The gun thread
 

On 11/5/2014 3:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 1:23 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:50 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 11:28:39 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/5/2014 11:23 AM, wrote:

The producer committed at least 2 crimes. He purchased a gun as a non
resident, then he carried that illegally purchased gun across a state
line. Since he was purchasing it for CNN, not himself, (CNN gave him
the money) he is also a straw purchaser.
That is 3 federal crimes. ... three counts each for 3 guns.

Up to $900,000 fine and 90 years in jail.

CNN didn't say that did they?




Good freakin' grief Greg.

See 18 U.S.C. 922

The producer "received" 3 guns in interstate commerce
He transported those 3 guns across a state line
He purchased them for a 3d party.

18 U.S. Code § 924
says fines up to $100,000 and 10 years in federal prison per count.

I don't write the laws, I just read them. The problem is nobody even
knows what the current law is because nobody gets prosecuted. They
would rather throw the book at a guy with 3 joints in his sock

Unenforced, what law do you think would "fix" this problem? Enforced,
we already have plenty of laws.



There are many people who think CNN broke the law. The guys that sold
them the guns without checking an ID broke the law (at least state law).

Neither CNN or the sellers were prosecuted. There is no evidence that
CNN transported the guns over state lines as you "assumed" they did. At
the end of the video Cooper says that the guns were turned over to CNN
security. Could have been in the parking lot of the gun show. CNN
security may have turned them over to the local police department. I
don't know. You don't know.

Again, the purpose of the report to was demonstrate how easy it is for
anyone to get guns.



I think if you add up both sides, and what was and wasn't said... as
well as considering the source, it's probably 50/50 that it's just
actors and fake guns :)



Actors and fake guns. Whew.



I have seen fake floods and reporters in canoes... Just sayin'. Either
way, I was being somewhat sarcastically over the edge to make the point
that trusting CNN is like a crapshoot.. maybe I got the numbers wrong,
but I don't really shoot craps, maybe I shudd'a put in *two* smiley
faces....... again, relax dick, you are gonna' pop an artery...

The gun thread
 

On 11/5/2014 4:11 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/5/14 3:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 2:29 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:14:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/5/2014 11:29 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 11:23 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 09:21:00 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"

wrote:

On 11/5/2014 9:05 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 8:35 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 8:22 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:54 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 00:00:41 -0500, KC
wrote:




I doubt it... Could be that they fudged the circumstances or
edited
though. CNN and even more MSNBC have been caught several times
doing
things like that.. I am not saying this story is fudged, but
it's very
possible if nobody ever really got busted.

I think that if this was a real news story, they would have
questioned
the sellers after the sale. I wonder why they didn't.
By fuzzing the faces and not addressing it any further, even
to the
point of saying the seller refused an interview, they make
this look
pretty hokey.
I agree that if this really happened the way they presented
it, laws
were broken. My first question is where does the producer
live? They
attempted to buy guns in a couple of states and the
transactions on
tape were in Tennessee. I bet the producer lives in Georgia.
(CNN is
based in Atlanta)
When BATF starts rounding up the criminals, they have to start
with
the guy who taped his crime.


Well, can we for the purpose of this discussion view this
"report"
as a
hypothetical but not proven to be real yet? Of course that
kills the
perspective of those in the discussion riding on this as
"evidence"...


The role of journalism in a report like this isn't to effect the
arrest
or apprehension of those breaking the law. It is to expose the
law
breaking.

Journalists enjoy a privilege called "confidentiality of
sources" and
are not required to identify the people in the report. That's why
their
images are blurred.




They are still not allowed to commit or participate knowingly in a
crime...


What crime did the show's producer commit? All he did was buy three
handguns and a rifle. Private sale, so no background check is
required.

What was illegal, according to the report, is that the sellers were
supposed to confirm the ID of the purchaser to ensure he was a state
resident.

The show's intent was to demonstrate how *easy* it is for anyone to
purchase a firearm ... in this case several ... with no background
checks and not even a check to ensure the buyer was entitled to buy.

It wasn't to expose law breaking (although it did).

The producer committed at least 2 crimes. He purchased a gun as a non
resident, then he carried that illegally purchased gun across a state
line. Since he was purchasing it for CNN, not himself, (CNN gave him
the money) he is also a straw purchaser.
That is 3 federal crimes. ... three counts each for 3 guns.

Up to $900,000 fine and 90 years in jail.

CNN didn't say that did they?



That's kind of what I was thinking.... with my tin hat and all :)
Either
that or the whole sale was actors and fake guns... but no news agency
would do that :O


This place is hilarious. If you don't like something ... deny it
exists. Simple.


Yup, everyone here but you and Harry are ****ed up.

Sad.


If that's your conclusion, thanks for the compliment.


There are cowards in this newsgroup who, if forced to choose between
keeping their guns and the lives of their children/grandchildren, would
keep their guns and claim their progeny died for "the cause."



What surprises me more ... and it's been a real eye opener ... is the
rancor held for some who don't share their fanaticism and their ability
to twist what is actually said into what they *think* they read or
heard. No, on second thought, maybe it's what they *want* to think they
read or heard.

When you peel away the onion it all comes back to the same thing. The
big bad gov'ment is comin' to take my guns away.

The gun thread
 

On 11/5/14 4:27 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 4:11 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/5/14 3:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 2:29 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:14:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/5/2014 11:29 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 11:23 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 09:21:00 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"

wrote:

On 11/5/2014 9:05 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 8:35 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 8:22 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:54 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 00:00:41 -0500, KC
wrote:




I doubt it... Could be that they fudged the circumstances or
edited
though. CNN and even more MSNBC have been caught several times
doing
things like that.. I am not saying this story is fudged, but
it's very
possible if nobody ever really got busted.

I think that if this was a real news story, they would have
questioned
the sellers after the sale. I wonder why they didn't.
By fuzzing the faces and not addressing it any further, even
to the
point of saying the seller refused an interview, they make
this look
pretty hokey.
I agree that if this really happened the way they presented
it, laws
were broken. My first question is where does the producer
live? They
attempted to buy guns in a couple of states and the
transactions on
tape were in Tennessee. I bet the producer lives in Georgia.
(CNN is
based in Atlanta)
When BATF starts rounding up the criminals, they have to start
with
the guy who taped his crime.


Well, can we for the purpose of this discussion view this
"report"
as a
hypothetical but not proven to be real yet? Of course that
kills the
perspective of those in the discussion riding on this as
"evidence"...


The role of journalism in a report like this isn't to effect the
arrest
or apprehension of those breaking the law. It is to expose the
law
breaking.

Journalists enjoy a privilege called "confidentiality of
sources" and
are not required to identify the people in the report. That's
why
their
images are blurred.




They are still not allowed to commit or participate knowingly in a
crime...


What crime did the show's producer commit? All he did was buy
three
handguns and a rifle. Private sale, so no background check is
required.

What was illegal, according to the report, is that the sellers were
supposed to confirm the ID of the purchaser to ensure he was a
state
resident.

The show's intent was to demonstrate how *easy* it is for anyone to
purchase a firearm ... in this case several ... with no background
checks and not even a check to ensure the buyer was entitled to
buy.

It wasn't to expose law breaking (although it did).

The producer committed at least 2 crimes. He purchased a gun as a
non
resident, then he carried that illegally purchased gun across a
state
line. Since he was purchasing it for CNN, not himself, (CNN gave him
the money) he is also a straw purchaser.
That is 3 federal crimes. ... three counts each for 3 guns.

Up to $900,000 fine and 90 years in jail.

CNN didn't say that did they?



That's kind of what I was thinking.... with my tin hat and all :)
Either
that or the whole sale was actors and fake guns... but no news agency
would do that :O


This place is hilarious. If you don't like something ... deny it
exists. Simple.


Yup, everyone here but you and Harry are ****ed up.

Sad.


If that's your conclusion, thanks for the compliment.


There are cowards in this newsgroup who, if forced to choose between
keeping their guns and the lives of their children/grandchildren, would
keep their guns and claim their progeny died for "the cause."



What surprises me more ... and it's been a real eye opener ... is the
rancor held for some who don't share their fanaticism and their ability
to twist what is actually said into what they *think* they read or
heard. No, on second thought, maybe it's what they *want* to think they
read or heard.

When you peel away the onion it all comes back to the same thing. The
big bad gov'ment is comin' to take my guns away.



Guns for me are a hobby, nothing more. I don't buy into the insane 2A
bull**** that old farts are going to be able to hold off the government
with our little light arms. Most of the 2A boys here wouldn't come to
the aid of a woman being beat up in a parking lot. They're NATO boys, no
action, talk only, and the louder they yap about the 2A, the less
likely they are to take action of any sort that requires personal
physical risk. Herring, for example, looks like a toddler on a plastic
skateboard would do him in. I do think Fretwell would shoot a black kid
if he had the chance, especially in Florida.

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

The gun thread
 

On 11/5/2014 4:19 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 3:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 1:23 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:50 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 11:28:39 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/5/2014 11:23 AM, wrote:

The producer committed at least 2 crimes. He purchased a gun as a
non
resident, then he carried that illegally purchased gun across a
state
line. Since he was purchasing it for CNN, not himself, (CNN gave him
the money) he is also a straw purchaser.
That is 3 federal crimes. ... three counts each for 3 guns.

Up to $900,000 fine and 90 years in jail.

CNN didn't say that did they?




Good freakin' grief Greg.

See 18 U.S.C. 922

The producer "received" 3 guns in interstate commerce
He transported those 3 guns across a state line
He purchased them for a 3d party.

18 U.S. Code § 924
says fines up to $100,000 and 10 years in federal prison per count.

I don't write the laws, I just read them. The problem is nobody even
knows what the current law is because nobody gets prosecuted. They
would rather throw the book at a guy with 3 joints in his sock

Unenforced, what law do you think would "fix" this problem? Enforced,
we already have plenty of laws.



There are many people who think CNN broke the law. The guys that sold
them the guns without checking an ID broke the law (at least state
law).

Neither CNN or the sellers were prosecuted. There is no evidence that
CNN transported the guns over state lines as you "assumed" they
did. At
the end of the video Cooper says that the guns were turned over to CNN
security. Could have been in the parking lot of the gun show. CNN
security may have turned them over to the local police department. I
don't know. You don't know.

Again, the purpose of the report to was demonstrate how easy it is for
anyone to get guns.



I think if you add up both sides, and what was and wasn't said... as
well as considering the source, it's probably 50/50 that it's just
actors and fake guns :)



Actors and fake guns. Whew.



I have seen fake floods and reporters in canoes... Just sayin'. Either
way, I was being somewhat sarcastically over the edge to make the point
that trusting CNN is like a crapshoot.. maybe I got the numbers wrong,
but I don't really shoot craps, maybe I shudd'a put in *two* smiley
faces....... again, relax dick, you are gonna' pop an artery...


Trust me. If I ever pop an artery it won't be due to anything being
discussed here. In some ways rec.boats is therapy. Makes one realize
one is still very much sane.

The gun thread
 

On 11/5/2014 4:39 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 4:27 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


When you peel away the onion it all comes back to the same thing. The
big bad gov'ment is comin' to take my guns away.



Guns for me are a hobby, nothing more. I don't buy into the insane 2A
bull**** that old farts are going to be able to hold off the government
with our little light arms. Most of the 2A boys here wouldn't come to
the aid of a woman being beat up in a parking lot. They're NATO boys, no
action, talk only, and the louder they yap about the 2A, the less
likely they are to take action of any sort that requires personal
physical risk. Herring, for example, looks like a toddler on a plastic
skateboard would do him in. I do think Fretwell would shoot a black kid
if he had the chance, especially in Florida.



On 11/5/2014 4:39 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/5/14 4:27 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


When you peel away the onion it all comes back to the same thing. The
big bad gov'ment is comin' to take my guns away.



Guns for me are a hobby, nothing more. I don't buy into the insane 2A
bull**** that old farts are going to be able to hold off the government
with our little light arms. Most of the 2A boys here wouldn't come to
the aid of a woman being beat up in a parking lot. They're NATO boys, no
action, talk only, and the louder they yap about the 2A, the less
likely they are to take action of any sort that requires personal
physical risk. Herring, for example, looks like a toddler on a plastic
skateboard would do him in. I do think Fretwell would shoot a black kid
if he had the chance, especially in Florida.



In fairness, you have to consider youth and conditioning:

http://tinyurl.com/lvm5a6r

The gun thread
 

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 16:11:48 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 3:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 2:29 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:14:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/5/2014 11:29 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 11:23 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 09:21:00 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/5/2014 9:05 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 8:35 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 8:22 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:54 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 00:00:41 -0500, KC
wrote:




I doubt it... Could be that they fudged the circumstances or
edited
though. CNN and even more MSNBC have been caught several times
doing
things like that.. I am not saying this story is fudged, but
it's very
possible if nobody ever really got busted.

I think that if this was a real news story, they would have
questioned
the sellers after the sale. I wonder why they didn't.
By fuzzing the faces and not addressing it any further, even
to the
point of saying the seller refused an interview, they make
this look
pretty hokey.
I agree that if this really happened the way they presented
it, laws
were broken. My first question is where does the producer
live? They
attempted to buy guns in a couple of states and the
transactions on
tape were in Tennessee. I bet the producer lives in Georgia.
(CNN is
based in Atlanta)
When BATF starts rounding up the criminals, they have to start
with
the guy who taped his crime.


Well, can we for the purpose of this discussion view this "report"
as a
hypothetical but not proven to be real yet? Of course that
kills the
perspective of those in the discussion riding on this as
"evidence"...


The role of journalism in a report like this isn't to effect the
arrest
or apprehension of those breaking the law. It is to expose the law
breaking.

Journalists enjoy a privilege called "confidentiality of
sources" and
are not required to identify the people in the report. That's why
their
images are blurred.




They are still not allowed to commit or participate knowingly in a
crime...


What crime did the show's producer commit? All he did was buy three
handguns and a rifle. Private sale, so no background check is
required.

What was illegal, according to the report, is that the sellers were
supposed to confirm the ID of the purchaser to ensure he was a state
resident.

The show's intent was to demonstrate how *easy* it is for anyone to
purchase a firearm ... in this case several ... with no background
checks and not even a check to ensure the buyer was entitled to buy.

It wasn't to expose law breaking (although it did).

The producer committed at least 2 crimes. He purchased a gun as a non
resident, then he carried that illegally purchased gun across a state
line. Since he was purchasing it for CNN, not himself, (CNN gave him
the money) he is also a straw purchaser.
That is 3 federal crimes. ... three counts each for 3 guns.

Up to $900,000 fine and 90 years in jail.

CNN didn't say that did they?



That's kind of what I was thinking.... with my tin hat and all :)
Either
that or the whole sale was actors and fake guns... but no news agency
would do that :O


This place is hilarious. If you don't like something ... deny it
exists. Simple.


Yup, everyone here but you and Harry are ****ed up.

Sad.


If that's your conclusion, thanks for the compliment.


There are cowards in this newsgroup who, if forced to choose between
keeping their guns and the lives of their children/grandchildren, would
keep their guns and claim their progeny died for "the cause."

You two are getting right good at the ridicule. Shame this thread had
to deteriorate to that.

As someone said, "Sad."

The gun thread
 

On 11/5/14 5:05 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 16:11:48 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 3:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 2:29 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:14:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/5/2014 11:29 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 11:23 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 09:21:00 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/5/2014 9:05 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 8:35 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 8:22 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:54 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 00:00:41 -0500, KC
wrote:




I doubt it... Could be that they fudged the circumstances or
edited
though. CNN and even more MSNBC have been caught several times
doing
things like that.. I am not saying this story is fudged, but
it's very
possible if nobody ever really got busted.

I think that if this was a real news story, they would have
questioned
the sellers after the sale. I wonder why they didn't.
By fuzzing the faces and not addressing it any further, even
to the
point of saying the seller refused an interview, they make
this look
pretty hokey.
I agree that if this really happened the way they presented
it, laws
were broken. My first question is where does the producer
live? They
attempted to buy guns in a couple of states and the
transactions on
tape were in Tennessee. I bet the producer lives in Georgia.
(CNN is
based in Atlanta)
When BATF starts rounding up the criminals, they have to start
with
the guy who taped his crime.


Well, can we for the purpose of this discussion view this "report"
as a
hypothetical but not proven to be real yet? Of course that
kills the
perspective of those in the discussion riding on this as
"evidence"...


The role of journalism in a report like this isn't to effect the
arrest
or apprehension of those breaking the law. It is to expose the law
breaking.

Journalists enjoy a privilege called "confidentiality of
sources" and
are not required to identify the people in the report. That's why
their
images are blurred.




They are still not allowed to commit or participate knowingly in a
crime...


What crime did the show's producer commit? All he did was buy three
handguns and a rifle. Private sale, so no background check is
required.

What was illegal, according to the report, is that the sellers were
supposed to confirm the ID of the purchaser to ensure he was a state
resident.

The show's intent was to demonstrate how *easy* it is for anyone to
purchase a firearm ... in this case several ... with no background
checks and not even a check to ensure the buyer was entitled to buy.

It wasn't to expose law breaking (although it did).

The producer committed at least 2 crimes. He purchased a gun as a non
resident, then he carried that illegally purchased gun across a state
line. Since he was purchasing it for CNN, not himself, (CNN gave him
the money) he is also a straw purchaser.
That is 3 federal crimes. ... three counts each for 3 guns.

Up to $900,000 fine and 90 years in jail.

CNN didn't say that did they?



That's kind of what I was thinking.... with my tin hat and all :)
Either
that or the whole sale was actors and fake guns... but no news agency
would do that :O


This place is hilarious. If you don't like something ... deny it
exists. Simple.


Yup, everyone here but you and Harry are ****ed up.

Sad.


If that's your conclusion, thanks for the compliment.


There are cowards in this newsgroup who, if forced to choose between
keeping their guns and the lives of their children/grandchildren, would
keep their guns and claim their progeny died for "the cause."

You two are getting right good at the ridicule. Shame this thread had
to deteriorate to that.

As someone said, "Sad."


You and your gun nutzi buddies are deserving of ridicule, and you of
course are in no position to whine about being ridiculed. You ain't in
the "he who is without sin" group.

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

The gun thread
 

On 11/5/2014 4:39 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 4:19 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 3:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 1:23 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:50 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 11:28:39 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"

wrote:

On 11/5/2014 11:23 AM, wrote:

The producer committed at least 2 crimes. He purchased a gun as a
non
resident, then he carried that illegally purchased gun across a
state
line. Since he was purchasing it for CNN, not himself, (CNN gave
him
the money) he is also a straw purchaser.
That is 3 federal crimes. ... three counts each for 3 guns.

Up to $900,000 fine and 90 years in jail.

CNN didn't say that did they?




Good freakin' grief Greg.

See 18 U.S.C. 922

The producer "received" 3 guns in interstate commerce
He transported those 3 guns across a state line
He purchased them for a 3d party.

18 U.S. Code § 924
says fines up to $100,000 and 10 years in federal prison per count.

I don't write the laws, I just read them. The problem is nobody even
knows what the current law is because nobody gets prosecuted. They
would rather throw the book at a guy with 3 joints in his sock

Unenforced, what law do you think would "fix" this problem? Enforced,
we already have plenty of laws.



There are many people who think CNN broke the law. The guys that sold
them the guns without checking an ID broke the law (at least state
law).

Neither CNN or the sellers were prosecuted. There is no evidence that
CNN transported the guns over state lines as you "assumed" they
did. At
the end of the video Cooper says that the guns were turned over to CNN
security. Could have been in the parking lot of the gun show. CNN
security may have turned them over to the local police department. I
don't know. You do
Again, the purpose of the report to was demonstrate how easy it is for
anyone to get guns.



I think if you add up both sides, and what was and wasn't said... as
well as considering the source, it's probably 50/50 that it's just
actors and fake guns :)



Actors and fake guns. Whew.



I have seen fake floods and reporters in canoes... Just sayin'. Either
way, I was being somewhat sarcastically over the edge to make the point
that trusting CNN is like a crapshoot.. maybe I got the numbers wrong,
but I don't really shoot craps, maybe I shudd'a put in *two* smiley
faces....... again, relax dick, you are gonna' pop an artery...


Trust me. If I ever pop an artery it won't be due to anything being
discussed here. In some ways rec.boats is therapy. Makes one realize
one is still very much sane.



Just worried about your health. We all got 'BamaCare now you know... :)

The gun thread
 

On 11/5/14 5:35 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 4:39 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 4:19 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 3:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 1:23 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:50 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 11:28:39 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"

wrote:

On 11/5/2014 11:23 AM, wrote:

The producer committed at least 2 crimes. He purchased a gun as a
non
resident, then he carried that illegally purchased gun across a
state
line. Since he was purchasing it for CNN, not himself, (CNN gave
him
the money) he is also a straw purchaser.
That is 3 federal crimes. ... three counts each for 3 guns.

Up to $900,000 fine and 90 years in jail.

CNN didn't say that did they?




Good freakin' grief Greg.

See 18 U.S.C. 922

The producer "received" 3 guns in interstate commerce
He transported those 3 guns across a state line
He purchased them for a 3d party.

18 U.S. Code § 924
says fines up to $100,000 and 10 years in federal prison per count.

I don't write the laws, I just read them. The problem is nobody even
knows what the current law is because nobody gets prosecuted. They
would rather throw the book at a guy with 3 joints in his sock

Unenforced, what law do you think would "fix" this problem?
Enforced,
we already have plenty of laws.



There are many people who think CNN broke the law. The guys that
sold
them the guns without checking an ID broke the law (at least state
law).

Neither CNN or the sellers were prosecuted. There is no evidence
that
CNN transported the guns over state lines as you "assumed" they
did. At
the end of the video Cooper says that the guns were turned over to
CNN
security. Could have been in the parking lot of the gun show. CNN
security may have turned them over to the local police department. I
don't know. You do
Again, the purpose of the report to was demonstrate how easy it is
for
anyone to get guns.



I think if you add up both sides, and what was and wasn't said... as
well as considering the source, it's probably 50/50 that it's just
actors and fake guns :)



Actors and fake guns. Whew.



I have seen fake floods and reporters in canoes... Just sayin'. Either
way, I was being somewhat sarcastically over the edge to make the point
that trusting CNN is like a crapshoot.. maybe I got the numbers wrong,
but I don't really shoot craps, maybe I shudd'a put in *two* smiley
faces....... again, relax dick, you are gonna' pop an artery...


Trust me. If I ever pop an artery it won't be due to anything being
discussed here. In some ways rec.boats is therapy. Makes one realize
one is still very much sane.



Just worried about your health. We all got 'BamaCare now you know... :)


Yeah, you have health care insurance now, thanks to the liberals.
Perhaps your friends in the GOP will take it away from now. Wouldn't
that be nice?

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.� -
Norman Mailer

The gun thread
 

On 11/5/2014 7:38 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 11/5/2014 9:11 AM, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 9:01:50 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 8:44 AM, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 8:35:27 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 8:22 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/5/2014 12:54 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 00:00:41 -0500, KC wrote:




I doubt it... Could be that they fudged the circumstances or edited
though. CNN and even more MSNBC have been caught several times doing
things like that.. I am not saying this story is fudged, but it's very
possible if nobody ever really got busted.

I think that if this was a real news story, they would have questioned
the sellers after the sale. I wonder why they didn't.
By fuzzing the faces and not addressing it any further, even to the
point of saying the seller refused an interview, they make this look
pretty hokey.
I agree that if this really happened the way they presented it, laws
were broken. My first question is where does the producer live? They
attempted to buy guns in a couple of states and the transactions on
tape were in Tennessee. I bet the producer lives in Georgia. (CNN is
based in Atlanta)
When BATF starts rounding up the criminals, they have to start with
the guy who taped his crime.


Well, can we for the purpose of this discussion view this "report" as a
hypothetical but not proven to be real yet? Of course that kills the
perspective of those in the discussion riding on this as "evidence"...


The role of journalism in a report like this isn't to effect the arrest
or apprehension of those breaking the law. It is to expose the law
breaking.

Journalists enjoy a privilege called "confidentiality of sources" and
are not required to identify the people in the report. That's why their
images are blurred.

Of course Dateline's "To catch a predator" had no problem following through. Many "news" stories have been staged, and later revealed. That this one hasn't doesn't mean it's real.



That show was specifically done in concert with law enforcement who were
conducting sting operations. Not really the same thing.

"Dateline NBC aired an investigative report on November 17, 1992, titled "Waiting to Explode". The 60-minute program focused on General Motors' Rounded-Line Chevrolet C/K-Series pickup trucks allegedly exploding upon impact during accidents due to the poor design of fuel tanks. Dateline?'?s footage showed a sample of a low-speed accident with the fuel tank exploding. In reality, Dateline NBC producers had rigged the truck's fuel tank with remotely controlled model
rocket engines to initiate the explosion. The program did not disclose the fact that the accident was staged."

But that is.



I remember that. Agreed, it was proven it was staged. In their
defense, NBC issued a statement that the problem with the GM trucks
was well known and documented. They just couldn't get the thing to
catch fire for their filming purposes, so they faked what caused the
leaking fuel to ignite. Not exactly honest and they should have
acknowledged it in the documentary.

It turns out that the problem with the side saddle tanks in the trucks
*was* real though. Here's what the Center For Auto Safety says about them:

"The side saddle fuel tank design installed in over 10 million trucks -
all 1973-87 General Motors full-size pickups and cab-chassis trucks
(pickups without beds) and some 1988-91 dual cab or RV chassis - is the
worst auto crash fire defect in the history of the U.S. Department of
Transportation. Based on data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting
System (formerly known as the Fatal Accident Reporting System), over
2,000 people were killed in fire crashes involving these trucks from
1973 through 2009. (Attachment A is a list of fatal C/K fire crashes by
state since 1993.) This is more than twenty times as many fatalities as
in the infamous Ford Pinto. Despite a voluntary recall request from the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in April 1993
(Attachment B) and an initial defect determination by Transportation
Secretary Federico Pena in October 1994 (Attachment C), GM stubbornly
refused to initiate a recall."


GM has not always been forthcoming in acknowledging defects in their
products. It caught up to them with the recent "key" thing though.

NBC lost credibility with they explosion prior to impact. They should
have immediately fired everyone involved in that staged video form the
top to they bottom. Instead they decided to keep them around. I don't
trust NBC to this day. Sixty-minutes is another show that has lost all
credibility. 20/20 doesn't do much better in the credibility department
either.



Let me ask you something:

If the danger exposed in an investigative report is *real* as in the
case of the Chevy trucks catching fire due to the unprotected side
saddle fuel tanks and as outlined in the Center For Auto Safety report
cited above, is a dramatization of the danger by artificially igniting
the fuel an attempt to mislead the public or provide false information?

The point was to expose the dangers associated with the design which had
already been responsible for many deaths.

I don't condone the way it was done. They should have acknowledged in
the video that the fire was not a result of the test, but was
intentionally initiated to demonstrate what had happened in other
crashes. The danger was still real.

I was surprised because when people think fuel tanks exploding, they
think of the Ford Pinto. Yet, the Chevy trucks caused over twenty times
the number of deaths according to the U.S. Department of
Transportation