Gun laws don't apply to rich news anchors.

Post Reply New Topic

http://news.yahoo.com/no-charges-nbc-ho ... 52419.html

1 in 2, NBC bought their way out of it.

i was thinking the same thing....if it was me i'd have been thrown into butt pounding federal prison for 10 yrs.

No surprise there.
Senators Chuck Schumer and Diane Feinstein both have carry permits but are against their own constituents and the rest of the country having them.
I guess we're either not elite enough be be worthy of protection or not socially enlightened enough to understand the responsibly.

Gun laws are there to protect the politicians and the richest 1% from the common man.

Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. Almost all of the gun grabbers either carry their own weapons(like Dianne Feinstein) or they have armed security 24/7. They send their kids to schools with armed guards too.

They ought to be afraid but their plan won't protect them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6-FtsnIFsc

Guys,

Even if the DA pressed charges against them - no jury would convict them. It's pretty obvious that this was an honest mistake, and we need to encourage that gun laws be prosecuted rationally - if the attitude at work here is spread to some other areas of gun control, everyone who is pro-2A benefits from the same degree of common sense.

That person you're defending is anti-gun and what he did, whatever his reason, is against the very law he apparently supports.
Sometimes I wonder about you............

It'd be fun to see if someone went around parading a similar magazine, showing how harmless it actually is (I reckon parading a rocket launcher would be best though) -- seems to be equal in points made, i.e., for political and/or media effect.

Technically, they couldn't prosecute either if they wanted to appear unbiased.

They covered the Heller case extensively and they thought (now they know) they are above the law.

This is a case where it is makes perfect sense for the law to not be enforced. Prosecutors constantly have to choose what they want to pursue, and a prosecutor who wanted to pursue this issue would be out of their mind.

It's very similar to another issue, which is when people on TV admit to possessing and smoking marijuana when the topic comes up.

It's the arrogance of holding up something just to show us peasants, the unwashed masses, what he'd like to see banned.
"It's okay for me to have one because I have to have something to show these stupid cows."
I think enough people know what a magazine or it's street term, "clip" looks like that we can do without the example.
There's people in jail over dumber things so he'll have someone to keep him company.

When I first saw him waggling about that magazine, I laughed and said, "Don't you know the damn laws in D.C.?!" Another case of failure to conduct adequate research prior to broadcasting. I figured every American knew D.C. has some of the (if not the) strictest gun laws...

Peasants, unwashed masses... what is this, class warfare?

Liberal politicians and reporters do tend to more likely to have a "let them eat cake" attitude than conservatives. That statement is not without noteworthy exceptions though.