures.

fallenturtle:
Mountain_Soldier:
They sure went balls to the wall in VA a couple years ago. I didn’t see any pushback from the left when that happened.
I’m not sure what you mean by “balls to the wall” in regards to VA.
There are liberals who are into hunting. There are liberals that believe in owning a gun for self defense.
They passed 8 gun control laws the second they got into power and the republicans couldn’t stop them. They got their dream list. That’s how liberals treat gun control. They want it all, not just so-called “common sense” (whatever the hell that means) measures.
You can be pro gun and pro gun control at the same time. They aren’t exclusive positions.

coolidge:
fallenturtle:
Dem:
Mountain_Soldier:
You feel the same way about, say, rural Virginians and their gun control opposition?
I’m probably the only progressive on these boards that don’t support many of the gun control options coming from the left.
The right severely underestimates the number of pro 2A folks on the left.
the left, as it is presently, is not an advocate for people defending their selves. At one time they may have been but I can’t remember that in my lifetime.
That’s the right wing meme, but its not true. Among the left, opinions on gun rights cover the full gamut.
Yep… I know plenty of people who are so far left that you get all of your guns back.
Your statement is broad and vague. The constitution upholds my right to own a gun will not be infringed on. So gun control can not or should not come from the government.
Yeah the left isnt as unified on 2a as the right believes. We run the gamut on gun control, from strict control, to none on the far left.
It’s also become more popular for the left to own guns in the last 5-6 years.
“Armed minorities are harder to oppress” is a quote that’s thrown around a lot.

Yeah the left isnt as unified on 2a as the right believes. We run the gamut on gun control, from strict control, to none on the far left.
It’s also become more popular for the left to own guns in the last 5-6 years.
“Armed minorities are harder to oppress” is a quote that’s thrown around a lot.
I know several people who are card carrying members of the Socialist Rifle Association.
Great then we should have a majority to eliminate impotent gun free zones.

Your statement is broad and vague.
It’s broad and vague because the opinion on guns on the left is broad and highly varied. There is no single opinion on guns or what the 2nd Amendment grants on the left.
The constitution upholds my right to own a gun will not be infringed on. So gun control can not or should not come from the government.
If only it was so cut and dry.

Great then we should have a majority to eliminate impotent gun free zones.
Aren’t gun free zone laws locally enacted?
Yeah by liberals. So this kind of goes against the left having a majority pro 2a advocates