BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

John H.[_5_]

On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 18:11:20 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 17:05:30 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/22/15 4:52 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 16:18:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 6/22/2015 11:54 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 04:12:12 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The responsibility for owning a firearm isn't limited to when you are
holding it. You are also responsible for who has access to it.

It is clear that the father had no problem with the son having access
to a firearm.

Did the father know his son had a felony charge? If so he is subject to
10 years for knowingly transferring a firearm to a felon.

The kid is not a felon. He is still innocent until proven guilty.
It is even unclear that he was actually indicted yet and it was a
simple possession charge for a small number of schedule 2 pills.
These typically get dealt out as a misdemeanor or even shuttled off to
"drug court".

If I was going to charge the father, it would be depraved indifference
(2d degree) murder.

So, you think it was *ok* for daddy to supply sonny boy with a GLOCK, eh?

BTW it would be OK for Root to buy this gun in Maryland. Article 5-118
only prevents sales on "Conviction" of the listed felonies.
Misdemeanor trespassing is not on the list..

~crickets~
--

Guns don't cause problems.
Gun owner behavior causes problems.