Update: felony charges - Page 6

WickedLou9 · 07-22-2007, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Isn't this whole case being brought against me a bit over-dramatic?

no doubt

kinggovernor · 07-22-2007, 07:04 PM

I wonder if the NRA or other pro-2nd amendment groups would be willing to help with your legal fees

Stylerod · 07-23-2007, 01:04 AM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Supposedly he hadn't looked at any changes in gun laws, or purchased/traded any guns in over a decade...again, supposedly

Calling Ballz a liar now are we?

Simius · 07-23-2007, 01:16 AM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Calling Ballz a liar now are we?

Well why not? We already know he is a felon.

(J/K Ballz... I still think this sucks royal donkey cock)

Donkey® · 07-23-2007, 02:54 AM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Ballz told the officers they weren't. When he went through the registration process there was no law saying you had to lock your guns inside your locked house. The law changed and Ballz didn't know.

Being "ignorant" of the law is not an excuse. I would also like to know how you make this contention? The laws I saw were on the books since at LEAST 2002. When were the guns purchased? Were any purchased after 2002? I am sure i'll get attacked some more...but being a RESPONSIBLE gun owner entails keeping aware of the laws surrounding guns as well.

I will repeat, just for the record, I hope he gets off...the law is stupid...I hope the criminals get caught and they are punished...even better, I hope he gets his guns back. That doesn't mitigate his blame in this situation.

Diesel66 · 07-23-2007, 04:43 AM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Being "ignorant" of the law is not an excuse. I would also like to know how you make this contention? The laws I saw were on the books since at LEAST 2002. When were the guns purchased? Were any purchased after 2002?

Why would that change anything ?

CA passes laws all the time. But they dont hand out pamplets when you go buy a new gun.

Thorgrim · 07-23-2007, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Being "ignorant" of the law is not an excuse. I would also like to know how you make this contention? The laws I saw were on the books since at LEAST 2002. When were the guns purchased? Were any purchased after 2002? I am sure i'll get attacked some more...but being a RESPONSIBLE gun owner entails keeping aware of the laws surrounding guns as well.

I will repeat, just for the record, I hope he gets off...the law is stupid...I hope the criminals get caught and they are punished...even better, I hope he gets his guns back. That doesn't mitigate his blame in this situation.

The laws were on the books approx 97-98...again, he'd have
A) Not have purchased/traded a gun in over a decade
B) Stored a gun for over a decade inside his house and not looked at any regulations for storing a gun inside his house...for over a decade

DosEquis · 07-23-2007, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Yeah NOW I know that. I've never been in trouble with the law before, and I thought I was being a good citizen by helping them with their questions

What you say can and will be used against you in a court of law

I consider a locked house a responsible measure to prevent theft of your fire arms. I do not believe you should be required to do anything extra. You live in a state with some bullshit laws. I doubt much will come of this for you though, maybe some sort of fine and maybe a probation period. Given your history with the law (none) and your background you should be fine.

hsmith · 07-23-2007, 01:38 PM

hahah fuck i hate visiting my g/f in Boston, that entire state is a commie shithole

hsmith · 07-23-2007, 01:38 PM

sorry about your fucking hassle bro, amazingly GAY that you are the criminal because someone robbed you. only in a liberal state would this occur

hsmith · 07-23-2007, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Yeah NOW I know that. I've never been in trouble with the law before, and I thought I was being a good citizen by helping them with their questions

thats why you never trust police and the gov't

Thorgrim · 07-23-2007, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

sorry about your fucking hassle bro, amazingly GAY that you are the criminal because someone robbed you. only in a liberal state would this occur

actually he's a criminal when he broke the law...had no one ever broken into his house, he'd still be an outlaw

hsmith · 07-23-2007, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

actually he's a criminal when he broke the law...had no one ever broken into his house, he'd still be an outlaw

So ballz, with no intent to harm someone is going to be a felon, unable to vote and his rights stripped from him, while a criminal using his firearm to commit crimes runs around free.

Yeah, the law did a great job there, didn't it? Hmm, MIT graduate student helping people is a felon and a criminal assaulting people with stolen firearms runs free.

Yep, liberal justice there!

motivez · 07-23-2007, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

So ballz, with no intent to harm someone is going to be a felon, unable to vote and his rights stripped from him, while a criminal using his firearm to commit crimes runs around free.

Yeah, the law did a great job there, didn't it? Hmm, MIT graduate student helping people is a felon and a criminal assaulting people with stolen firearms runs free.

Yep, liberal justice there!

This supposes that the guy who broke into his house is running around free because they aren't looking for him / he wouldn't be punished if caught.. which is simply incorrect.

And he's not a graduate student, he's doing post-doctoral stuff there.

hsmith · 07-23-2007, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

This supposes that the guy who broke into his house is running around free because they aren't looking for him / he wouldn't be punished if caught.. which is simply incorrect.

And he's not a graduate student, he's doing post-doctoral stuff there.

They are wasting effort prosecuting ballz. Fine, charge him with a misdemeanor and have him waste time taking some jackoff class to "educate him" on doing whatever the gov't says.

The fact remains, they are prosecuting the wrong person. And people wonder why there is such distrust of the gov't and police. People wonder why minorities are worried about talking to the cops, because the intent is to get arrests and prosecute people, not stop crime. It is the bigger issue here, ballz is just a victim of laws that don't do shit and don't matter.

People that use guns in crimes should be charged, not gun owners who commit no crimes.

ballz2wallz · 07-23-2007, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

I wonder if the NRA or other pro-2nd amendment groups would be willing to help with your legal fees

I'm only gonna go to such extreme measures if this thing takes me to court. If the state of MA is gonna make an ass out of themselves, I'll pull out all the stops, including the NRA, Hannity and Colmes, Bill O'Reilly, David Pakman...

motivez · 07-23-2007, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

They are wasting effort prosecuting ballz.

I agree, I don't think the law is a good one.

Originally Posted by hsmith

Fine, charge him with a misdemeanor and have him waste time taking some jackoff class to "educate him" on doing whatever the gov't says.

There should definitely be an attempt to educate gun owners if they're going to have a law like this one, all law abiding citizens who own a gun should be aware of any laws / requirements for storage, transport, etc of guns and ammo..

That said, ignorance is never an excuse and personal responsibility in making an effort to learn about the laws is a principle I'm sure you can get behind even while disagreeing with the law.

Originally Posted by hsmith

People that use guns in crimes should be charged, not gun owners who commit no crimes.

I agree, but, he did commit a crime by failing to abide by the laws of the state, even though it is a stupid law that puts upstanding citizens like ballz in a position they shouldn't be in

Linzyhop · 07-23-2007, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I'm only gonna go to such extreme measures if this thing takes me to court. If the state of MA is gonna make an ass out of themselves, I'll pull out all the stops, including the NRA, Hannity and Colmes, Bill O'Reilly, David Pakman...

if you need help "pulling out all the stops", i can definitely help with that.

hsmith · 07-23-2007, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

I agree, I don't think the law is a good one.

There should definitely be an attempt to educate gun owners if they're going to have a law like this one, all law abiding citizens who own a gun should be aware of any laws / requirements for storage, transport, etc of guns and ammo..

That said, ignorance is never an excuse and personal responsibility in making an effort to learn about the laws is a principle I'm sure you can get behind even while disagreeing with the law.

I agree, but, he did commit a crime by failing to abide by the laws of the state, even though it is a stupid law that puts upstanding citizens like ballz in a position they shouldn't be in

The law isn't valid and it is unjust. The only valid laws protect property (including your body). All others are immoral. Laws that prosecute victim less crimes, such as this, must be done away with.

Thorgrim · 07-23-2007, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

The law isn't valid and it is unjust. The only valid laws protect property (including your body). All others are immoral. Laws that prosecute victim less crimes, such as this, must be done away with.

So I guess the 5th amendment is immoral because it gives the government the right to take away your property just by giving some just compensation