candycorn
Diamond Member
Incredibly sad, totally unbelievable reasoning. Dude clearly should not be allowed to have a firearm.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Incredibly sad, totally unbelievable reasoning. Dude clearly should not be allowed to have a firearm.
Because his mother did not cooperate with investigators.He threatened to blow up his mother with a bomb, yet was never charged by the DA.
Yes. That needs to be changed. If you're arrested...you should be flagged irregardless of conviction.Thus is not put on any “no buy” list or red flag laws.
He sounds like every gun nut on this board.The guy was a loon who wanted to blow up his own mother. He’s probably a fag or a tranny himself.
Really? Provide some quotes then.He sounds like every gun nut on this board
Incredibly sad, totally unbelievable reasoning. Dude clearly should not be allowed to have a firearm.
So much for due process. Can you hate the Constitution more? (Rhetorical). I have no doubt you will prove you can in short order.Because his mother did not cooperate with investigators.
Yes. That needs to be changed. If you're arrested...you should be flagged irregardless of conviction.
He sounds like every gun nut on this board.
Whether you watch it or not concerns me very little.Do you have an unbiased source? These kooks tried to blame the Boston Marathon bombing on the Tea Party. Hard to take anything they say seriously. Which is why I won't watch this video, can you give us the run down?
Fair enough, not like you have any credibility to worry about anyways.Whether you watch it or not concerns me very little.
We customarily take weapons from those accused of crimes well before they are found guilty of said crimes. For example, your bond conditions may prevent you from having a firearm. You have not been convicted of anything...but you cannot have a possess a firearm.So much for due process. Can you hate the Constitution more? (Rhetorical). I have no doubt you will prove you can in short order.
He wasn't even charged. Where then is your justification for theft and violating ones Constitutional rights?We customarily take weapons from those accused of crimes well before they are found guilty of said crimes. For example, your bond conditions may prevent you from having a firearm. You have not been convicted of anything...but you cannot have a possess a firearm.
Translation: I'm an antigun nut with no concept on gun functionality. All I know is they go bang and they scare me.Because his mother did not cooperate with investigators.
Yes. That needs to be changed. If you're arrested...you should be flagged irregardless of conviction.
He sounds like every gun nut on this board.
In many cases red flag laws don't work because families won't let them work.He threatened to blow up his mother with a bomb, yet was never charged by the DA. Thus is not put on any “no buy” list or red flag laws.
The guy was a loon who wanted to blow up his own mother. He’s probably a fag or a tranny himself.
He was arrested.He wasn't even charged.
He was arrested for allegedly having committed a violent crime....and whatdoyouknow...he committed another violent crime 18 months later.Where then is your justification for theft and violating ones Constitutional rights?
Still no Constitutional basis to violate his rights and steal his property. You offer no due process. No thanks.He was arrested.
He was arrested for allegedly having committed a violent crime....and whatdoyouknow...he committed another violent crime 18 months later.
Yup, that how the system works. Get an amendment if you want the power of unlimited theft. Good luck.So if the charges were dropped, for example, should we just ignore the crime he was charged with unless he's convicted????