Conflicting Reports

David Gregory flashed a 30-round STANAG magazine on Meet the Press, which is filmed in DC. That magazine is a felony in the District. There was talk about Gregory facing criminal charges…now there’s talk he isn’t:

An official from the D.C. police told a member of the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that David Gregory COULD display a high capacity magazine on “Meet the Press” Sunday … TMZ has learned.

Well-placed law enforcement sources tell TMZ … a staffer from “Meet the Press” called ATF before the show aired to inquire about the legality of David holding the empty magazine during a segment on gun control. We’re told the ATF person contacted the D.C. police to find out if the District of Columbia — the place where the show is broadcast — had a law prohibiting such a display.

Our sources say the D.C. police official informed ATF David could legally show the magazine, provided it was empty. An ATF official then called the staffer from “Meet the Press” to inform them they could use the magazine.

D.C. police released a statement today, saying “NBC contacted the Metropolitan Police Dept. inquiring if they could utilize a high capacity magazine for this segment. NBC was informed that possession of a high capacity magazine is not permissible and the request was denied.”

Now one other thing we need to look at, besides the obvious bullshit that the law might be overlooked so long as an anti-rights dog-and-pony show is underway, is the potential for Gregory facing felony charges and possible jail time.

He’s a smarmy asshole, but is it reasonable to level such charges for simple possession of a piece of folded sheet-aluminum?

**UPDATE** WizardPC has an interesting observation over at Uncle’s:

Interesting that no one at nbc or mpd knew that for three days.

Retroactive permission?

This is a VERY good point, if NBC and Meet The Press were knowledgeable of the seriousness of possessing a normal-capacity magazine on national TV, and actively sought out a dispensation, why didn’t they, or MPD mention this when the press calls started coming in?

I suspect somebody made a phone call to avoid the charges because the propaganda was worth it. Either way, it shows that the laws are stupid and cause harm to harmless people, or shows that “Progressives” have no interest in following their own laws.

Gun laws, at their heart are unreasonable, and turn lawful citizens with no criminal intent into criminals.

This entry was posted in Bad Justice, Guns, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Conflicting Reports

  1. He’s a smarmy asshole, but is it reasonable to level such charges for simple possession of a piece of folded sheet-aluminum?

    It’s a stupid law and he broke it. If either of us was in DC with a normal magazine we would face jail time, why shouldn’t he?

    It is important to enforce laws even of we don’t like them. It helps people realize that they are bad.

  2. George says:

    I’ll let everyone in on a secret: Yes, they knew it was illegal, and yes, they got retroactive permission. Eric Holder had *no idea* that guns were being sold illegally in his office. He was shocked, SHOCKED to find it out.

    The sad part is that there are two sets of rules. Our job is to make sure that the two sets are as close to each other as possible.

  3. Jake says:

    Our sources say the D.C. police official informed ATF David could legally show the magazine, provided it was empty.

    Two points come to mind when I see this: 1) As I understand it, the statute makes no distinction between “empty” and loaded, mere possession is a crime; and 2) Again, as I understand it (IANAL, etc.,) the fact that the police (or a lawyer, or sometimes even a judge) tell you something is legal is not a valid defense in court.

    It’s my understanding that #2 has gotten people in legal trouble many times, especially when it’s the police – remember, they’re allowed to lie to you.

    He’s a smarmy asshole, but is it reasonable to level such charges for simple possession of a piece of folded sheet-aluminum?

    Since he’s actively calling for this very same law to be applied to the entire nation, yes.

  4. Eck! says:

    Shame the guy on the on the other side of the interview didn’t challenge having it. My read is whoever has it in DC is in felony country unless its a cop or other authorized user. Or in plain english the only ones, rank and privilege.

    If it applies to me does it apply to thee? I guess not.

    Eck!

  5. Larry says:

    “He’s a smarmy asshole, but is it reasonable to level such charges for simple possession of a piece of folded sheet-aluminum?”

    Yes, because 1) he’s a smarmy asshole and 2) sauce for the gander. All of us know it won’t happen though, because some animals are more equal than others.

  6. LMB says:

    Yea, I have to admit to feeling conflicted about this whole thing. On one hand, that law is such total bullshit. On the other hand, they were told by the police that they did not have permission, and they brought it in anyway.

    Plus, since when can the ATF trump local law enforcement on stuff like this?

  7. Pingback: More Linkey Less Thinky - The Minuteman

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>