David Gregory Violates DC Gun Law

[OfficerObie59]

In addition, in order to raise this affirmative defense successfully, the defendant must prove (s)he relied on the representation of law enforcement when committing the illegal act. For example, someone who is well known to understand the actual MGL in regard to carry (as evidenced through public statements, forum posts, etc.) could not hide behind the estoppel defense just because LE told that person something (s)he knew to be false.

Additionally, that reliance must also be objectively reasonable. To cite an absurd example, you can't walk up to a cop, tell him your wife is pissing you off, ask him if it's legal to kill her, have him say yes, and assert entrapment by estoppel when you get charged with murder.

I think that as well applies here. First, DC Metro Police flat out told NBC "no". Not only that, but the statutory language is pretty clear--there's no vaugeness or ambiguity in the law. The very fact that NBC asked (twice) seems to suggest to me they weren't asking for a statutory clarification, but rather permission to violate the law without consequence.

 

[That Guy]

I can't believe the arguments Bill O is getting here.

If a member of NES appeared on television at Fox25 studios in Boston and waved what he claimed to be a post-ban 30 round magazine and then was prosecuted, we'd be outraged. We would argue, first and foremost, that nobody can prove that the magazine was really what he claimed it was. Then we would argue that his admission of what it was is completely inadmissible as evidence - it was a statement made on television (hardly a basis for being a truthful statement). Then we'd argue that the law itself was stupid.

Just because Gregory is an asshat with views completely opposed to my own does not mean I want to see him convicted of something in a manner that would outrage me if it were an ally in this debate.

I find it appropriate for the DC police to investigate, given that he did make a statement that it was a 30 round magazine. But unless he admits it was a real mag, they have no proof to do anything and the investigation should stop.

The upside to this story, however, is that Gregory is now in a situation where he has to do one of two things: Admit it was real and face prosecution or admit he was lying to make his point. Journalists who are forced to admit to lying rarely prosper for long.

 

[Mass-diver]

raid his house now!

(not kidding, f him, he sucks at life)

 

[Dench]

I can't believe the arguments Bill O is getting here.

If a member of NES appeared on television at Fox25 studios in Boston and waved what he claimed to be a post-ban 30 round magazine and then was prosecuted, we'd be outraged. We would argue, first and foremost, that nobody can prove that the magazine was really what he claimed it was. Then we would argue that his admission of what it was is completely inadmissible as evidence - it was a statement made on television (hardly a basis for being a truthful statement). Then we'd argue that the law itself was stupid.

Just because Gregory is an asshat with views completely opposed to my own does not mean I want to see him convicted of something in a manner that would outrage me if it were an ally in this debate.

I find it appropriate for the DC police to investigate, given that he did make a statement that it was a 30 round magazine. But unless he admits it was a real mag, they have no proof to do anything and the investigation should stop.

The upside to this story, however, is that Gregory is now in a situation where he has to do one of two things: Admit it was real and face prosecution or admit he was lying to make his point. Journalists who are forced to admit to lying rarely prosper for long.

I think most here would be happy with him getting in hot water, and let off after being dragged through the bullshit that goes along with such a BS offense. In my eyes the ban on those mags isnt even legal, ergo its not enforceable.

It would be very entertaining, though, to see an anti get stuck in a web of bullshit while trying to make a stupid point about a piece of metal. Maybe after dropping a few thousand on lawyer fee's will he see how retarded that law is, and how little similar new laws will do in the future.

 

[Mike-Mike]

I think most here would be happy with him getting in hot water, and let off after being dragged through the bullshit that goes along with such a BS offense. In my eyes the ban on those mags isnt even legal, ergo its not enforceable.

It would be very entertaining, though, to see an anti get stuck in a web of bullshit while trying to make a stupid point about a piece of metal. Maybe after dropping a few thousand on lawyer fee's will he see how retarded that law is, and how little similar new laws will do in the future.

I agree with this, However he is advocating making something illegal Federally while holding it is his hand in a state where it is already illegal. He should be mad if we DON'T prosecute him.

I wish Wayne said to him "So you think people should go to jail for possessing that? " Then reminded him of the ban.

 

[Billsail]

I would much rather see him fired/demoted than go to jail.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I wish Wayne said to him "So you think people should go to jail for possessing that? " Then reminded him of the ban.

What would be really impressive is if Wayne were properly briefed on DC law, and the limits of entrapment by estoppel, prior to the interview so he could have made it an issue during the interview.

 

[Dench]

I wish Wayne said to him "So you think people should go to jail for possessing that? " Then reminded him of the ban.

I can say with confidence, that if I was in that interview, I would of brought up the fact that he is committing a felony on TV.

 

[bill o]

I would much rather see him fired/demoted than go to jail.

Fired for what, holding a tube with a spring? Either you're against these laws or you're for them. You can't be against them but still want to see people suffer for breaking them.

 

[Mike-Mike]

Fired for what, holding a tube with a spring? Either you're against these laws or you're for them. You can't be against them but still want to see people suffer for breaking them.

If you held the same tube and spring you would go to prison.

 

[06LemansC6]

Fired for what, holding a tube with a spring? Either you're against these laws or you're for them. You can't be against them but still want to see people suffer for breaking them.

I want to see the people that propose and support such stupid laws suffer. THAT is the difference. Perhaps if the stupid laws they create bite them in the ass they will stop proposing them. This isn't a black or white issue.

 

[bill o]

If you held the same tube and spring you would go to prison.

Your point being...?

 

[bill o]

I want to see the people that propose and support such stupid laws suffer. THAT is the difference. Perhaps if the stupid laws they create bite them in the ass they will stop proposing them. This isn't a black or white issue.

So you want to use government power to inflict pain on people whose views you disagree with?

 

[mass]

I don't want to see him go to jail any more than I want anyone to go to jail for posession of a 30 round magazine. I do want him to have a felony on his record to make a point.

 

[Supermoto]

Fired for what, holding a tube with a spring? Either you're against these laws or you're for them. You can't be against them but still want to see people suffer for breaking them.

This, the only reason people want him arrested is because he is the enemy, not because he violated a just law or violated someones rights. You just want to F this guy because you don't like him.

 

[06LemansC6]

So you want to use government power to inflict pain on people whose views you disagree with?

Way to twist my words. I want equal treatment across the board. I would prefer to be left completely alone by .gov, but that isn't going to happen. I want to see BS laws like this implode on the people that propose and support them. I didn't create the system, but I'm forced to live with it. This elitist douche should get the same treatment any of us would receive. I don't like that status and money can buy your way out of the legal system, but it's a fact we must deal with. Like I said you are trying to make things black or white, when the reality is many shades of grey.

 

[Mike-Mike]

Your point being...?

My point being, if he pushes for a law (no matter how wrong the law) and I am subject to it. There is no reason to exempt him from it. The only thing worst than a bad law is unequal or selective enforcement. He will realize how stupid the law is once he charged.

 

[xtry51]

So you want to use government power to inflict pain on people whose views you disagree with?

No, we want gov't to enforce laws equally on those who called for them in the first place. I don't think anyone here approves of the laws existence in the first place.

 

[strangenh]

I think the phrase driving this discussion is "hoist by his own petard." None of us like that law. But there's a guy calling for one nationally while dancing on one right under his own feet. "Wait! Not MEEEEEEE!"

 

[bill o]

No, we want gov't to enforce laws equally on those who called for them in the first place. I don't think anyone here approves of the laws existence in the first place.

If you're calling for any enforcement, then you 're supporting the legitimacy of that law.

This thread is a steaming pile of statist shit. My god.

 

[Billsail]

Fired for what, holding a tube with a spring? Either you're against these laws or you're for them. You can't be against them but still want to see people suffer for breaking them.

I just said I'd rather see him fired than go to jail. That has NOTHING to do with laws! It's about being caught lying. But barring any disciplinary action by a biased employer, yes, I want to see him prosecuted to underscore the absurdity of the laws.

 

[xtry51]

If you're calling for any enforcement, then you 're supporting the legitimacy of that law.

This thread is a steaming pile of statist shit. My god.

I pretty much as libertarian as anyone gets. Most people would refer to me as an extreme libertarian and I've been called an anarchist, erroneously, by more than a few people on this forum.

That said my desire of how I would like to see the country run does not disillusion me from how it currently IS being run. The only way you stop these a**h***s is play their game or declare civil war. I'm not at the latter yet, so I've got no problem using the system they created to make my point. As I said earlier him being charged fully is a win/win for us. It proves a point AND allows for the law to be challenged in court and overturned.

Lets be perfectly clear, politicians is DC are NOT going to vote away the DC AWB.

So you go through the courts, which requires a victim (who in this case just happens to be an anti douchebag) or you take up armed rebellion. Which course are you advocating for?

 

[06LemansC6]

If you're calling for any enforcement, then you 're supporting the legitimacy of that law.

I don't see it that way. The problem is the people introducing and supporting these laws don't understand how absurd they are. They are passing laws they don't understand. Kind of like "that shoulder thing that goes up". No one here is supporting the legitimacy of the law, the fact is the supporters of said laws have no idea. Perhaps, maybe, just maybe, if they find themselves wrapped up in the legal system due to the absurdity of holding a harmless chunk of stamped metal and a spring some eyes will open. It's pretty goddamned clear that the status quo isn't doing much for us. So you can continue to oppose this law equally (despite anyone else would be charged with a crime) and hope the laws will somehow just disappear, or you can hope that he gets charged and some eyes open up to how asinine the laws are.

 

[06LemansC6]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to xtry51 again.

You seem to be doing a better job stating my viewpoint on the subject.

 

[bill o]

I don't see it that way. The problem is the people introducing and supporting these laws don't understand how absurd they are. They are passing laws they don't understand. Kind of like "that shoulder thing that goes up". No one here is supporting the legitimacy of the law, the fact is the supporters of said laws have no idea. Perhaps, maybe, just maybe, if they find themselves wrapped up in the legal system due to the absurdity of holding a harmless chunk of stamped metal and a spring some eyes will open. It's pretty goddamned clear that the status quo isn't doing much for us. So you can continue to oppose this law equally (despite anyone else would be charged with a crime) and hope the laws will somehow just disappear, or you can hope that he gets charged and some eyes open up to how asinine the laws are.

So you're hoping for abusive prosecutions to make certain people realize their Constitutionally protected views are wrong?

 

[06LemansC6]

So you're hoping for abusive prosecutions to make certain people realize their Constitutionally protected views are wrong?

Isn't that what they are doing to us with our Constitutionally protected rights? I think your point of view (just ignore the bad law rather than equal enforcement) is doing more to embolden the antis than my wish for prosecution to be equally applied. If you continue to obey and ignore the existence of bad laws you're just asking for more bad laws.

 

[xtry51]

So you're hoping for abusive prosecutions to make certain people realize their Constitutionally protected views are wrong?

Yes, because the courts are the last option before civil war.

 

[That Guy]

Again, how can people be calling for him to be prosecuted based on waving something around on TV that may or may not have really been a 30 round mag? Unless he admits his guilt, there is no way to prosecute him for this (barring an enormous, costly investigation and sifting through private emails of NBC employees, etc - an invasion of privacy no one here would ever call just if it were happening to an NES member based on similar circumstances).

If he had actually loaded the magazine on television, that would be proof of it being a real mag, but other than that, he's just a clown making outlandish claims on TV - not a crime and not something we should advocate jailing someone over.

Put it this way - if, say, a photograph of me holding what looked like a 2003 date stamped AR 15 thirty rounder suddenly surfaced, I'd like to think the police would still have to come up with more proof than that photo that I actually possessed an illegal mag.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, because the courts are the last option before civil war.

I think is point is in reference to it being an abusive prosecution, not a legal one.

 

[GM-GUY]

+1 xtry51

IIRC, there was a Colonial Case that spelled out it was illegal to speak ill of the King of England. A colonist wrote an article that did just that, the Crown sued, and the people on the jury found him not guilty. A big reason why the Red Coats were deployed, hence the Revolutionary War.


My memory may be off, but I do remember reading about this a long time ago.


That Guy:

The person across the table from him is what almost all would call can expert. He claimed it to be an item to illustrate his argument. So, if it is, prosecute; or vacate past convictions; or (or if it's not the item in question) a public apology and admission that it was not the item and his argument is BS.

Either laws apply equally and blindly (the lady with the blindfold and scales), or the law must be vacated/nullified.

 

[xtry51]

Again, how can people be calling for him to be prosecuted based on waving something around on TV that may or may not have really been a 30 round mag? Unless he admits his guilt, there is no way to prosecute him for this (barring an enormous, costly investigation and sifting through private emails of NBC employees, etc - an invasion of privacy no one here would ever call just if it were happening to an NES member based on similar circumstances).

If he had actually loaded the magazine on television, that would be proof of it being a real mag, but other than that, he's just a clown making outlandish claims on TV - not a crime and not something we should advocate jailing someone over.

Put it this way - if, say, a photograph of me holding what looked like a 2003 date stamped AR 15 thirty rounder suddenly surfaced, I'd like to think the police would still have to come up with more proof than that photo that I actually possessed an illegal mag.

- - - Updated - - -


I think is point is in reference to it being an abusive prosecution, not a legal one.

Again, the way the law is written it need not be a functioning magazine to be charged and found guilty. He spoke on air saying it was. It will be up to him to prove he was lying.