They might have a hard time proving that with a good lawyer. So an undercover cop can't buy a gun. Might make the state look kind of stupid in their law or they are saying even their cops can't be trusted with guns.:biggrin:In the second alleged sale, investigators say Wassell sold an undercover officer an Armalite AR-10 Magnum Semiautomatic Rifle in February, in violation of the then recently passed NY SAFE Act, which made illegal the transfer, sale, exchange and disposal of an assault weapon to a person unauthorized to possess such a weapon. Wassell is facing a misdemeanor for the alleged violation of the NY SAFE Act.
Jeez, this guy had a wish to get nailed. The first gun he sold had no place in NY under the law since 1994. The second one could only be sold to an FFL or out of state.
As has been stated, you can't fix stupid.
Keep your guns, don't register them if that's the form of civil disobedience you prefer, but for cryin out loud selling them to someone you don't know is asking for it. Effective civil disobedience means deploying it in such a way as to pull it off and keep fighting.
Perhaps it was an activist action.
I dunno. I can't my head around the guy. He took himself out of the fight. It's like he was about to engage the Taliban, and before the firefight started, he threw his M4 on the ground and ran at them with his fists up. Accomplished nothing.
And the notion of the NRA stepping up? Don't remind me. That's looking more and more like a lost cause.
...what on earth could it hurt to go for broke with 'em and ask for the moon? What, they might ignore you? Aren't they already ignoring your plight anyway?
Here's the best way I've come to think about it, because like you said, there's so many idiots out there that like to say "so you think people should be able to own nuclear bombs?" when I say that the 2nd amendment should include ALL arms...if it can be used for self defense in a crowded room without harming anyone other than the intended target, then it should be 100% covered under the 2A. Grenades, C4, yeah crap like that you can restrict all you want. But I don't see how even an M16 isn't covered.Jeez, this guy had a wish to get nailed. The first gun he sold had no place in NY under the law since 1994. The second one could only be sold to an FFL or out of state.
As has been stated, you can't fix stupid.
Keep your guns, don't register them if that's the form of civil disobedience you prefer, but for cryin out loud selling them to someone you don't know is asking for it. Effective civil disobedience means deploying it in such a way as to pull it off and keep fighting.
Perhaps it was an activist action. Maybe the N R A will take up his cause and fund and/or provide his defense with an eye towards getting to the Supreme Court again.....Oops. Did I say "again?" That's right, the N R A has never taken a case to the SCOTUS. Nevermind.....
Just some friendly ribbin' 2Aw. Please don't call me a chihuahua or something over that, OK? Seriously, the guy could have activism in mind. He could be just a stupid guy with a blank stare on his face too, but the fact is, someone is going to have to be a sacrificial lamb to the court system to get anything done about the SAFE Act. Since the vast majority of the country can currently own the types of weapons this guy sold, why not make it about those kinds of weapons? Tailor it to already highly-restricted types of weapons, and it's not going to seem to the rest of the country that your state's gun owners are very serious about restoring their rights, as taking the baby step backwards from ultra-restrictive to highly-restrictive is not something the "unabridged 2nd Amendment" crowd is likely to donate time and/or money to.
I resist including myself in the collective by saying things like, "As gun owners, we need to do..." whatever, but I'm going to make an exception here. I honestly don't think "we" do "ourselves" any favors by accepting the premise that any small arms should be outlawed in any jurisdiction in America. I understand differences in 2A interpretation between ARs and say, Abrams tanks, but if we can't all agree that small arms should unequivocally be protected by the 2A, then we are unnecessarily diluting our strength as an influential constituency no matter which, or how many, gun-rights organizations we employ to aid in our struggle.
Instead of calling the victim of unconstitutional laws passed by tyrants "stupid," why don't you drop your ol' buddy Wayne a line and suggest he and his .org at least take a public stand against this kind of prosecution? Or the JPFO? Or the SAF? Or whomever. Just don't accept the premise that he acted illegally. It is your state government who is acting illegally, and who has been for years.
Blues
Here's the best way I've come to think about it, because like you said, there's so many idiots out there that like to say "so you think people should be able to own nuclear bombs?" when I say that the 2nd amendment should include ALL arms...if it can be used for self defense in a crowded room without harming anyone other than the intended target, then it should be 100% covered under the 2A. Grenades, C4, yeah crap like that you can restrict all you want. But I don't see how even an M16 isn't covered.
Link Removed might be blocked for linking.
They might have a hard time proving that with a good lawyer. So an undercover cop can't buy a gun. Might make the state look kind of stupid in their law or they are saying even their cops can't be trusted with guns.:biggrin:
I know you and I have had differences, blues, and are having them as we speak in other threads - but let it never be said that I miss a good point when it's presented to me.
And I wrote to Chris Cox and Wayne LaPierre, too.
Guess what...?
Edit - I guess I should have called it an "inadvertently applicable form letter". 2A
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?