Discussion in 'Legal' started by coebam, Dec 25, 2012.
Consider it public attention and awareness.
If he broke the law, the broke the law. It's a very straightforward did he do it, or not, kind of thing.
Having strict but fairly enforced laws is a far worse option vs. having and actually standing up to defend all of our rights.
I don't particularly like Gregory's use of his 1st amendment rights either, but I would stand up to stop the government from harassing him because of something he said. Same principle.
Look at it this way, if he's convicted, he's not able to vote anymore. One less ignorant voice is a positive move.
The principle is that he shouldn't get a pass on committing a crime because he is in the media
I think it's a dumb law, but we cannot allow those who
A) would use those very laws to hang us
B) speak to us as the unwashed and uneducated masses
C) seek to sway public opinion in their favor with lies and misrepresentation
to get a free pass.
If I had a say in legislation, I'd vote to repeal this law. But I don't, so I'll use the opportunity to expose it for the fraud it is and motivate those who DO have a say to repeal it.
From the Washington Post:
Therein is the issue: gun control advocates do not take existing laws seriously, even while calling for more laws; gun owners may despise existing laws, but expect them to be enforced.
Just like the case where the late Redskins owner Jack Kent Cooke had a firearm in his home at a time when all handguns were banned there; they'll investigate and find "Insufficient Evidence".
"Eliminate armed guards for the President, Vice-President, and their families, and establish Gun Free Zones around them"
"Gun Free Zones are supposed to protect our children, and some politicians wish to strip us of our right to keep and bear arms. Those same politicians and their families are currently under the protection of armed Secret Service agents. If Gun Free Zones are sufficient protection for our children, then Gun Free Zones should be good enough for politicians."
The Metro Police are investagating. Allow them to their jobs. If they find sufficient evidence, file charges. Of course the DA has the option to administratively reduce or even dismiss charges.
Now, should Mr Gregory be put in county jail and every legal method used to deny or slow down the bail process and if Mr Gregory should get "exposed" to the very people he and his ilk pretend to champion, well it will be a "boots on the ground" learning experience about the criminal justice system for Mr Gregory. That "up close and personal" insight will, no doubt, make him a better reporter.
The way I see it, this is a no lose situation for gun owners. They wont prosecute Gregory because he is one of them. So it sets a precedent about enforcement. Were they to prosecute him, that would be one less idiot on TV. I really don't see the reason for the petition. They really don't care what we think. Right now they are just trying to figure out how to spin this to keep one of their own out of trouble, while still trying to keep us inline. Sit back and watch the show I say.....
I to wonder where the heck he got the magazine. I can't believe they didn't think that one through. Not exactly difficult to find pictures of 30 round magazines!
David's team had to consider a live shot or recorded VSOT with a reporter in a free state holding a 30-round magazine to set up the discussion with LaPiere. In addition, given the felonious intent, the idea had to be run past senior management and counsel, who provide pre-pub review. They evidently thought it more impactful for David to intentionally break the law on "national TV" to prove the subjective point the team was using public air time to make. It backfired, big time.
Was the point:
That David is above the law? "I can own this because my purposes are above other purposes."
That such laws don't work, because David (and others in his organization) obtained the "contraband" despite the law? "See how meaningless magazine bans are? Even I can buy one at my corner grocery store."
That DC cops don't enforce the laws already on the books? "See, look at me, people. I'm holding up this "illegal" magazine on national television, and I will never be charged. Local laws are not enough. Sure, it is a felony for me to do this. But my employer has sway over these DC cops, who will never, ever charge me. Ha ha ha. We need congress to act to stop me before I break the law again!"
David should be charged and he should be prosecuted. Or everyone else in DC should be allowed to violate the same law for their own unique purposes.
That's as wrong headed as the suggestion we should be petty and vengeful in supporting a "petition" to have charges pressed over a magazine being used as a visual aid. Very low road as well as being pointless thereby making us look idiotic.
This is childish and low road.
Take 4 steps backwards and look at it.
You need to be charged with the crime, and then defend it in a court of law under the Second AMendment.
The ideal case is this:
Gregory is charged with a crime and he does not plea bargin out of it.
The case goes to court.
The NRA, GOA or someone defends Gregory on the basis of the Second Amendment.
A court throws out the law as unconstitutional.
Separate names with a comma.