A Deputy Mayor Is Charged With Amassing 16 Assault Weapons And Fake FBI IDs

[arakboss]

Because people who you don't identify with are unsympathetic to you on a subconscious level.

And no matter how many times a person slides into the gray areas themselves, no one else should ever get away with it. Not once. Not even through simple ignorance.

The gray area is a problem which is why I subscribe to the belief that any infringement is too much infringement. I realize it is not a popular view but when people stray from that view we end up where we are today. Give them an inch and they will take a 100 miles.

 

[RVTECH]

What did he do?

If by this statement do you mean because he didn't actually use the items for an illegal purpose are you suggesting then that mere possession of the items should NOT be technically illegal?

If this is the case it is one of the oldest 'paradoxical' arguments for nearly anything that is 'technically' illegal to possess - but of itself is not capable of doing anything unless used by a person in the commission of a crime but this is another discussion.

If the laws are such that they prevent possession of the items he is in fact guilty and it appears that is the case - at least with the guns - however I was still questioning the badges and credentials. It would seem to ME unless he stole authentic credentials then there is no crime in possessing 'fakes' - and this part of the article would seem to support this, All of the badges and credentials "are not authentic and not issued under the proper authority," yet the next part seems to support them being illegal, 'resulting in a state charge of possessing a forged instrument', but this still seems to be them 'grabbing at straws'

Regardless I am in no way supporting this guy. He appearance suggests low IQ and for anyone to want to create fake IDs & creds that look this authentic is obviously planning on using them for a 'nefarious' purpose - OR he is stone cold crazy and possibly suffering from some sort of 'idiot savant' condition with some sort of weird preoccupation with items of authority such as this.

 

[Flopsweat]

Is an "illegal trove'" more, or less, than an "arsenal"?

More than an arsenal, less than an arseload.

Like any other sample of the population, their beliefs vary.

There are those who believe in strong gun control, others who believe in moderate gun control (define that however you wish), those who believe in very minimal gun control, and those of us who believe in no control at all.

Add onto that those who will comply with existing laws and those who will not.

I am somewhere between minimal and no control - I believe there is a case for arguing that a few people probably should not be allowed to have guns; e.g., those who have proved by past actions, that they will (not might - will) use firearms in a criminal manner to harm innocents.

But I comply (so far) with existing gun control laws because I do not wish to be arrested, convicted, have my property confiscated and quite probably windup in prison. Primarily because I have a daughter to care for, less so because I probably wouldn't last five minutes in prison. To me it is a matter of survival for my family and myself. That may change in the future.

So in principle, I do not have a problem with someone who does not comply, except to note parenthetically that if they get caught, then they knew what they were doing, and if they supported gun control, that they may be hypocritical in their support of gun control laws.

I'm a firm believer that the most important consideration is the spirit of the law. I don't know of any law promoted as a tool to oppress gun owners. As for the Constitution, the spirit of the Constitution is the Spirit of '76.

 

[The Heretic]

I don't know of any law promoted as a tool to oppress gun owners.

Look at the results, not the asserted purpose.

A LOT of laws have been promoted for one stated purpose, when the actual reason for them was something else altogether.

Then there are gun control laws used to control people of color "back in the day".

 

[Stomper]

I don't know? Maybe he had a "From My Cold Dead Hands" mantra? We hear it here from time to time and I'm real sure there are people here and elsewhere that don't talk about it, but will never turn their arms in while they are alive. What makes him so much different than some of us? It's not like he's some democrap that actually makes the laws? He's only supposed to follow/enforce the laws. Not much different than a policeman that believes laws maybe unjust, but his job is to enforce them. Just throwing a different angle out there to consider.

That "just doing my job/following orders" sheite didn't hold water at the Nuremberg Trials….. just sayin'.

 

[Flopsweat]

Look at the results, not the asserted purpose.

A LOT of laws have been promoted for one stated purpose, when the actual reason for them was something else altogether.

Then there are gun control laws used to control people of color "back in the day".

I agree completely. My point was that using technicalities to punish people is the exact opposite of justice. Funny how we have a federal department with that in their name and they've been caught doing exactly that.