• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

D.C. store owner behind bars due to gun ownership...

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
This is ridiculous

Unlike a lot of people in his position, Malcolm Hines left prison in 2007 with a plan to avoid ever going back.
Before his 2003 conviction on cocaine-dealing charges, Hines had invested about $10,000 in blue-chip stocks — Exxon Mobil, Hewlett-Packard, Sirius satellite radio. By the time he was released, the D.C. native had doubled his money, which he then invested in a much riskier proposition: a shoe shop in Congress Heights.
16guns_1321306922.jpg

(Family Photo) - Sherita McLamore-Hines, left, and Malcolm Hines in a family photo. After his release from prison several years ago, Malcolm Hines turned his life around, opening a shoe shop, City Beats, in Anacostia.



Hines kept out of trouble and built City Beats into a thriving business on retail-starved Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE, selling the latest styles from New Balance, Timberland and Nike, even though the store was hit by a string of burglaries and holdups.

But now Hines, 40, is back behind bars, awaiting sentencing on felony gun charges after police found a loaded shotgun his sister-in-law had stashed inside his shop for protection.

The conviction has Hines, his wife and neighboring business owners frustrated. They complain that dozens of gun-related crimes in the area go unsolved, while an otherwise upstanding entrepreneur faces three years in prison.

“Most of the stores on the avenue have guns in them,” Hines said this month from inside the D.C. jail. “That’s the way it is on MLK.”

Hines, as a twice-convicted felon, is prohibited by federal law from owning a firearm. Still, shop owners say, a review of crime statistics in the area around City Beats makes it clear why a business owner might want to be armed.

The police service area has seen more than 110 gun crimes in the past year, including robberies, assaults and killings. The commercial stretch of MLK Jr. Avenue where the shop sits has seen 15 gun crimes in the past year, including the Oct. 17 slaying of a gas station attendant.

The business owners who have endured the violence — up about 10 percent in the area over the same period the previous year — said that police protection has been inadequate and that they understand why those running a cash-heavy business such as City Beats would arm themselves.

“We need protection,” said Hamdu Mukhtar, 33, who has run a pair of King Gas Convenience stations across the street from City Beats for more than two years.

His brother, Mohammed Mukhtar Abduselam, was working after his shift had ended to help stock chips and drinks the evening of Oct. 17. Two men walked into the store. Friends say Abduselam, 32, saw that one of them had a gun and went outside to call 911. One of the men followed and shot him dead.

Cmdr. Joel Maupin, who heads the D.C. police department’s 7th District, said he has moved to put more police on foot patrol in the area, both on the commercial blocks and in the area around the Congress Heights Metro station, which has recently experienced a spate of muggings.

Mukhtar said that after his brother was killed, about 10 gas workers at his two stations quit rather than risk their lives. Teenagers or youths — some as young as 12, Mukhtar said — regularly bring guns into the store and flash them to intimidate employees.

“Maybe we must sell the shop or move,” Mukhtar said. “My brother is gone for nothing.” He said police have told him they have a suspect, but no arrest has been made.
 
ya it sucks, and there are worse criminals out there, but the law on ex-felon gun ownership is pretty clear. Would I want a gun too if I was in his position? Sure.

But that doesn't give me a legitimate excuse to break the law.
 
He should have worked to restore his 2nd amendment rights. But the law is the law and was applied correctly here. It sucks for the guy, but as a felon he can't have firearms on his person or property.
 
Yes, they should. Are you saying felons should lose all natural rights as enumerated in the Bill of Rights?

no, but they shouldn't be allowed to own guns. but I'll leave it at that because I'm not going to get into an endless and pointless debate with people who have no sense of reality
 
If he had just gone to hang out with his rich-ass cousin Duncan and sat around eating cake all day, this would never have been a problem.

Maybe Duncan will just send him a delicious cake with a file in it instead.
 
ya it sucks, and there are worse criminals out there, but the law on ex-felon gun ownership is pretty clear. Would I want a gun too if I was in his position? Sure.

But that doesn't give me a legitimate excuse to break the law.

Just because something is legal or illegal does not make it right or wrong.

Just because it was legal to kill Jews in 1930s - 1940s Germany did not make it right.

Just because it was legal to own blacks did not make it right.

Just because the US Army slaughtered native Americans did not make it right.

Sometimes you have to stand up and say "the law is wrong." And in this case, the law is wrong.

This would be a good case for jury nullification. If the jury had any balls, they would find the accused not guilty, and then issue a stern reprimand to the judge and the DA.
 
Last edited:
are you trying to say that felons should be allowed to buy guns?
He broke the law, and should be punished according. I also sympathise with his plight because of the crime in his area.

Your first post read like you're happy that he's going to jail because he's a felon. At least that's how I read it.
 
Just because something is legal or illegal does not make it right or wrong.

You'll notice the first thing I said was that the outcome "sucks." But I don't see this as any different than the people caught smoking pot and then bitching after the fact that it should be legal. Be that as it may, everyone knows that smoking pot and felons owning guns is illegal, and you voluntarily risk the consequences by ignoring that fact.

You're kind of making the opposite argument with your analogies of just because X is legal does not make it morally right.

Here, the corollary is that just because X is illegal does not make it morally wrong. While true, engaging in X certainly exposes you to risk. Rosa Parks knew this when she refused to relinquish her seat, and Malcolm Hines knew this when he kept a gun in his store.
 
this is sad.. but all guns should be illegal. UNLESS FOR HUNTING.


in a perfect world there would be no need for guns (besides hunting)

and.... i quote Ghandi...

"we dont know much about this world, but we do know, the best thing we can be in this world is the change we'd like to see in this world"
 
I think after a certain amount of time without having any new convictions a felon should be able to live like a normal American citizen.

you would think 20 years might be long enough, but hell no some evil ass **********can't even say how much i despise these people set me up and had me arrested because i was in a house where someone owned a gun, even though i didn't know where it even was, and it had never been fired, and it was not my gun. same charge he is facing, it is a very serious charge and can carry a lot of time.

The law states you can not even be in a house with a gun present, that is considered you being in possession. I am not the same person who i used to be, if i was the people who set me up to try and send me away to prison would be dead right now.
 
You'll notice the first thing I said was that the outcome "sucks." But I don't see this as any different than the people caught smoking pot and then bitching after the fact that it should be legal. Be that as it may, everyone knows that smoking pot and felons owning guns is illegal, and you voluntarily risk the consequences by ignoring that fact.

You're kind of making the opposite argument with your analogies of just because X is legal does not make it morally right.

Here, the corollary is that just because X is illegal does not make it morally wrong. While true, engaging in X certainly exposes you to risk. Rosa Parks knew this when she refused to relinquish her seat, and Malcolm Hines knew this when he kept a gun in his store.

correct. this is true, this is why we should be the change in this world we would like to see... it may not happen in our lifetimes, but, it's the best thing we could possibly be.
 
Article says his sister stashed the shotgun. Did he own the weapon or did she? Or is he simply taking the fall because the weapon was on property owned by him?
 
That kind of blind loyalty is what allowed the US to do some pretty embarrassing things.
It sucks that he's in this position.

However, I'm not American, nor have I stepped foot on American soil, but even I know convicted felons are not allowed to have weapons.
 
I sympathize with him. He had already done the near impossible by turning away from crime and building a successful business. There should be room for leeway in this. I say confiscate the gun, slap a fine on him, and let him go back to work.
 
I sympathize with him. He had already done the near impossible by turning away from crime and building a successful business. There should be room for leeway in this. I say confiscate the gun, slap a fine on him, and let him go back to work.

That would be ideal, but it's an automatic felony. At least 1 year in jail.
 
However, I'm not American, nor have I stepped foot on American soil, but even I know convicted felons are not allowed to have weapons.

How do you "know" this? Because someone told you? I have been told that convicted felons can not own a firearm, but in a lot of cases I reject that logic.

Why must society continue to punish people who have paid the price for their crimes?

In Texas, if the crime is over $75 or $100 (not sure which one), it can be a felony. So someone can lose their right to vote, and lose the right to own a gun over a $100 crime. How is that "right"?

In certain cases, it is absurd to punish someone for the rest of their life because of a mistake in judgement.

That would be ideal, but it's an automatic felony. At least 1 year in jail.

Jury nullification, accused you are free to go, and to the judge and DA, you are both stupid.
 
Last edited:
ya it sucks, and there are worse criminals out there, but the law on ex-felon gun ownership is pretty clear. Would I want a gun too if I was in his position? Sure.

But that doesn't give me a legitimate excuse to break the law.

I'd think self defense is plenty of an "excuse" to break a law, especially an unconstitutional law.
 
Back
Top