Scruit Posted December 24, 2012 Report Share Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) http://ohioccwforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=67497Get the word out. Edited December 24, 2012 by Scruit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokey Posted December 24, 2012 Report Share Posted December 24, 2012 More shocked that he didn't refer to it as a 30 round clip. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted December 24, 2012 Report Share Posted December 24, 2012 Good for him, trying to point out that merely possessing something doesn't mean it will cause harm if your intentions are admirable. Isn't that what gun owners have been stating all along? You have a friend in the media that proves your point and you want him prosecuted for doing something which you believe should be legal. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The King Posted December 24, 2012 Report Share Posted December 24, 2012 No, he broke the law in DC...it applies to everyone in DC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted December 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 24, 2012 Good for him, trying to point out that merely possessing something doesn't mean it will cause harm if your intentions are admirable. Isn't that what gun owners have been stating all along? You have a friend in the media that proves your point and you want him prosecuted for doing something which you believe should be legal.He wants laws enforced. I say enforce them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReconRat Posted December 24, 2012 Report Share Posted December 24, 2012 Don't remember the DC mayor's name, but years ago the DC mayor shot a kid in his swimming pool. With an illegal handgun. Did he get prosecuted? No he did not, that I can remember.So, the nobility can do what they want, but the peasants and serfs have to abide? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted December 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 24, 2012 Thought that was Carl Rowan, famous anti-gun crusader. Who owned a gun, it seems.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Rowan#ControversyJury deadlocked, not retried. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReconRat Posted December 24, 2012 Report Share Posted December 24, 2012 Thought that was Carl Rowan, famous anti-gun crusader. Who owned a gun, it seems.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Rowan#ControversyJury deadlocked, not retried.Got it, I confused this guy with the mayor, who at the time was facing charges of something like cocaine use and possession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmh_sprint Posted December 24, 2012 Report Share Posted December 24, 2012 Got it, I confused this guy with the mayor, who at the time was facing charges of something like cocaine use and possession.The one and only Marion Barry. He is a stellar example of how screwed up how people will believe everything in an election. Mr. Barry on top of his drug issues, has had issues with the IRS, illegally awarding contracts, etc., etc. and is still a active member of DC city council. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted December 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2012 He is being investigated by the police now.http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/12/25/washington-d-c-police-investigating-whether-nbc-moderator-violated-law/?hpt=hp_t3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted December 25, 2012 Report Share Posted December 25, 2012 (edited) Anyone confirm it wasn't just a TV prop? Edited December 25, 2012 by JRMMiii Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted December 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2012 Anyone conform it wasn't just a TV prop?No. However considering he held it in his hand and said; "This is a 30 round magazine" if I was on the jury I'd need HIM to prove it was a prop, not the prosecution to prove it wasn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted December 25, 2012 Report Share Posted December 25, 2012 No. However considering he held it in his hand and said; "This is a 30 round magazine" if I was on the jury I'd need HIM to prove it was a prop, not the prosecution to prove it wasn't.But that's not really how it works. You're making the assumption of guilt to prove innocence, not -- how it's written into law.How do we prove all the food in restaurant adverts are real? Or that Sylvester Stallone really didn't kill all those people?I really don't care either way, but people are making a big deal over this are the silly ones. He was using it in a dramatic manner for news purposes, not in the offense of committing a crime. I'd rather have that law on the books if only for it to be used as an excuse to be able to tack on some additional consecutive time during sentencing if an extended magazine was used in the commission of a crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted December 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2012 But that's not really how it works. You're making the assumption of guilt to prove innocence, not -- how it's written into law.As a member of the jury I would consider him saying; "This is a 30 round magazine" as evidence of guilt. That is not an assumption, that is a confession. That is not "guilty until proven innocent".. That is him starting his trial assumed innocent, and this video and statement is what would convince me that he was guilty.He would have the opportunity to refute that by providing evidence that the mag was a prop. But he's have to do more than produce a prop mag. He'd have to convince me that the one he was holding was a prop rather than him just going out and finding a prop/nonfunctional mag.Hoisted by his own petard. So to speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cOoTeR Posted December 26, 2012 Report Share Posted December 26, 2012 But that's not really how it works. You're making the assumption of guilt to prove innocence, not -- how it's written into law.How do we prove all the food in restaurant adverts are real? Or that Sylvester Stallone really didn't kill all those people?I really don't care either way, but people are making a big deal over this are the silly ones. He was using it in a dramatic manner for news purposes, not in the offense of committing a crime. I'd rather have that law on the books if only for it to be used as an excuse to be able to tack on some additional consecutive time during sentencing if an extended magazine was used in the commission of a crime.So illegally using a firearm part for "dramatic manner" is ok but any other use is bad? I thought guns themselves were bad but its ok for him to have it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swingset Posted December 26, 2012 Report Share Posted December 26, 2012 I really don't care either way, but people are making a big deal over this are the silly ones. He was using it in a dramatic manner for news purposes, not in the offense of committing a crime.And if you were there, in possession of a high cap magazine and were caught with one, no matter what your excuse or activities, you'd be prosecuted for it.This is about the hypocrisy of the law and the media, and the absurdity of it, not that what this guy was bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C-bus Posted December 26, 2012 Report Share Posted December 26, 2012 A) It's real and he should be prosecuted as I would have been....typical of the media's "us" and "them" mentality.Or....B) It's fake and he loses credibility as a journalist. Lying on national TV to create a story. Of course he will get a pass by the zombified public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jst2fst Posted December 26, 2012 Report Share Posted December 26, 2012 Hell if we tried that we'd be looking at the inside of a jail cell right about now. WTF is with people? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReconRat Posted December 26, 2012 Report Share Posted December 26, 2012 D.C. police investigating "Meet the Press" over gun propApparently they called first and the police said no. Oops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cOoTeR Posted December 26, 2012 Report Share Posted December 26, 2012 D.C. police investigating "Meet the Press" over gun propApparently they called first and the police said no. Oops.And they did it anyways, they must be above the law! I guess that's why its so easy for them to say stricter laws are needed they don't plan on following them anyhow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbot Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/11/nbc-david-gregory-no-charge-displaying-ammunition-clip/1827673/just thought you all should know. so those of us with spot free records can use them as key chains and not be charge, am i right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smashweights Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/11/nbc-david-gregory-no-charge-displaying-ammunition-clip/1827673/just thought you all should know. so those of us with spot free records can use them as key chains and not be charge, am i right?What shit. If John Doe got pulled over with that in his back seat and nothing else he'd be charged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smashweights Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 ""would not promote public safety in the District of Columbia nor serve the best interests of the people of the District to whom this office owes its trust"So is this now an argument in court? I would like to argue the ticket for driving 35 in a 25 down a deserted 4 lane road on WSU campus meets this definition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbot Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 yuuuuuuppeople with great hair think they can get away with anything. hmph! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.