Laws Are For Little People, Not David Gregory

[Elbe]

Laws Are for Little People - Mark Steyn - National Review Online

For those of you unfamiliar with the author, Mark Steyn, he is using a lot of sarcasm at the beginning of the article. His larger point is on the problem of laws applying to the citizenry yet not so much to the governing elite class of which big liberal media is a part of.

 

[grasshopperglock]

Hense why lots of folks consider the current policy a form of class warfare.


True story. Had a friend that worked for the Bartlett police department. Seem like a county commissioner got into a fight with his girl friend. They responded to the call, but the street was blocked. By who else, the Bell County Sheriff's dept. The city officers were told that it was being taken care of, that they had it under control.

The law only applies to those that don't control it.

 

[Glockster69]

Well damm woman, that read has ruined my New Year ~ already!

Well written and good cross points but I especially liked ...

Not far away from David Gregory, across the Virginia border, eleven-year-old Skylar Capo made the mistake of rescuing a woodpecker from the jaws of a cat and nursing him back to health for a couple of days. For her pains, a federal Fish & Wildlife gauleiter accompanied by state troopers descended on her house, charged her with illegal transportation of a protected species, issued her a $535 fine, and made her cry. Why is it so “obvious” that David Gregory deserves to be treated more leniently than a sixth grader? Because he’s got a TV show and she hasn’t?

 

[Elbe]

The other article I posted is on the brighter side.

 

[ROGER4314]

We always compare gun control with other nations and the results of their gun control efforts. Comparing Hitler and his gun registration/confiscation is a favorite. We don't need to look elsewhere. Gun control is right here, right now and the US has a long history of using gun regulation as a means to keep ethnic or racial groups contained and subjugated.

Native Americans (Indians) had severe firearms limitations placed on them in vintage US history. Even so, Indian mounted warriors were termed "the finest light cavalry in the world." When Native Americans needed weapons, they raided those who had firearms and stole them. There is a lesson to be learned there.

Black slaves and freed blacks were highly limited in possession and use of firearms. There were also severe penalties for teaching Blacks to read. They were kept from voting and later, when Blacks were granted the vote, they were stone walled by literacy tests, poll taxes and other means to keep them from casting a ballot. During the 1960's Freedom Workers were routinely beaten and murdered for assisting Blacks to register for the vote. It was all done to keep that spectrum of society from gaining strength.

During World War 2, people of Japanese ancestry were taken from their homes, interned in camps, severely limited in their rights including ownership of firearms. They lived in encampments and were kept prisoner for no other reason than their heritage. Their citizenship meant nothing. The book "Farewell to Manzanar" and movie "Return to Manzanar" are chronicles of that monstrosity of governmental abuse.

When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, survivors were rousted, their firearms were confiscated and never returned ......all without due process. LEO's and soldiers simply searched and disarmed the citizens regardless of their need for protection or their behavior.

In Skokie, Illinois, one of the first places to ban weapons, firearms were banned regardless of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

In Illinois and more precisely, Chicago, where I was born, firearms are severely regulated. They just scored murder number 500 for 2012. How's that gun control workin' for you, Chicago? Please note that Obama came from that outhouse and his top aide left Obama's team and returned to become mayor of Chicago!

In New Jersey, and New York, cesspools of violence and crime, firearms are severely regulated. Some cities in New Jersey had to lay off their entire Police force! With no guns, no cops, what else can you expect but increased crime?

California....not even going to touch that crap. The ones in control, make the rules and disarm the citizens. Senator Diane Feinstein, the chief cook for gun control legislation carries a concealed weapon. That's OK for HER but she doesn't want YOU to be safe!

There is more to each story and unfortunately many more stories.

Our history as a nation is to disarm and subjugate classes of people that we view as inferior. Now that the middle class is crushed, we have the rich and powerful and the rest of us. It's the Golden Rule. The ones with the Gold, make the rules.

Flash

 

[Texan-in-Training]

David Gregory couldn't have done a better job demonstrating the point of our argument if we had paid him.

 

[TXARGUY]

David Gregory couldn't have done a better job demonstrating the point of our argument if we had paid him.

Yup

 

[Texas Bulldog]

I was just reading this.

I can't stand that crap. What kind of "defense" is that? Do you think it would hold up in court if I had an illegally purchased suppressor and just say "well, i didn't plan on hurting anybody". LOL.... Right.

ARGHHH! This country is in so much trouble its depressing.

 

[java]

case closed , but don't try it yourself

No charges for NBC's David Gregory - POLITICO.com

 

[Glockster69]

case closed , but don't try it yourself

No charges for NBC's David Gregory - POLITICO.com

Nice one, I completely missed your post. And in the link you'll find this cozy little thought:


Nathan [the attorney general] noted that his office’s decision in this case was also influenced by “our recognition that the intent of the temporary possession and short display of the magazine was to promote the First Amendment purpose of informing an ongoing public debate about firearms policy in the United States.”

Still, Nathan said other, legal means should have been used to demonstrate Gregory’s point.

The NBC show said in a statement to POLITICO that its staffers respect both the attorney general’s decision and his rebuke regarding the gun clip.

“We displayed the empty magazine solely for journalistic purposes to help illustrate an important issue for our viewers. We accept the District of Columbia Attorney General’s admonishment, respect his decision and will have no further comment on this matter,” the show stated.

 

[LJH]

Nathan [the attorney general] noted that his office’s decision in this case was also influenced by “our recognition that the intent of the temporary possession and short display of the magazine was to promote the First Amendment purpose of informing an ongoing public debate about firearms policy in the United States.”

Hmmmm, The AG is setting a new legal precedent? News and media personnel are immune to the law, as long as it if for journalistic reasons. As a posting member on a public forum anyone can say they are a published author. So this has the potential to get real interesting. The AG must have forgoten that it works both ways....

Funny thing about laws, once you stop enforcing them publicly, it is almost impossible to reinstate the enforcement.

 

[Glockster69]

Hmmmm, The AG is setting a new legal precedent?

'Do as I say, not as I do' comes to mind here

Funny thing about laws, once you stop enforcing them publicly, it is almost impossible to reinstate the enforcement.

But only if you're on the right side ............. err, left side that is