>Lorenzo Beechman, 36, of Hyde Park, was held without bail, charged with his third offense of carrying a loaded firearm without a license, illegal possession of a firearm without a license with a prior violent offense, illegal possession of ammunition and airport security violations.

Lorenzo is a big fan of bad choices.

[removed]

lolz

Please explain

YAHTZEE

[removed]

Wow. What a weak ass attempt at trolling.

Dude literally created an account to troll this post. Damn.

[removed]

Without a license?

What a dummy.

Gun laws at work

Clearly Lorenzo is not the sharpest pencil in the box.

Nor the sharpest pencil in the knife draw.

For the third time?

So what was his crime?

So what's going to happen to him? Clearly the dude feel the need for a gun so either he is paranoid, a killer, or someone is actually threatening him.

>third offense of carrying a loaded firearm without a license, illegal possession of a firearm without a license with a prior violent offense, illegal possession of ammunition and airport security violations

Carrying a firearm without a license (again), possession of a firearm without a license (again), illegal possession of ammunition, and various Logan or TSA-related rules around firearms and ammunition.

Like I said, so what were his crimes? All I see are victimless policy violations. 🤷

I hope you are being sarcastic. Dude is not licensed nor will he ever be especially after his first offense of possessing without a license.

I know, just saying criminals don't care about gun laws

Damn. THIRD offense? That’s like five piece easy. Hey whist is fun hope he likes cards

Victimless policy violation or not, he's been convicted of the same thing multiple times and knows what he's not allowed to do.

>So what's going to happen to him?

The DA will drop the most serious gun charges to secure a win/plea deal and the cycle will repeat itself in six months.

Third times a charm. Maybe this time he’ll learn his lesson.

Policy violation=crime when the policy is the federal government

That's a terrible way to go through life. Free men and all that.

Lol must've forgotten he had it.

Well that’s what you get for living in America

Shut up dude. You wanna sit next to a felon with a loaded gun on a plane?

Sure. Why wouldn't I? I'd have one too.

The headline is technically accurate but also a bit misleading misleading. Bringing the gun to the airport isn't really what's getting him in trouble. The TSA confiscates weapons all the time to the point that their cringy social media presence memes about it trying to make themselves look like they're actually effective.

For a loaded gun you might still catch charges for it the real point here is that he's a multiple offender and didn't have a license for t he gun in the first place.

What is wrong with following the law dude?

Nothing, as long as it's a moral and valid law. Requiring an LTC isn't either of those things.

>Gun laws at work

"Murder shouldn't be illegal because people still get murdered all the time"

I’m with you. Some people on here think this guy is the victim. I’d like to see his record I’m sure it is quite marvelous

Oh cool. And if he drew the gun on you?

Yes, but not in the stupid way you think.

Some lessons are learned harder than others.

Haha, and why would he? Dude is just trying to go on a trip. Don't live your life afraid of the world. Draw on me. Hahahahaha. On a plane. Amazon.

Well he’s an unlicensed felon with a gun. Not the most predictable folks. Amazon.

Again, he is unlicensed because of bullshit laws that shouldn't exist. Same reason he is a felon. Get rid of bogus anti gun laws and he is seemingly no more a criminal than you or I. Also, you don't think felons go on vacation? What's his plan in this scenario, stick up the plan passengers who he is stuck on the plane with for several more hours. 🙄

See how far you'll get through an airport with one then.

>don't live your life afraid of the world

So why do you need to have a gun with you on a plane if you're not?

Why do felons need guns on vacation?

Same reason as everyone else I'd imagine.

It's perfectly moral not to let former criminals who are repeat offenders to have the means to kill people efficiently.

Hahahahaah. So now he is a murderer. Keep making those giant leaps Superman. Fear is a choice my dude.

Everyone else isn't a repeat offending criminal.

That's not an answer.

Again his crime is victimless. Keep kneeling to the state. Daddy will keep on spanking you if you are a good boy.

Fear is a choice? So why do you need a gun if you're not afraid?

I don't need a gun to walk through life lol

As per the article

"charged with his third offense of carrying a loaded firearm without a license, illegal possession of a firearm without a license with a prior violent offense"

It's not a victimless crime if it's a gun being carried by a person with a history of criminal violence.

His previous offense was not a victimless crime and it's why he's not allowed to have a gun.

[removed]

He was previously convicted for a violent crime.

Why do you need a gun if you're not afraid ? Seems like you're avoiding the question because I hit a nerve on that point.

Hahaha. Hit what nerve? You asked a silly question thinking it's some kind of "gotcha" when it wasn't. Carrying a gun isn't about fear. It's about preparedness, same as a seat belt, and a fire extinguisher or smoke alarms in your house. I don't expect anyone to carry a gun that doesn't want to, it's weird you'd expect someone else not to. Let people be.

Well apparently the majority of people voted for it which as least makes it a valid law. I have no idea why you think it's immoral to obey the law just because you don't agree with it.

So, tell me, who exactly was the victim in this current arrest. I'll send them a card. And again "his third offense" doesn't mean anything when the law is immoral and spurious. 🤷.

I don't expect people with violent criminal records to be allowed to have guns. What are you preparing for that you need a gun all the time? Still sounds fearful to me.

What was he preparing for, The felon with the history of criminal violence?

Everyone who has a right to safety and to not sit next to an armed criminal with a history of violence.

But if you need a gun all the time is that what you're preparing for? Because then that would just be two criminals on a plane with guns.

[removed]

What I'm doing is free speech right now. You're just mad nobody who is reasonable agrees with you.

He literally has a history of criminal violence, did you even read the article?

Why do you need a gun if you're not afraid

i think you are mistaking "Having a loaded weapon in the airport" vs "Bringing a gun to the airport". By bringing a firearm to Logan, he had to be in Mass, which requires an FID, and why he caught a few new charges. The title isn't misleading, it's quite accurate.

I'm not mad at all. I'm having a conversation. The worst thing about the internet is everyone thinks everyone else is mad because of opposing views. You are a complete stranger. You have no ability to make me mad. I don't care if he is a violent criminal , if he is out of prison, he gets full access to his rights. That's how a free society should work. If he is too dangerous to have his rights, then they shouldn't have let him out. Now back to your repeated fake gotcha question , I already told you, same reason you'd use a seatbelt or fire extinguisher, just in case. Your working theory seems to be that just because I'm not walking around afraid, like you, then I am not aware that bad things can happen. And that's silly.

You think that there was a public vote on licenses to carry? I didn't say obeying the law is immoral. I said the law itself is immortal because it takes away ones rights.

Lmfao you don't like it when I say you're, obviously, mad but you get to say I'm afraid. That's rich! I dont need a gun like you, so what are you preparing for that has you so afraid that you need a gun?

My working theory is that you're projecting. People with violent criminal histories don't get to have guns, why that bothers you is incredibly suspect.

I dont have a history of criminal violence, so if I want a gun I can have one. Sorry! You don't get to if you've been a violent piece of shit to people!

That you're more concerned with their "right" to have the means to kill people rather than the right to vote once they get out says a lot too!

No I'm not mistaking anything. And you're just semantically restating the same thing.

As I said....

>the real point here is that he's a multiple offender and didn't have a license for the gun in the first place.

He's not really getting charged with "bringing a loaded gun into an airport" vs being charged for getting caught illegally possessing a firearm. It's not where he had it. It's that he had at all when he wasn't supposed to. If a person who is properly credentialed to carry a firearm walks into logan with it and casually puts it through security like did they're most likely just going to have it confiscated.

He won’t.

Just another kid growing up without a father

Actually caring a loaded firearm at Logan at all is illegal since 9/11.

Once you've outted yourself as a violent asshole why won't follow the rules, it's reasonable to presume that you might get violent in the future. This warrants restrictions that wouldn't be in place for other people precisely to prevent future victims.

You're moving the goalposts on us here. Laws don't require a victim to be valid. Restraining orders, for example, could be argued as not technically having a victim since their aim is to prevent future crimes that haven't happened yet rather than punish past crimes. You're trying to pretend that that very simple and obvious type of legal restriction doesn't exist, while in fact it does.

Ah, so I only need to follow laws that I agree with. Good to know 🙄

“It’s my God given right!”

-this guy, probably

He won’t, because our judges wont hold anyone accountable.

They should have a law for that….

Most of the shooters in our city are on their 3rd or 4th offense. Some of them are wearing ankle monitors when they do it!

Maybe violent people and people carrying tools of violence without the legal ability to do so should be held? Just a thought.

smooth brain comeback

knowing MA, more gun laws to stop everyone else from doing what criminals do

i think if they add another law it will work this time /s

I…never said he shouldn’t….

My commentary was that you’re right… but somehow the state will justify trying to convince you you’re wrong

Yet still accesses firearms.

I’m a well regulated militia :}

That’s why everyone should carry