did david gregory break the law on meet the press holding up that magazine

[Pogo]

.Well, good thing Gregory showed the illegal magazine in the District and not Virginia. I can get charges if I tell a cop "fuck you" and I can charges if the cop tells me not to do something and I still do it.

I doubt it. Not charges that will stick. You might get roughed up, but illegally.
But go ahead, cite Virginia law that says you can't say "fuck you" to a cop.

Videos are definitely submissable evidence. It has been that way for quite a while.

For an action maybe. This would be to identify an object. The action is not in question, the object is. So you can tell the difference between an authentic and a prop by watching video? How do you ever get through a movie then?

I definitely think LaPierre will testify, for the prosecution.

He'd have to swear that an object he didn't handle was authentic. He'd also have to be qualified to say whether it's authentic (just because he's an NRA official doesn't mean he knows that particular magazine).

Gregory clearly and blatantly broke the law. He doesn't get a passin the District on gun laws simply because he is a white guy in a suit.

See all of the above. Basically you're jumping to a whole lot of conclusions based on a right wing hair-on-fire blog and convicting without evidence. We don't do that here.

Bad dog! Down.

 

[LockeJaw]

in examining the facts surrounding both guns and elections it has been proven that individual voters dont cheat in elections .


People who have a gun are more likely to die.

These are facts folks

people who breathe are most likely to die.

Idiot.

^post of the day!

 

[Pogo]

Those of you who can't see past your partisan noses who assume I came to this thread to stand up for a network or a person are just dumb hacks. I never even knew who this guy was, I was merely responding to a story which I immediately thought was ridiculous on it's face..I laughed and stated my opinion, and all this thread has done is further prove the silliness of those who insist he should be harshly prosecuted.

Ditto in toto.

Great tagline btw. It's true, every word.

 

[Si modo]

.Well, good thing Gregory showed the illegal magazine in the District and not Virginia. I can get charges if I tell a cop "fuck you" and I can charges if the cop tells me not to do something and I still do it.

I doubt it. Not charges that will stick. You might get roughed up, but illegally.
But go ahead, cite Virginia law that says you can't say "fuck you" to a cop.

Videos are definitely submissable evidence. It has been that way for quite a while.

For an action maybe. This would be to identify an object. The action is not in question, the object is. So you can tell the difference between an authentic and a prop by watching video? How do you ever get through a movie then?

I definitely think LaPierre will testify, for the prosecution.

He'd have to swear that an object he didn't handle was authentic. He'd also have to be qualified to say whether it's authentic (just because he's an NRA official doesn't mean he knows that particular magazine).

Gregory clearly and blatantly broke the law. He doesn't get a passin the District on gun laws simply because he is a white guy in a suit.

See all of the above. Basically you're jumping to a whole lot of conclusions based on a right wing hair-on-fire blog and convicting without evidence. We don't do that here.

Bad dog! Down.

I'm jumping to conclusions? NBC has already said publicly that it is a real magazine. And, although you've spent "25 years in broadcasting", LaPierre was the only other witness to what Gregory did.

 

[beretta304]

It's much ado about nothing in the end. The real insight would be to see the responses if a Hannity did the same. It wouldn't be "no big deal then" for a few hypocrites here. That's what this thread boils down to.

 

[saveliberty]

Those of you who can't see past your partisan noses who assume I came to this thread to stand up for a network or a person are just dumb hacks. I never even knew who this guy was, I was merely responding to a story which I immediately thought was ridiculous on it's face..I laughed and stated my opinion, and all this thread has done is further prove the silliness of those who insist he should be harshly prosecuted.

Ditto in toto.

Great tagline btw. It's true, every word.

Valerie basically admits to making a comment without prior research or background. Back up the ignorance POGO.

 

[beretta304]

Those of you who can't see past your partisan noses who assume I came to this thread to stand up for a network or a person are just dumb hacks. I never even knew who this guy was, I was merely responding to a story which I immediately thought was ridiculous on it's face..I laughed and stated my opinion, and all this thread has done is further prove the silliness of those who insist he should be harshly prosecuted.

Ditto in toto.

Great tagline btw. It's true, every word.

Valerie basically admits to making a comment without prior research or background. Back up the ignorance POGO.

I find it amusing she claims to be informed on so many issues on various threads...yet never heard of David Gregory? It's a stretch to buy into that.

 

[Pogo]

It's a District law. The majority of the District is Black. The cops take it easy on this white guy in a suit, especially when there were millions of witnesses? The residents will not be pleased.

There is one witness, unless you count the camera crew, and I don't think they're close enough to get a good look. Actually you could question the stagehand that brought it up too, but each of these cases depends on that witness being familiar enough with the magazine to definitively state that it is that and not a prop. Rotsa ruck there.

Your "millions" simply saw him pick up "something". If you or I were under oath asked to positively identify what we saw on TV -- we couldn't.

As for the District, while I'm amazed that you propose to speak for black people in DC, I suggest not burning the bridge on the day job, because we all know when there's no case, there's no case. You're projecting again.

This is basically a last-minute entry for silliest story of the year, aiming valiantly for honourable mention. Have some perspective.

What would you be saying if this had been Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck that had displayed a 30 round magazine?

I'd be saying this: ______________________

Why? See my last line above.
I'm far more concerned about what Glenn Beck incites with his mic than with his props.

44 pages, one conclusion.

The hypocrites of the Left are LEGION.

Had this been Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity you guys would be RABID!

I find it all quite humorous.

See above. Fallacy of speculation.
No surprise, since that's what this entire thread is based on.

What do we really know? We know it's another really really really slow news day.

 

[Valerie]

Those of you who can't see past your partisan noses who assume I came to this thread to stand up for a network or a person are just dumb hacks. I never even knew who this guy was, I was merely responding to a story which I immediately thought was ridiculous on it's face..I laughed and stated my opinion, and all this thread has done is further prove the silliness of those who insist he should be harshly prosecuted.

Ditto in toto.

Great tagline btw. It's true, every word.

Valerie basically admits to making a comment without prior research or background. Back up the ignorance POGO.

I had to google to see which talking head he was, which changes nothing...

 

[saveliberty]

Since the left said this was all a nonissue, prior to a police investigation, I'll wait to see if its no big deal.

 

[Pogo]

Why should this law be ignored?

If it is, every young black man and woman who have already been convicted of this should get an appeal, at a minimum, and sue for discrimination. I doubt the Court is going to want that sort of shit happening.

I don't know why you want to bring race and discrimination into this? Each circumstance is different and as I said yesterday, this law has a range of punishments for a reason. I read an article someone posted at the very beginning of this thread which cited the punishments for breaking this particular law can range from a fine up to the most severe, depending on the circumstances...

Because race clearly is an issue here. If the police and the courts deal with this white guy differently than they have dealt with others in the District (majority Black and Hispanic) it is not too much of a leap to know that the courts are going to be filled with appeals AND discrimination suits.

Apparently it's only clear to you since you're the only one bringing up race.

I gotta say, for such a short-legged animal you do some impressive leaps.

 

[Pogo]

.Well, good thing Gregory showed the illegal magazine in the District and not Virginia. I can get charges if I tell a cop "fuck you" and I can charges if the cop tells me not to do something and I still do it.

I doubt it. Not charges that will stick. You might get roughed up, but illegally.
But go ahead, cite Virginia law that says you can't say "fuck you" to a cop.



For an action maybe. This would be to identify an object. The action is not in question, the object is. So you can tell the difference between an authentic and a prop by watching video? How do you ever get through a movie then?


He'd have to swear that an object he didn't handle was authentic. He'd also have to be qualified to say whether it's authentic (just because he's an NRA official doesn't mean he knows that particular magazine).

Gregory clearly and blatantly broke the law. He doesn't get a passin the District on gun laws simply because he is a white guy in a suit.

See all of the above. Basically you're jumping to a whole lot of conclusions based on a right wing hair-on-fire blog and convicting without evidence. We don't do that here.

Bad dog! Down.

I'm jumping to conclusions? NBC has already said publicly that it is a real magazine. And, although you've spent "25 years in broadcasting", LaPierre was the only other witness to what Gregory did.

Where did NBC say that?

As for the second line, once again, take it Nomad...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZwVCjhq3YI]Star Trek - Nomad says "Non Sequitur" a few times - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Pogo]

Those of you who can't see past your partisan noses who assume I came to this thread to stand up for a network or a person are just dumb hacks. I never even knew who this guy was, I was merely responding to a story which I immediately thought was ridiculous on it's face..I laughed and stated my opinion, and all this thread has done is further prove the silliness of those who insist he should be harshly prosecuted.

Ditto in toto.

Great tagline btw. It's true, every word.

Valerie basically admits to making a comment without prior research or background. Back up the ignorance POGO.

Uh - what am I supposed to "back up"?
"Ditto in toto" means I agree with every word. Take the entire quote, put my name on it, and it goes for me too. How simple does this have to be exactly?
=========

Since the left said this was all a nonissue, prior to a police investigation, I'll wait to see if its no big deal.

Thank you. Far as I know that's the first rational thing you've uttered.

 

[Si modo]

I doubt it. Not charges that will stick. You might get roughed up, but illegally.
But go ahead, cite Virginia law that says you can't say "fuck you" to a cop.



For an action maybe. This would be to identify an object. The action is not in question, the object is. So you can tell the difference between an authentic and a prop by watching video? How do you ever get through a movie then?


He'd have to swear that an object he didn't handle was authentic. He'd also have to be qualified to say whether it's authentic (just because he's an NRA official doesn't mean he knows that particular magazine).



See all of the above. Basically you're jumping to a whole lot of conclusions based on a right wing hair-on-fire blog and convicting without evidence. We don't do that here.

Bad dog! Down.

I'm jumping to conclusions? NBC has already said publicly that it is a real magazine. And, although you've spent "25 years in broadcasting", LaPierre was the only other witness to what Gregory did.

Where did NBC say that?

As for the second line, once again, take it Nomad...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZwVCjhq3YI]Star Trek - Nomad says "Non Sequitur" a few times - YouTube[/ame]

Linked several times in the thread. Obviously, you are one of those posters who won't read links.

 

[saveliberty]

Ditto in toto.

Great tagline btw. It's true, every word.

Valerie basically admits to making a comment without prior research or background. Back up the ignorance POGO.

Uh - what am I supposed to "back up"?
"Ditto in toto" means I agree with every word. Take the entire quote, put my name on it, and it goes for me too. How simple does this have to be exactly?
=========

Since the left said this was all a nonissue, prior to a police investigation, I'll wait to see if its no big deal.

Thank you. Far as I know that's the first rational thing you've uttered.

Ignorance. No kidding? Like I didn't know that. lol Post still stands, you just have to work on meaning a bit more.

 

[Too Tall]

There is one witness, unless you count the camera crew, and I don't think they're close enough to get a good look. Actually you could question the stagehand that brought it up too, but each of these cases depends on that witness being familiar enough with the magazine to definitively state that it is that and not a prop. Rotsa ruck there.

Your "millions" simply saw him pick up "something". If you or I were under oath asked to positively identify what we saw on TV -- we couldn't.

As for the District, while I'm amazed that you propose to speak for black people in DC, I suggest not burning the bridge on the day job, because we all know when there's no case, there's no case. You're projecting again.

This is basically a last-minute entry for silliest story of the year, aiming valiantly for honourable mention. Have some perspective.

What would you be saying if this had been Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck that had displayed a 30 round magazine?

And, if this is violation of the DC law is ignored, as it should be, what happens when it becomes a federal law?

How about all of the assault weapons used in movies? Will they continue to be exempt from the law?

So many questions, so few answers.

Why should this law be ignored?

If it is, every young black man and woman who have already been convicted of this should get an appeal, at a minimum, and sue for discrimination. I doubt the Court is going to want that sort of shit happening.

Sorry, I used a bad choice of words. The law is ridiculous and should be taken off of the books. I suggest that this will not go to court because Gregory is a liberal and therefore bullet proof.

 

[Pogo]

Valerie basically admits to making a comment without prior research or background. Back up the ignorance POGO.

Uh - what am I supposed to "back up"?
"Ditto in toto" means I agree with every word. Take the entire quote, put my name on it, and it goes for me too. How simple does this have to be exactly?
=========

Since the left said this was all a nonissue, prior to a police investigation, I'll wait to see if its no big deal.

Thank you. Far as I know that's the first rational thing you've uttered.

Ignorance. No kidding? Like I didn't know that. lol Post still stands, you just have to work on meaning a bit more.

yyyyyeaaah, OK. So no answer at all. It is OK to withdraw a stupid question you know.
Despite your creative quote editing, what I seconded had nothing to do with research or reasoning. It described the hair-on-fire dynamics that make this non-story into a thread at all.

Once again the unexpurgated quote was this:

Those of you who can't see past your partisan noses who assume I came to this thread to stand up for a network or a person are just dumb hacks. I never even knew who this guy was, I was merely responding to a story which I immediately thought was ridiculous on it's face..I laughed and stated my opinion, and all this thread has done is further prove the silliness of those who insist he should be harshly prosecuted.

Some of the more dishonest here seem to think that editing somebody else's quotes is some kind of time machine.
It isn't.

Oh well. See Nomad above.

ps once again, my handle is not an acronym. Stop shouting.

 

[Pogo]

I'm jumping to conclusions? NBC has already said publicly that it is a real magazine. And, although you've spent "25 years in broadcasting", LaPierre was the only other witness to what Gregory did.

Where did NBC say that?

As for the second line, once again, take it Nomad...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZwVCjhq3YI]Star Trek - Nomad says "Non Sequitur" a few times - YouTube[/ame]

Linked several times in the thread. Obviously, you are one of those posters who won't read links.

Funny how people go about things; when I need a link, I go fetch it. When I make a claim, I substantiate it. I don't just sit there and say "it's back there somewhere, go find it".
I know that smell. Bad dog.

"Run! Martians are invading the earth!!"

"Oh yeah? Where'd you hear that?"

"Go look it up, it's been linked! Don't you read links??"

Talk is cheap.

 

[Si modo]

Where did NBC say that?

As for the second line, once again, take it Nomad...
Star Trek - Nomad says "Non Sequitur" a few times - YouTube

Linked several times in the thread. Obviously, you are one of those posters who won't read links.

Funny how people go about things; when I need a link, I go fetch it. When I make a claim, I substantiate it. I don't just sit there and say "it's back there somewhere, go find it".
I know that smell. Bad dog.

"Run! Martians are invading the earth!!"

"Oh yeah? Where'd you hear that?"

"Go look it up, it's been linked! Don't you read links??"

Talk is cheap.

I posted the link already in this thread, and don't do that again for those too lazy to read it the first time. If I posted it in another thread, then I would post it again.

Now you know.

 

[jillian]

It's a District law. The majority of the District is Black. The cops take it easy on this white guy in a suit, especially when there were millions of witnesses? The residents will not be pleased.

There is one witness, unless you count the camera crew, and I don't think they're close enough to get a good look. Actually you could question the stagehand that brought it up too, but each of these cases depends on that witness being familiar enough with the magazine to definitively state that it is that and not a prop. Rotsa ruck there.

Your "millions" simply saw him pick up "something". If you or I were under oath asked to positively identify what we saw on TV -- we couldn't.

As for the District, while I'm amazed that you propose to speak for black people in DC, I suggest not burning the bridge on the day job, because we all know when there's no case, there's no case. You're projecting again.

This is basically a last-minute entry for silliest story of the year, aiming valiantly for honourable mention. Have some perspective.

What would you be saying if this had been Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck that had displayed a 30 round magazine?

And, if this is violation of the DC law is ignored, as it should be, what happens when it becomes a federal law?

How about all of the assault weapons used in movies? Will they continue to be exempt from the law?

So many questions, so few answers.

you don't think its stupid that he, allegedly, can't display such a magazine for purposes of education or news?

and given that i haven't seen the statute i'm not convinced there aren't exemptions or at least additional information.

not to mention the fact that there is ALWAYS prosecutorial discretion....

and it has nothing to do with gregory's politics. i'd suggest you don't know his politics. just like you didn't know his predecessor tim russert's.