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

[paperview]

Even if Heller doesn't apply (I think it does) - ever consider, being TV and all, it was a prop?

They do those things at TV studios, you know.

 

[Truthmatters]

touching one on TV is NOT the same as owning one you silly fools

 

[Truthmatters]

news exsec:hey get someone to bring me in a clip for visuals.

news intern: Ok


news intern on phone: where can I get some one to bring in a clip for a news visual?

gun shop guy on phone: You will have to get a cop who owns one to bring it in, They are about the only people allowed to own one.


news intern: thanks

 

[Truthmatters]

You people are jambed packed to the brim full of hate you dont think ANYTHING through

 

[jtpr312]

David Gregory presses Wayne LaPierre, may have violated law | The Daily Caller

hope someone calls the dc atf

Does it really qualify if it's not loaded?

Doesn't matter loaded or not illegal to posses the magazine.

 

[jtpr312]

Even if Heller doesn't apply (I think it does) - ever consider, being TV and all, it was a prop?

They do those things at TV studios, you know.

The relvent statute states; b) No person in the District shall possess, sell, or transfer any large capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm. For the purposes of this subsection, the term “large capacity ammunition feeding device” means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

 

[jtpr312]

touching one on TV is NOT the same as owning one you silly fools

Holding one in your hand on TV or off TV, is possession of, which is against the law you silly fool.

 

[Truthmatters]

No under the law possession is ownership.

If the Cop who legally owns it is sitting right off camera he is the owner.

Letting someone touch what he owns is NOT illeagal.....mmmmkay

 

[Truthmatters]

This is how you people get yourselves in messes all the time.

YOU seek to see things through a straw.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

No under the law possession is ownership.

If the Cop who legally owns it is sitting right off camera he is the owner.

Letting someone touch what he owns is NOT illeagal.....mmmmkay

So if someone shows up at your house and takes possession of your dog, they own it under the law and there's nothing you can do about it?

 

[Truthmatters]

Georgory had the legal owners permission to touch the weapon.

see how easy it is to think clearly

 

[Truthmatters]

Instead you fools went on for hours pretending some crime had taken place.


nutters

 

[jtpr312]

No under the law possession is ownership.

If the Cop who legally owns it is sitting right off camera he is the owner.

Letting someone touch what he owns is NOT illeagal.....mmmmkay

Wrong again dumbass, The legal defintion of possession is having control of

POSSESSION. A person has possession of something if the person knows of its presence and has physical control of it,

There are two types of possession: actual possession and constructive possession.

Actual possession (or physical possession) means you have the item on your person.

Constructive possession is when the item is in an area you control, such as inside your car, or in a drawer in your house. This type of possession requires knowledge. This means you either knew or should have known you had the item.

Run along now, it's obvious you have absolutley nothing intelligent to add to this conversation.

 

[bripat9643]

No under the law possession is ownership.

Not true. take Marijuana, for example. If your buddy has an OZ of good Colombian and he allows you to take it to a party, you are in possession and the cops will arrest you for possession if they find it on your person or in your car, regardless of who actually "owns" it.

If the Cop who legally owns it is sitting right off camera he is the owner.

Do you have any evidence that there was a cop sitting off camera who owned the clip?

Letting someone touch what he owns is NOT illeagal.....mmmmkay

If a cop dropped the clip off at his office, then he would be doing a lot more than "touching" it. He would be in possession. And it would be illegal for a cop to leave an illegal item in someone's possession.

 

[paperview]

Is Heller not applicable?

Ahem.

Asking once again...

 

[Truthmatters]

No under the law possession is ownership.

If the Cop who legally owns it is sitting right off camera he is the owner.

Letting someone touch what he owns is NOT illeagal.....mmmmkay

Wrong again dumbass, The legal defintion of possession is having control of

POSSESSION. A person has possession of something if the person knows of its presence and has physical control of it,

There are two types of possession: actual possession and constructive possession.

Actual possession (or physical possession) means you have the item on your person.

Constructive possession is when the item is in an area you control, such as inside your car, or in a drawer in your house. This type of possession requires knowledge. This means you either knew or should have known you had the item.

Run along now, it's obvious you have absolutley nothing intelligent to add to this conversation.

I think the judge would accept the cops assertion that he was in possession of the clip you complete fucking partisan hack

 

[Truthmatters]

Look at them twist and gyrating to create something where nothing exsists.


this is why they are a dying party

 

[bripat9643]

I think the judge would accept the cops assertion that he was in possession of the clip you complete fucking partisan hack

What cop? Where is this cop you keep talking about?

 

[bripat9643]

Look at them twist and gyrating to create something where nothing exsists.


this is why they are a dying party

You're the own "twisting and gyrating" trying to defend one of your favorite demagogues who broke the law right on national TV. However, probably only about 2000 people saw him do it. That's the only reason he hasn't been arrested.

 

[Truthmatters]

where is your proof that this clip was illeagal for the reporter to touch?

NOWHERE!


you just got led by the nose by some partisan asshole reporter