lacoochee
Member
The photo is not close enough to see that kind of detail unless you have access to a better photo than the one in the article?
Drew Peterson's gun card revoked
- Thread starter Neo-Luddite
- Start date
- Status
Technosavant
Member
If that is the case, the prosecutor will look REALLY silly in court. Not long ago a few IL policemen were acquitted of violating the NFA for having full auto ARs on the basis that they were police. I'd think that would also translate to state laws regarding SBRs (that could be why this is a state charge, not a fed one, since the feds know it is a waste of time).
As Jeff said, they were going to find something to charge him with, come hell or high water. Sure, Peterson seems to be quite the jerk, but being a jerk isn't illegal, so they have to find something else.
lesjones
Member
Im sorry, 10.5" barrel and 5.5" flash hider combos are dumb as hell.
Yep. Regardless of what one thinks of Peterson, the state of Illinois, or whatever else, it's all cons and no pros, especially if you don't do it right.
Yep. Regardless of what one thinks of Peterson, the state of Illinois, or whatever else, it's all cons and no pros, especially if you don't do it right.
Gunnerpalace
Member
Don Gwinn
Moderator Emeritus
Peterson's lawyer says he was told the barrel was "3/8-inch too short." Doesn't look, from that photo, as if that's the allegation.
He also claims that Peterson owned the rifle as a duty weapon (he was a SWAT member) and that it was "registered as a duty weapon" with the Bolingbrook PD. He further claims that Peterson surrendered the gun before he retired, so while he possessed it, he was still a LEO and it was still his duty weapon.
If all that is true, it sounds like there's no case. But is it true? Who knows?
He also claims that Peterson owned the rifle as a duty weapon (he was a SWAT member) and that it was "registered as a duty weapon" with the Bolingbrook PD. He further claims that Peterson surrendered the gun before he retired, so while he possessed it, he was still a LEO and it was still his duty weapon.
If all that is true, it sounds like there's no case. But is it true? Who knows?
El Tejon
Member
The stupidity of these laws enrage me.
I am certain the women of Illinois will sleep better tonight as they now know that a metal tube is more important to Illinois law enforcement than a woman's life.
I am certain the women of Illinois will sleep better tonight as they now know that a metal tube is more important to Illinois law enforcement than a woman's life.
XDKingslayer
member
Hell just froze over. I agreed with Jeff White.
Gunnerpalace
Member
The Flash suppressor is sitting IN FRONT of the rifle in case anyone missed it...........I did.
I needed a good laugh thanks king.
El Tejon said;
Actually women nationwide who watch Nancy and Greta and spend the rest of their waking hours watching the Law and Order reruns that are available 24-7 on any cable or satellite package are sleeping better because he was charged with something.
I don't see how they have any UUW case against him. He was still a peace officer when the weapons were taken from him and he never possessed them after he retired. If the barrel is too short, there is a case that could be made for not returning that weapon to him, because he no longer could possess it since he lost his peace officer status, but I hardly see how they could convict him on UUW.
But then it's been a media circus around him, I doubt they would have any problem convicting Peterson for anything they wanted...the Lindberg kidnapping, being the gun man on the grassy knoll that fateful day in Dallas, overtime parking......thanks to the crusading press, in who's eyes the demise of an attractive, upper middle class white woman is more important then the demise of thousands of lessor women who aren't attractive and rich enough to make a good story.
Jeff
I am certain the women of Illinois will sleep better tonight as they now know that a metal tube is more important to Illinois law enforcement than a woman's life.
Actually women nationwide who watch Nancy and Greta and spend the rest of their waking hours watching the Law and Order reruns that are available 24-7 on any cable or satellite package are sleeping better because he was charged with something.
I don't see how they have any UUW case against him. He was still a peace officer when the weapons were taken from him and he never possessed them after he retired. If the barrel is too short, there is a case that could be made for not returning that weapon to him, because he no longer could possess it since he lost his peace officer status, but I hardly see how they could convict him on UUW.
But then it's been a media circus around him, I doubt they would have any problem convicting Peterson for anything they wanted...the Lindberg kidnapping, being the gun man on the grassy knoll that fateful day in Dallas, overtime parking......thanks to the crusading press, in who's eyes the demise of an attractive, upper middle class white woman is more important then the demise of thousands of lessor women who aren't attractive and rich enough to make a good story.
Jeff
Harley Quinn
Member
The guy needs some trouble after all he has done it appears, he is innocent until proven guilty true, but he messed up on something else and they got him, hmmm reminds me of Al Capone and old IL laws and the feds. This guy does not need to be carring anything around that is a weapon. Maybe a pencil or a pen but nothing else. 
When it is over and done with lets see what he will have going.
When it is over and done with lets see what he will have going. Andras
Member
Someone on arfcom posted that the flash-hider looks like the 4.5" version and not the 5.5" version, due to the step down. If that is the case, it would still be shorter then 16" when assembled.
NickEllis
Member
doesn't matter, if he was LEO and it was registered as a service weapon. Looks like this is a null and void case.
I'm glad the ISP isn't after me!
I'm glad the ISP isn't after me!
Looks like his son is getting the rest of the weapons.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,357143,00.html
If that AR is in fact an SBR, then it would have had to be a registration with BATFE for it to be legal. Even a dept must register their machine guns and SBRs with BATFE on a Form 10. Of course any charges related to that would be federal and not state.
Jeff
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,357143,00.html
If that AR is in fact an SBR, then it would have had to be a registration with BATFE for it to be legal. Even a dept must register their machine guns and SBRs with BATFE on a Form 10. Of course any charges related to that would be federal and not state.
Jeff
I don't know the details of the case because I'm just not interested, but it appears to me that this guy has already been convicted of his wife's murder by the media. It says a lot about today's society when the media is the judge and jury.
If he did it he deserves the bad press, but if he's innocent then he has been slandered by the likes of Nancy Grace and her cohorts for nothing but to help their ratings.
The SBR thing sounds like a bunch of BS from what little I know about it, and I'm sure it will blow over soon.
If he did it he deserves the bad press, but if he's innocent then he has been slandered by the likes of Nancy Grace and her cohorts for nothing but to help their ratings.
The SBR thing sounds like a bunch of BS from what little I know about it, and I'm sure it will blow over soon.
koja48
member
Can we say innocent until proven guilty???!!!
In this case, NO! I disagree with the gun ruling, but am disgusted that a 2-time wife killer is still walking around free.
In this case, NO! I disagree with the gun ruling, but am disgusted that a 2-time wife killer is still walking around free.
Care to elaborate on what evidence you've seen that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Peterson is a 2-time wife killer? Don't you think that if such evidence was available he would have been charged with murder?
Or would you prefer that the National Enquirer, Geraldo Rivera, Nancy Grace and Greta Van Susteren replace our criminal justice system?
Jeff
I just read some back story.
In my opinion, it sounds like he very well killed his last two wives. It does sound a bit too fishy, especially considering the abuse records, the thing on the containers, and so forth.
Just my opinion, but lightning doesnt strike twice unless you have a metal rod in your ass. Just sayin'. however, it is just my opinion.
As for the weapons charges, I agree. Can't really get him on that.
In my opinion, it sounds like he very well killed his last two wives. It does sound a bit too fishy, especially considering the abuse records, the thing on the containers, and so forth.
Just my opinion, but lightning doesnt strike twice unless you have a metal rod in your ass. Just sayin'. however, it is just my opinion.
As for the weapons charges, I agree. Can't really get him on that.
Aguila Blanca
Member
I read some back stories, too.
I read that an older guy seems to like marrying younger women, one of whom is dead and another of whom is missing.
Do I believe that he killed at least one of them? Yes, I do. After the media brainwashing, how could anyone believe otherwise?
Is there a shred of proof that he killed either of them? Apparently not. If there was, I rather imagine that he would have been arrested on a murder charge if there was even a half-decent circumstantial case. So, if we are to live according to the legal system we all hope would be protecting us if we were ever arrested for something, we must proceed on the assumption that he is innocent until proven guilty.
alan
Member
As I understand this discusion, correct me if I'm wrong, the state police revoked an individuals FOID Card under questionable circumstances, having previously seized the individual's personal property, guns, computers and so on. A court has ordered return of seized items. State police haven't complied with a court order. Seems that there would be grounds for a contempt citation, which could possibly see offending party or parties jailed and or fined.
Correct me if I've misunderstood or am otherwise wrong.
Correct me if I've misunderstood or am otherwise wrong.
Deanimator
Member
Just not in Chicago, where Daley has decided to violate that law, even for retired cops IN the city.
scout26
Member
As much as I think he is slime, he has NOT been convicted, much less charged with anything in connection to anything regarding wives 3 and 4.
He has been denied his rights and due process, by having his FOID card revoked without being charged much less convicted of anything.
I do hope the rifle in question is a duty weapon, because then he can sue the ISP and shove their idiotic FOID law up their 4th point of contact.....Sideways.
koja48
member
Care to elaborate
My PERSONAL opinion, Mr. Moderator White . . . and I AM as entitled to that opinion as you are yours. You believe what you are inclined to believe, and I'll do likewise. I also believe he was "protected by position" and covered-up-for in the first unfortunate instance. And before you climb back on your high-horse again, I HAVE been a peace officer in my lifetime, but I was and still am, dead-honest, no matter what job capacity I'm in. As for "reasonable doubt," try 2 wives missing under mysterious circumstances, the first later determined to be the victim of a homicide after-the-fact. Now, would you be interested in buying some timbered, high mountain property rich with trophy trout streams & thriving elk herds on the outskirts of New Orleans? Feel thankful that I even took the time to explain my position . . . I usually detest wasting my time so . . .
My PERSONAL opinion, Mr. Moderator White . . . and I AM as entitled to that opinion as you are yours. You believe what you are inclined to believe, and I'll do likewise. I also believe he was "protected by position" and covered-up-for in the first unfortunate instance. And before you climb back on your high-horse again, I HAVE been a peace officer in my lifetime, but I was and still am, dead-honest, no matter what job capacity I'm in. As for "reasonable doubt," try 2 wives missing under mysterious circumstances, the first later determined to be the victim of a homicide after-the-fact. Now, would you be interested in buying some timbered, high mountain property rich with trophy trout streams & thriving elk herds on the outskirts of New Orleans? Feel thankful that I even took the time to explain my position . . . I usually detest wasting my time so . . .
- Status
