If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(News9 Oklahoma)   DC Prosecutors have decided to not to charge the David Gregory with breaking the law. Finally, a rich affluent white person can get justice in America   (news9.com) divider line 17
    More: Followup, Wayne LaPierre, David Keene, Oklahoma City, school massacre, Admonition, d.c. police, NBC, attorney generals  
•       •       •

7281 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Jan 2013 at 1:19 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-01-12 12:42:48 AM  
3 votes:
legalinsurrection.com
2013-01-12 02:45:51 AM  
2 votes:

Victoly: JasonOfOrillia: Why the definite article, Subs?

"The David Gregory?"

"No, just a David Gregory. Didn't you hear I come in six-packs?"


Remind me not to drink your six-packs.
2013-01-11 10:13:28 PM  
2 votes:
Sure, but when will it be cool to call them "crackers"? Or is that still something only they are allowed to call each other?
2013-01-12 04:34:49 PM  
1 votes:

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Ad hominem, how unexpected.


You're supposed to read the definition on your word of the day calendar.  You're also supposed to tear that sheet off to reveal a new word the next day.  And welcome to Fark.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: You people literally have not a single fact on your side.


I'm not sure which people you believe I represent.  Hell, I wasn't even trying to represent all these people who think you're an idiot.  I don't think you're an idiot.  i just think that you forget which persona you meant to use from time to time, and I think it has to do with drinking and isolation.
2013-01-12 11:02:32 AM  
1 votes:

Fart_Machine: way south: Over a hundred other people have been put through the ringer as a result of this law because they weren't given the "I'm famous" exemption.

Citation?


Googling "people put through the ringer" is too hard for you?
2013-01-12 09:53:52 AM  
1 votes:

Mikey1969: Who's Heller? That's not anybody involved in this story, the one about the person who illegally possessed a gun magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammo in DC. The "logic" here is that despite what you seem to think, just because he is a journalist, he doesn't get to break the law and cry "first amendment". The rest of us don't get to, and journalists don't have a special set of laws that they get to abide by.


But I was told laws banning high capacity magazines tyrannically savagely trample the rights of lawful gun owners. I guess possessing high capacity magazines is only constitutionally protected when it's not a member of the press using it for high value 1st Amendment demonstrative purposes?
2013-01-12 06:47:12 AM  
1 votes:
I'd like one of these, please:
i1220.photobucket.com
2013-01-12 05:47:33 AM  
1 votes:

Atomic Spunk: Sure, but when will it be cool to call them "crackers"? Or is that still something only they are allowed to call each other?


I think it's OK.
2013-01-12 04:11:48 AM  
1 votes:
You know, if Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, or any other news personality did the same thing, I wouldn't want to see them be prosecuted for it either. You know why? because they are simply reporting on what the magazine is to their viewers, they aren't carrying it around in their pickup on the streets of D.C. "Not people they like who cause the exact same degree of harm", not sure what this means? How is showing the magazine in public to your viewers the same as carrying it around in your vehicle with you on the street?

If Meet the Press wanted to "show the viewers" what a NATO standard, 30 round, 5.56mm aluminum magazine with a green follower and a phosphate finish was, they very well could have sent a small field crew 20 minutes outside of DC to Virginia. Hell, they even could have gone to the range and shot some scary video of the mass murder magazine being loaded with baby killer bullets. A really nice slow shot of it being erotically inserted into the luscious magazine well of a beastly black Colt 6920. Than they could have shown some gun nut getting his rocks off as the carbine unleashed just buckets of white hot 62 grain instant death down the line of a dingy indoor range, where they would savagely attack an FBI standard Q target, ripping it to shreds with their murderous power designed expressly to exsanguanate as many hapless, cowering, unarmed civilians in the room as is humanly possible.

Of course, the rifle could have easily turned on the crew. Or the range officer operating it could have been so overwhelmed with the erotic thumping of the Colt's new Rodgers collapsable stock (now standard equipment) that the blood lust would have taken over at that very moment and he could have accidentally executed the film crew.

But it woulda made a better visual AND not have broken any laws.
2013-01-12 02:35:00 AM  
1 votes:

GAT_00: Lsherm: GAT_00: Hey look, predictable people with predictable responses.

Lsherm: Let me guess, you think it was made out of cheese?

I think you can't prove anything from an image on a TV.  But thanks Senator Frist.

Coupled with video of him announcing what it was, eyewitness reports from production staff and other guests on the show, his prior request to the federal government and the DC government about whether or not he could bring the magazine on the show, the receipt from his production staff to purchase the magazine - none of that is "circumstantial" except in your liberal masturbatory fantasy of TV-land legal justice where people you agree with always get off because they are working for your greater good.

You're slipping into Alex Jones territory.  That's not a good place to be.  It's where the vortex of trolling and stupid come together in a black hole of ridiculous.

And unlike you, I'm not cheerleading so I don't have to contort myself into such asinine arguments.  He shouldn't have been prosecuted because it was a poorly written law to begin with, and it clearly wasn't meant to target journalists making a point on the news.  It would be just as ridiculous if a DC college professor was arrested using an empty high capacity magazine to make a point in class.

I know this, because liberals wrote that law, and it was stupid how they wrote it.  You have to pretend he didn't break the law because if you admit it, you have to admit it was a stupid law in the first place.  And you can't have your team take a hit, can you?

Glad that you're admitting you want to use a law that you claim has no basis in legality because it's a handy way to throw a political enemy in prison. Come on, just admit it. That's what you're trying to do.


gat_00 in charge of reading comprehension.
2013-01-12 01:49:48 AM  
1 votes:

twistofsin: If gun nuts want to make it through this they need to reach out to other people looking for more freedom.

Could you imagine a coalition of gun nuts, potheads, and gays? The platform for America's next great party will revolve around those 3 issues.


That's funny, because as a gay pothead, I'm seriously considering purchasing a gun sometime soon. Maybe we are the future.
2013-01-12 01:44:17 AM  
1 votes:

GAT_00: Except, you know, there was only circumstantial evidence that the law was broken.  But hey, good to know Republicans are more than happy to apply a law they claim is unconstitutional to someone without proof so they can throw a political enemy in jail.


lol

You know... when you dig your holes, you don't HAVE to jump into them headfirst. It's funny when you do, but it isn't required.
2013-01-12 01:34:46 AM  
1 votes:
It is high time that whitey caught a break.
2013-01-12 01:34:37 AM  
1 votes:

Lenny and Carl: I'm only a lawyer on the interwebs, but don't you think Gregory would have beaten back any prosecution with a First Amendment argument? Free press, informed public, etc....


He could make a good second amendment case.
2013-01-12 01:23:28 AM  
1 votes:

dickfreckle: It appears I must repeat myself from another thread.


PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION, MOTHERF*CKER...DO YOU SPEAK IT?

This case would not really serve the interest of the people. Had I been in the same shoes, I'd have declined it, too, even if it were Rush Limbaugh doing it. It would be nothing but a complete waste of resources and time.


Yes, but then you send the message that any rich, affluent person can wave a magazine around in order to make a vague political statement. Is that the kind of Sunday morning political talk show we want our precious children to sleep through?
2013-01-12 12:53:50 AM  
1 votes:
That's not what the law was written for, so it shouldn't have been prosecuted in this case.

But I find this liberal talking point interesting (and stupid):

GAT_00: Except, you know, there was only circumstantial evidence that the law was broken.  But hey, good to know Republicans are more than happy to apply a law they claim is unconstitutional to someone without proof so they can throw a political enemy in jail.


Let me guess, you think it was made out of cheese?
2013-01-11 10:19:51 PM  
1 votes:

Atomic Spunk: Sure, but when will it be cool to call them "crackers"? Or is that still something only they are allowed to call each other?


I think they've successfully taken back the word.
 
Displayed 17 of 17 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report