The felons from Jan 6 should never legally carry a gun again.

SmarterthanYou said:
and you still have that poor of a perception of former military?
Click to expand...

Never said that, but what you saw at the Capital was neither a well organized or tactically sound effort. That said, groups such as the Oath Keepers are not numerous enough to actually do anything than to commit acts of terror, and that will not bring recruits to their cause, whatever that is. The fact of the matter is most Vets saw the attack on the Capital as a treasonous act, I sure did, especially by those that served, so do not think for a second that Vets as a whole would ever support an insurrection. You took an Oath to this Nation, it does not end when you get out if you truly have Honor.

That said, if we truly had a Government and Leader that was an enemy to Democracy, the Constitution, and the Republic I would stand right there with you as would huge numbers of Vets and other Americans, that day is not here, no matter what some want to claim. Keep a cool head and remember your Oath.
 
CASPER said:
Never said that, but what you saw at the Capital was neither a well organized or tactically sound effort.
Click to expand...
agreed, which is why I said from the beginning that it was doomed to failure

CASPER said:
That said, groups such as the Oath Keepers are not numerous enough to actually do anything than to commit acts of terror, and that will not bring recruits to their cause, whatever that is. The fact of the matter is most Vets saw the attack on the Capital as a treasonous act, I sure did, especially by those that served, so do not think for a second that Vets as a whole would ever support an insurrection. You took an Oath to this Nation, it does not end when you get out if you truly have Honor.
Click to expand...
despite what most people here want to believe I supported it, I didn't. I also thought it was borderline treason and had they used firearms, I would consider it such. now i'll get accused of more backtracking, i'm sure.

CASPER said:
That said, if we truly had a Government and Leader that was an enemy to Democracy, the Constitution, and the Republic I would stand right there with you as would huge numbers of Vets and other Americans, that day is not here, no matter what some want to claim. Keep a cool head and remember your Oath.
Click to expand...
agreed............the only thing left about that is where the line is.
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
I don't think the FBI or Biden wants to be anti-gun advocates. That would only fan flames.

Guns aren't the problem- People are!
Click to expand...

I've spent over a decade dealing with gun laws, government action against gun crime, etc. and i've never seen a single case where the gov WAITED to file gun charges............

so no, you were lied to by the FBI, deal with it.
 
Jarod said:
If you participated in an armed insurrection on the United States Capitol, you should lose your right to carry a firearm for life.


Agreed?
Click to expand...

Cool. They can just carry illegally then. LOL like laws matter anymore after you liberals stole the election and rigged the courts to let your antifa goons off the hook for the violence they perpetrate.
Laws don't matter to anyone anymore thanks to you people.
Enjoy the civil war you fomented
 
SmarterthanYou said:
agreed, which is why I said from the beginning that it was doomed to failure

despite what most people here want to believe I supported it, I didn't. I also thought it was borderline treason and had they used firearms, I would consider it such. now i'll get accused of more backtracking, i'm sure.


agreed............the only thing left about that is where the line is.
Click to expand...

Good to hear that.

I am sure some might, but this discussion was between us, and not others or past comments made.

The line is always close, that is why we all need to pay attention to the events taking place, especially as Vets. I would only suggest that it is best to do so from a bit of distance to keep a good perspective of those events, ones view point is less clouded by other voices and your own is clear.

Well done.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Then it's a fantasy thread. Not one person in the Capitol riot has been charged with treason, sedition, insurrection, or anything like that, so they aren't "insurrectionists" except in your imagination.
Click to expand...
s, who Trump has already labeled criminals and lawless actors, will walk free?

The charges are substantial and might increase as more information is gathered by law enforcement. No doubt the FBI doesn't want to screw up a case on a technicality.

4wqbms.jpg
 
tinfoil said:
Cool. They can just carry illegally then. LOL like laws matter anymore after you liberals stole the election and rigged the courts to let your antifa goons off the hook for the violence they perpetrate.
Laws don't matter to anyone anymore thanks to you people.
Enjoy the civil war you fomented
Click to expand...

Well then, back to this crap.........................
 
Jarod said:
If you participated in an armed insurrection on the United States Capitol, you should lose your right to carry a firearm for life.

Agreed?
Click to expand...

How many had guns? The same laws should apply to them as all other convicted felons. Many of them were charged with misdemeanors (curfew).
 
Flash said:
How many had guns? The same laws should apply to them as all other convicted felons. Many of them were charged with misdemeanors (curfew).
Click to expand...

There's 52 weapons charges listed here: https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases?combine=weapon

At least one person has 4 of the charges, a handful have two and a lot have a single weapons charge.

Any idea what all of these are likely to add up to when all is said and done? :

MILLER, Matthew Ryan
Civil Disorder; Obstruction of an Official Proceeding; Aiding and Abetting; Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding Certain Officers Using a Dangerous Weapon; Entering and Remaining in a Restricted building or Grounds with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon; Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building or Grounds with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon; Engaging in Physical Violence in a Restricted Building or Grounds with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon; Disorderlly Conduct in a Capitol Building; Act of Physical Violence in the Capitol Grounds or Buildings; Stepping, Climbing, Removing, or Injuring Property on the Capitol Grounds

 
Dutch Uncle said:
There's 52 weapons charges listed here: https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases
Click to expand...

I'll assume you mis-typed that. There are--per the list you posted-- just 25 persons charged with possession and or use of a dangerous or deadly weapon on it. There are three firearms related charges which interestingly in zero cases were directly related to the riot.

Want the names? I made a list. I also read selected at random statements of fact and charges officially filed against some of them. So of these charges are utterly laughable.
For instance, Rachel M. Powell's complaint lists her as "Depredation of government property with a dangerous weapon." I'm not sure whether they are referring to her having a cell phone, a bullhorn, or being one of several people that used a large pipe to smash a window, but the charge is ridiculous. Sure, charge her with property damage like any normal prosecutor would, but the charge as made is absurd.

You obviously don't know what Matthew R. Miller's charge of use of a deadly or dangerous weapon was. Miller is charged on this for discharging a fire extinguisher held over his head (there's a photo). Really dangerous or deadly there...

That's not to defend them, but rather to point out the over-reach by federal prosecutors--something they commonly do.

Again, you need to go through the list better. You'll quickly see most of the people charged are really looking at misdemeanors realistically.
 
Last edited:
T. A. Gardner said:
I'll assume you mis-typed that. There are--per the list you posted-- just 25 persons charged with possession and or use of a dangerous or deadly weapon on it. There are three firearms related charges which interestingly in zero cases were directly related to the riot.

Want the names? I made a list. I also read selected at random statements of fact and charges officially filed against some of them. So of these charges are utterly laughable.
For instance, Rachel M. Powell's complaint lists her as "Depredation of government property with a dangerous weapon." I'm not sure whether they are referring to her having a cell phone, a bullhorn, or being one of several people that used a large pipe to smash a window, but the charge is ridiculous. Sure, charge her with property damage like any normal prosecutor would, but the charge as made is absurd.

You obviously don't know what Matthew R. Miller's charge of use of a deadly or dangerous weapon was. Miller is charged on this for discharging a fire extinguisher held over his head (there's a photo). Really dangerous or deadly there...

That's not to defend them, but rather to point out the over-reach by federal prosecutors--something they commonly do.

Again, you need to go through the list better. You'll quickly see most of the people charged are really looking at misdemeanors realistically.
Click to expand...

52 charges but 25 people have the charges against them. I trust your count.

I'm not a fucking lawyer, sea or otherwise, but I don't want to be in the shoes of those assholes. Trump threw them all under the bus and under the bus is where they are going to stay.

Why are you so intent on defending people who attack police officers, assaulted the Capitol and who Trump labeled as criminals and lawless actors?
 
Dutch Uncle said:
52 charges but 25 people have the charges against them. I trust your count.

Why are you so intent on defending people who attack police officers, assaulted the Capitol and who Trump labeled as criminals and lawless actors?
Click to expand...

I'm not defending them, but rather intent they get a fair trial and that the charges against them are ones they really should be charged with.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I'm not defending them, but rather intent they get a fair trial and that the charges against them are ones they really should be charged with.
Click to expand...
Agreed on fair trails. It's in the Constitution.

After watching the videos of the Insurrection, I'm sure they are properly charged. A trial will determine their fates. Some will be offered plea deals.
 
Jarod said:
If you participated in an armed insurrection on the United States Capitol, you should lose your right to carry a firearm for life.


Agreed?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that felons who've served their sentences should have any restrictions on their rights, be it voting, firearms, or anything else.
The ones who are clearly not rehabilitatable, however, should be humanely euthanized, not stuck in prisons for decades or punitively executed.

I don't believe in capital punishment, but I do believe in expedient exclusion by humane euthanasia. .
Put the sickos peacefully to sleep, don't punish them for being sick.
It's the humane thing to do.
 
Let me expand on my earlier answer in post 215. If the feds were to stack charges...

https://www.massachusettscriminalde... stacking is daunting to a criminal defendant.
https://wrongfulconvictionsblog.org/2015/06/12/prosecutors-charge-stacking-and-plea-deals/

...or overreach on the charges presented, then there becomes a very real potential that those charged will be seen as martyrs or victims rather than as criminals by many, particularly those that share similar political views. Instead of a deterrent affect this could produce the opposite and increase opposition to the sitting government and government in general. That's hardly a good thing. If the prosecutors overreach here they can create the very thing they seek to stop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top