- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,556
- Likes
- 33,622
As a general rule, courts will not entertain arguments like "others were not prosecuted for the same offense" or "others got a lesser penalty".
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Watch what you post online...
- Thread starter Ultrarunner
- Start date
As a general rule, courts will not entertain arguments like "others were not prosecuted for the same offense" or "others got a lesser penalty".
xtry51
NES Member
I'm hoping my sarcasm meter needs adjusting. Otherwise you just went full retard.
Jason Flare
NES Member
Alex Jones is a specific person. The tweets posted later included a threat to David Keene specifically.
(All children of NRA members, I will agree, is not specific./sarcasm)
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 6,920
- Likes
- 615
WTF does that mean, and why would you HOPE anyone loses their gun to confiscation unless it is some scumbag criminal (which I don't believe this guy was, btw)?
It means I went full retard.
What I meant to say was best case scenario for him would be dismissal of all charges and UNFORTUNATELY the commies will steal his super-evil 7.62 caliber AK, all because of a non-threat.
Last edited:
It shouldn't stick, including anything found during an involuntary search, considering the way he structured the sentence. "I think we" is not "we are/will/shall". It should hold the same weight as "In my opinion", and would under most circumstances. Being in Connecticut after Newtown and in the context of gun legislation is most likely not one of those circumstances. If he had one iota of common sense he would have shut his mouth about the rifle. Who's to say from a photograph that it wasn't an airsoft? I would think that a good lawyer should be able to get the threatening charge tossed. Did a 30 second google search on the inciting charge but couldn't find it. I am curious how it's written. It still shouldn't restrict an individual's right to verbalize an opinion. I think if inciting others to join him in actually commiting the act he would have stated it as such. "Let's douse Malloy", etc. They're using this poor prick (though he doesn't strike me as the brightest bulb) as a "don't **** with us" poster boy. Perhaps people ought to start filing complaints against those doing the exact thing to gun owners. If the incite charge is that broad, every CT. gun owner could potentially file thousands of complaints against people like those shown in the twitter example if the state decides to set a precedent.
Similar threads
