NRA General Counsel Robert Dowlut Convicted of Murder

[Impenitent]

Didn't you mean to say Robert Dowlut instead of Michael Brown?

 

[WinterBorn]

Didn't you mean to say Robert Dowlut instead of Michael Brown?

No, I meant Michael Brown. Earlier JoeB used Brown as an example of how unfair things are.

 

[WinterBorn]

Something I find most amusing is JoeB's ability to justify things in his own mind.

In this thread he seems angry that Dowlut is allowed to walk free and practice law, and it is this way because the police officers walked all over his rights. But Joey still wants the man to pay. Thinks he is too dangerous to be on the loose. The only crime he committed happened 50 years ago. But JoeB is mad.


At the same time, he thinks everyone should just forget about Bill Ayers. He said "Who cares? I mean, you guys care about what some old hippy did 40 years ago, I'm living in the here and now and so are most people."

So if it is a homegrown terrorist, you live in the here & now. But if it is a member of the NRA, you care about what happened 50 years ago and are living in the 60s?

 

[Impenitent]

The "only crime? Please read the link! He was a one-man crime spree!

And for Ayers, cons will never leave him alone, will they? Pretty good parallel with those two, but I don't think Ayers put a bullet in anybody's back.

 

[WinterBorn]

The "only crime? Please read the link! He was a one-man crime spree!

And for Ayers, cons will never leave him alone, will they? Pretty good parallel with those two, but I don't think Ayers put a bullet in anybody's back.

No, Ayers just built bombs that killed indiscriminately.

 

[Impenitent]

The "only crime? Please read the link! He was a one-man crime spree!

And for Ayers, cons will never leave him alone, will they? Pretty good parallel with those two, but I don't think Ayers put a bullet in anybody's back.

No, Ayers just built bombs that killed indiscriminately.

Except his bombs didn't kill people. So they were discriminating.

 

[WinterBorn]

The "only crime? Please read the link! He was a one-man crime spree!

And for Ayers, cons will never leave him alone, will they? Pretty good parallel with those two, but I don't think Ayers put a bullet in anybody's back.

No, Ayers just built bombs that killed indiscriminately.

Except his bombs didn't kill people. So they were discriminating.

By his choices or by accident?

And actually, if memory serves, at least 3 people died while building pipe bombs.

 

[Impenitent]

The "only crime? Please read the link! He was a one-man crime spree!

And for Ayers, cons will never leave him alone, will they? Pretty good parallel with those two, but I don't think Ayers put a bullet in anybody's back.

No, Ayers just built bombs that killed indiscriminately.

Except his bombs didn't kill people. So they were discriminating.

By his choices or by accident?

And actually, if memory serves, at least 3 people died while building pipe bombs.

Let's stop and note that ayers wasn't charged with killing anyone. (Dowlut wAs)

Ayers wasn't present when those bombs went off.
He blew up
Statues and empty buildings.

Crimes, but not capital ones.

 

[turtledude]

Do the allegations against the attorney somehow mean his legal arguments are less valid? that seems to be the insinuation of the anti gun extremists who think what happened 50 years ago somehow undermine the NRA or arguments he advances on their behalf

 

[Impenitent]

No, I haven't seen that insinuation. The insinuation I've
seen made is that the NRA encourages gun sales
to criminals by lobbying against background checks and supporting the gun-show loophole, and what better man to support that loophole than a man who got away with murder on a loophole.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, I haven't seen that insinuation. The insinuation I've
seen made is that the NRA encourages gun sales
to criminals by lobbying against background checks and supporting the gun-show loophole, and what better man to support that loophole than a man who got away with murder on a loophole.

The idea that there is a "gun show loophole" is laughable. It has nothing to do with gun shows at all. It is simply that private citizens are allowed to sell their privately owned property, and that they have no access to the background check system.

 

[turtledude]

No, I haven't seen that insinuation. The insinuation I've
seen made is that the NRA encourages gun sales
to criminals by lobbying against background checks and supporting the gun-show loophole, and what better man to support that loophole than a man who got away with murder on a loophole.

when someone claims there is a gun show loophole, I write them off as being either liars or so ignorant that their opinions on gun issues cannot be taken seriously ever again

 

[Impenitent]

Yet there is access. The dealers who sell guns at the shows are performing checks instantly in most cases, so the infrastructure is there.

Additionally the NRA (possibly Dowlut) has lobbied against
Taking away guns for individuals with protective orders against them. They partially won that fight, succeeding in saving the guns of those who have temporary orders against them. The winners? The gun industry! The losers? The 1
out of 5 women who are murdered by their partner while protected by a temporary order.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yet there is access. The dealers who sell guns at the shows are performing checks instantly in most cases, so the infrastructure is there.

Additionally the NRA (possibly Dowlut) has lobbied against
Taking away guns for individuals with protective orders against them. They partially won that fight, succeeding in saving the guns of those who have temporary orders against them. The winners? The gun industry! The losers? The 1
out of 5 women who are murdered by their partner while protected by a temporary order.

The infrastructure is there for instant background checks, that is true.

I have given my info numerous times to gun dealers. But, at the very least they will need my SSN, full name, and address. A dealer has a reason to stay within the law. An ordinary joe selling his deer rifle doesn't.

 

[Impenitent]

Y

No, I haven't seen that insinuation. The insinuation I've
seen made is that the NRA encourages gun sales
to criminals by lobbying against background checks and supporting the gun-show loophole, and what better man to support that loophole than a man who got away with murder on a loophole.

when someone claims there is a gun show loophole, I write them off as being either liars or so ignorant that their opinions on gun issues cannot be taken seriously ever again

Perhaps you don't want to take my arguments seriously because you lack the ability to successfully challenge them.

 

[Impenitent]

Yet there is access. The dealers who sell guns at the shows are performing checks instantly in most cases, so the infrastructure is there.

Additionally the NRA (possibly Dowlut) has lobbied against
Taking away guns for individuals with protective orders against them. They partially won that fight, succeeding in saving the guns of those who have temporary orders against them. The winners? The gun industry! The losers? The 1
out of 5 women who are murdered by their partner while protected by a temporary order.

The infrastructure is there for instant background checks, that is true.

I have given my info numerous times to gun dealers. But, at the very least they will need my SSN, full name, and address. A dealer has a reason to stay within the law. An ordinary joe selling his deer rifle doesn't.

You are excluding moral reasons for selling a gun to a possible criminal or provably deranged individual. Conscience should be another reason for wanting to stay within the law.

 

[turtledude]

Y

No, I haven't seen that insinuation. The insinuation I've
seen made is that the NRA encourages gun sales
to criminals by lobbying against background checks and supporting the gun-show loophole, and what better man to support that loophole than a man who got away with murder on a loophole.

when someone claims there is a gun show loophole, I write them off as being either liars or so ignorant that their opinions on gun issues cannot be taken seriously ever again

Perhaps you don't want to take my arguments seriously because you lack the ability to successfully challenge them.

well that is really funny but you don't know what a loophole is

the law at gun shows is not different than at any other place within a given state

so when you start with a LIE you are not to be taken seriously

and your whining about what an employee of the NRA did 15 years before the NRA hired him is pathetic

 

[turtledude]

Yet there is access. The dealers who sell guns at the shows are performing checks instantly in most cases, so the infrastructure is there.

Additionally the NRA (possibly Dowlut) has lobbied against
Taking away guns for individuals with protective orders against them. They partially won that fight, succeeding in saving the guns of those who have temporary orders against them. The winners? The gun industry! The losers? The 1
out of 5 women who are murdered by their partner while protected by a temporary order.

sounds like a good reason for women to be armed

only a cretin thinks that someone willing to kill his ex is going to obey a gun law

logic

IF THE THOUGHT OF A CAPITAL MURDER CONVICTION DOES NOT DETER YOU

the thought of buying a gun illegally does not either

 

[Impenitent]

Y

No, I haven't seen that insinuation. The insinuation I've
seen made is that the NRA encourages gun sales
to criminals by lobbying against background checks and supporting the gun-show loophole, and what better man to support that loophole than a man who got away with murder on a loophole.

when someone claims there is a gun show loophole, I write them off as being either liars or so ignorant that their opinions on gun issues cannot be taken seriously ever again

Perhaps you don't want to take my arguments seriously because you lack the ability to successfully challenge them.

well that is really funny but you don't know what a loophole is

the law at gun shows is not different than at any other place within a given state

so when you start with a LIE you are not to be taken seriously

and your whining about what an employee of the NRA did 15 years before the NRA hired him is pathetic

On May 27, 1999, Wayne LaPierre testified before the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Crime, on behalf of theNational Rifle Association, saying that "We think it's reasonable to provide mandatory instant criminal background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere for anyone," he said. "That means closing the Hinckley loophole so the records of those adjudicated mentally ill are in the system. This isn't new, or a change of position, or a concession. I've been on record on this point consistently, from our national meeting in Denver, to paid national ads and position papers, to news interviews and press appearances."[23]

I guess Wayne LPisrre doesn't know what a loophole
Is now, though he did in 1999. His masters must have made
Him forget. Note, he said, "every sale, at every gun show." I believe that would include every private sale.

You realize Wayne is only doing the gun manufacturers bidding by changing his mind. Do you also reverse your position on order?

 

[Impenitent]

Y

Yet there is access. The dealers who sell guns at the shows are performing checks instantly in most cases, so the infrastructure is there.

Additionally the NRA (possibly Dowlut) has lobbied against
Taking away guns for individuals with protective orders against them. They partially won that fight, succeeding in saving the guns of those who have temporary orders against them. The winners? The gun industry! The losers? The 1
out of 5 women who are murdered by their partner while protected by a temporary order.

sounds like a good reason for women to be armed

only a cretin thinks that someone willing to kill his ex is going to obey a gun law

logic

IF THE THOUGHT OF A CAPITAL MURDER CONVICTION DOES NOT DETER YOU

the thought of buying a gun illegally does not either

You may legally legally purchase a gun while under a temporary restraining order, thanks to the NRA, and possibly Robert Dowlut. When it's a woman dear to you, you might reconsider who you consider complicit.