DC AG now has Gregory case

posted at 11:21 am on January 9, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Does the rule of law apply equally to all citizens, even when “the law is a ass,” to quote Charles Dickens?  Or do celebrities get one form of justice for mindless laws they endorse while breaking them, while everyone else gets the tougher form?  That question now rests with the District of Columbia’s Attorney General, who will have to decide what to do with NBC’s David Gregory for brandishing a high-capacity magazine on television:

The decision on whether anyone should be prosecuted after “Meet the Press” host David Gregory appeared to hold a high-capacity ammunition magazine on national television now belongs to the District’s Office of the Attorney General, authorities said Tuesday.

In an e-mail, a spokeswoman for D.C. Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said her department has “completed the investigation into this matter, and the case has been presented to the OAG for a determination of the prosecutorial merit of the case.” …

The question of how to proceed now rests with the office of Attorney General Irvin B. Nathan, which oversees prosecutions of some low-level offenses. A spokesman for the Nathan said the office would not comment until a decision was made.

On one level, this is absurd.  David Gregory wasn’t a threat to public peace.  He didn’t intend on using the magazine in a weapon.  Intent does matter in criminal prosecution, although it’s not entirely dispositive either. (By the way, it’s equally absurd to use the construct “appeared to hold”; Gregory was seen holding it on television and identified the magazine as a high-capacity version.)

On the other hand, all of this is true because high-capacity magazines present no real danger … especially when not connected to an actual firearm.  The danger comes from a person prepared to act malevolently with a high-capacity magazine loaded into a firearm, but the same danger exists whether the magazines hold ten rounds, sixteen rounds, or in the case of revolvers, six rounds.  The absurdity is the law itself, which protects no one while giving a false sense of security.

Nevertheless, DC prosecutes people for violating this absurd law, which has done nothing to keep the area out of the top-ranked gun homicide cities, it should be noted.  Either Gregory should be held just as accountable as anyone else in DC for violating the law, or the law should be struck and other prosecutions dropped.  There is no journalistic privilege for violating gun laws, no matter how absurd they are — even if the violation eminently demonstrates the absurdity.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Perp walk.

WisRich on January 9, 2013 at 11:24 AM

Either Gregory should be held just as accountable as anyone else in DC for violating the law, or the law should be struck and other prosecutions dropped. There is no journalistic privilege for violating gun laws, no matter how absurd they are — even if the violation eminently demonstrates the absurdity.

Excellent! Spot on.

katy on January 9, 2013 at 11:24 AM

Every time I see that picture of Gregory carelessly waving around that death machine my blood freezes in terror. Lock the bastard up and throw away the key now!

NotCoach on January 9, 2013 at 11:26 AM

If you are I branded that magazine in public, we would be arrested, fined…Gregory, if he was a man, would surrender and pay the fine…

right2bright on January 9, 2013 at 11:26 AM

As a condition of not prosecuting him he should be banned from being or living in DC!

tim c on January 9, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Perp walk.

WisRich on January 9, 2013 at 11:24 AM

+1

Tim_CA on January 9, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Actually, the more I think about it, the more adamant I am about him being arrested and prosecuted, just to show the public how foolish these laws are. And to show to Gregory how stupid these laws are, listening to him in court trying to dissuade the judge that those magazines alone do not hold a threat would be gold.

right2bright on January 9, 2013 at 11:29 AM

It’s a win-win situation. He gets prosecuted – brings attention to how stupid and ineffectual this law is. He doesn’t get prosecuted – brings attention to…well…

Hueydriver on January 9, 2013 at 11:30 AM

Gregory would be elevated by the luciferian media to saint status if he were to face trial. I say go for it.

tom daschle concerned on January 9, 2013 at 11:30 AM

D.C. gun laws prohibit possessing a “large capacity ammunition feeding device” — defined as holding more than 10 rounds — regardless of whether it is attached to a firearm and whether there are bullets in it. The offense is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

So what’s the hold up?

Axe on January 9, 2013 at 11:31 AM

don’t be silly Ed, we all already know that David Gregory is a member of the Fifth Column treasonous Media Aristocracy, laws only apply to the little people, not the Aristocracy. At the absolute most Gregory will be given a small token fine.

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Does the rule of law apply equally to all citizens, even when “the law is a ass,” to quote Charles Dickens?

No.

Or do celebrities get one form of justice for mindless laws they endorse while breaking them, while everyone else gets the tougher form?

Yes, in many cases.

There is no journalistic privilege for violating gun laws, no matter how absurd they are —

There shouldn’t be, but since Gregory is a Lefty who meant well, what punishment he may get, if any, will be light. So, yes, in his case there probably is journalistic privilege, since Gregory is in a privileged class of people.

hawkeye54 on January 9, 2013 at 11:31 AM

He didn’t intend on using the magazine in a weapon. Intent does matter in criminal prosecution, although it’s not entirely dispositive either.

Does that really even matter? He wasn’t brandishing and violating the law; he was possessing and violating.

Axe on January 9, 2013 at 11:31 AM

I had no idea that the AG of DC personally handles all gun law violations in his district. Oh, wait, Gregory is special.

gwelf on January 9, 2013 at 11:32 AM

Intent does matter in criminal prosecution, although it’s not entirely dispositive either.

Not here. Gregory intended to possess the mag which is a violation of the law. Further, this is a strict liability crime, so mens rea need not be shown. Lastly, if NBC contacted DC Metro and was told that it would be illegal to have the meg and did it anyway, he knowingly and with intent violated the law.

Using the mag in a way that threatens public peace is another crime or three. This one stands alone, ridiculous though it may be. The fact that Gregory is promoting more such laws is just icing on the hypocrisy cake.

Pablo on January 9, 2013 at 11:32 AM

“The police are in a public relations quandary,” said David Benowitz, a defense lawyer who handles gun cases in the District, Maryland and Virginia. “The question is going to be to what level of knowledge did David Gregory have that this was potentially an illegal act. . . . I presume David Gregory didn’t go out on the street and get a 30-round clip himself.”

“Maybe the NRA can fund his defense,” he joked.

Axe on January 9, 2013 at 11:32 AM

Perp walk.

WisRich on January 9, 2013 at 11:24 AM

Agreed. Fine him. Jail him. Expose this ridiculous elitist and the silly law.

LaughterJones on January 9, 2013 at 11:33 AM

Every time I see that picture of Gregory carelessly waving around that death machine my blood freezes in terror. Lock the bastard up and throw away the key now!

NotCoach on January 9, 2013 at 11:26 AM

:)

Children had to watch that.

Axe on January 9, 2013 at 11:34 AM

When guns are outlawed, only journalists will have guns

austinconservative on January 9, 2013 at 11:34 AM

“The police are in a public relations quandary,” said David Benowitz, a defense lawyer who handles gun cases in the District, Maryland and Virginia. “The question is going to be to what level of knowledge did David Gregory have that this was potentially an illegal act. . . . I presume David Gregory didn’t go out on the street and get a 30-round clip himself.”

“Maybe the NRA can fund his defense,” he joked.

Axe on January 9, 2013 at 11:32 AM

Is that imbecile really attempting to suggest that ignorance of the law is a valid defense?

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 11:35 AM

Ed, I don’t think Gregory’s actions fit the legal definition of brandishing.

The law bans possession. “Brandishing” has nothing to do with it.

Pablo on January 9, 2013 at 11:36 AM

There is no journalistic privilege for violating gun laws, no matter how absurd they are — even if the violation eminently demonstrates the absurdity.

This. Since a fair number of everyday people have been punished under the provisions of this law Gregory should face the same punishment.

chemman on January 9, 2013 at 11:36 AM

Silly wabbits. All it takes for the DC donkeys to solve the conundrum is for David Gregory to declare he had used a plastic imitation, and for the “investigation” to eagerly confirm it. Are they too stupid to find the solution?

Archivarix on January 9, 2013 at 11:36 AM

I believe it was Abraham Lincoln who said that the best way to get rid of a bad law was to enforce it strictly. I, for one, would like to see Gregory vigorously waterboarded, prosecuted and then executed for his crimes. Then, the law could be changed, and Gregory could be remembered forever as a martyr for our second amendment rights.

morganfrost on January 9, 2013 at 11:37 AM

Sentence: 100 hours of pro gun community service…

d1carter on January 9, 2013 at 11:39 AM

Prosecute Gregory first, then dump the law. But I’m under no illusions. He won’t be charged and the law will remain on the books.

Liam on January 9, 2013 at 11:41 AM

He looks very threatening in that shot. I think a detailed psycho analysis is in order. Not because of the magazine… even that can’t make him look normal. It’s the eyes…

RalphyBoy on January 9, 2013 at 11:41 AM

Is that imbecile really attempting to suggest that ignorance of the law is a valid defense?

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 11:35 AM

What other legal defense does he have? Insanity?

It is so beyond a reasonable doubt that Gregory broke the law that the only way his attorney can possibly mitigate the consequences (pretending for a moment Gregory is treated like an average citizen) is to plead for mercy by claiming ignorance of the law. Of course if Gregory would like to plead insanity we can enjoy that spectacle as well.

NotCoach on January 9, 2013 at 11:43 AM

If the prosecutors go after him and it goes to court and if he’s convicted, I don’t see him getting anything more than a wrist slap of a fine. First offense, judges usually go for the minimum punishment. I seriously doubt Gregory would see time even if that’s on the list of possible punishments. I believe the judge would do the same for anyone in the same position.

I know someone who was charged with some misdemeanors. First time offense. According to the law the individual could have been jailed for a year. Person saw no jail, only a fine – and some anger management classes. Judge based the punishment on the fact of no prior offense even though there was more than one charge and the supposed fact that the defendant could have harmed and endangered multiple people.

Logus on January 9, 2013 at 11:46 AM

It is so beyond a reasonable doubt that Gregory broke the law that the only way his attorney can possibly mitigate the consequences (pretending for a moment Gregory is treated like an average citizen) is to plead for mercy by claiming ignorance of the law. Of course if Gregory would like to plead insanity we can enjoy that spectacle as well.

NotCoach on January 9, 2013 at 11:43 AM

LOL…Didn’t the little d-bag claim that he knew it was illegal….and tried to call the Feds for permission?

so much for the “ignorance” part.

Tim_CA on January 9, 2013 at 11:48 AM

A criminal and a thug… one of the “peeps” in Obama’s posse. Throw him in jail.

sauldalinsky on January 9, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Your wrong about intent. There is intent – he intended TO POSSESS A UNLAWFUL MAGAZINE (as opposed to like someone slid it into his briefcase and he didn’t know).

The violation of the law is Intentionally Possessing a Banned Gun Magazine – there is no requirement in the law that you intend to commit a violent crime or even shoot. Its the INTENTIONAL possession.

hayekorbust on January 9, 2013 at 11:48 AM

If the prosecutors go after him and it goes to court and if he’s convicted, I don’t see him getting anything more than a wrist slap of a fine. First offense, judges usually go for the minimum punishment. I seriously doubt Gregory would see time even if that’s on the list of possible punishments. I believe the judge would do the same for anyone in the same position.

I know someone who was charged with some misdemeanors. First time offense. According to the law the individual could have been jailed for a year. Person saw no jail, only a fine – and some anger management classes. Judge based the punishment on the fact of no prior offense even though there was more than one charge and the supposed fact that the defendant could have harmed and endangered multiple people.

Logus on January 9, 2013 at 11:46 AM

If you honestly think that, then you have obviously never been in a court room let alone as the defendant.

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 11:49 AM

If you are I branded that magazine in public, we would be arrested, fined…Gregory, if he was a man, would surrender and pay the fine…

right2bright on January 9, 2013 at 11:26 AM

Here, here. And apologize on air for flagerantly disregarding a law of DC. Displays of personal accountability, it’s what’s lacking in this nation.

NickelAndDime on January 9, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Ed, you need to get your terminology right. The 30-round magazine is the standard capacity. 10- and 20-round magazines are “limited” or “restricted” capacity. The 60-, 90-, and 100-round magazines are high-capacity.

30 rounds is standard capacity for an AR-15.

Mohonri on January 9, 2013 at 11:51 AM

Your wrong about intent. There is intent – he intended TO POSSESS A UNLAWFUL MAGAZINE (as opposed to like someone slid it into his briefcase and he didn’t know).

The violation of the law is Intentionally Possessing a Banned Gun Magazine – there is no requirement in the law that you intend to commit a violent crime or even shoot. Its the INTENTIONAL possession.

hayekorbust on January 9, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Which illustrates the absurdity of the law.

So either prosecute Gregory or kill the law and drop charges against everyone currently charged.

The Rogue Tomato on January 9, 2013 at 11:53 AM

I really hope that the authorities do not rush to judgement in this case. The facts are extremely complicated and the witnesses have provided conflicting stories. Some witnesses claim Gregory was holding a high capacity hair clip, some said it was an AR15/M16 magazine, some people said it was a copy of a magazine (SI), while others claim Gregory was in fact waving a dildo around.

The law is not perfect and we may never know what really happened on that fateful Sunday when David Gregory allegedly waved something in the air. If Gregory is wrongly convicted of the crime of waving around AR magazines it would shake the legal system to its core.

CorporatePiggy on January 9, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Federal Pound Me In The @$$ Prison.

Nothing less.

CurtZHP on January 9, 2013 at 11:53 AM

who will have to decide what to do with NBC’s David Gregory for brandishing a high-capacity magazine on television:

Ed, I don’t think Gregory’s actions fit the legal definition of brandishing.

Brandishing of a firearm can be illegal in public and some LOE attempt to incorrectly claim open carriers are brandishing. Let’s not contribute to this.

blink on January 9, 2013 at 11:31 AM

bran·dish
[ brándish ]

1) wave something about: to wave something about, especially a weapon, in a menacing, theatrical, or triumphant way

I dunno. Looks like he was indeed brandishing the mag..

katy on January 9, 2013 at 11:54 AM

The absurdity is the law itself, which protects no one while giving a false sense of security.

Just another liberal “feel good” law. Doesn’t do a damned thing, but it makes liberals FEEL GOOD that they ‘did something’.

GarandFan on January 9, 2013 at 11:55 AM

AR-15 Magazine
http://defcad.org/ar-15-magazine/

Printed AR-15 Magazine data now free for all.

Southern by choice22 on January 9, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Our nation’s capital has many private institutions capable of dealing with this problem …

Rodent Control Washington DC

RedPepper on January 9, 2013 at 11:56 AM

30 rounds is standard capacity for an AR-15.

Mohonri on January 9, 2013 at 11:51 AM

Yes, thanks for stating that.

juliesa on January 9, 2013 at 11:56 AM

“The question is going to be to what level of knowledge did David Gregory have that this was potentially an illegal act. . . . I presume David Gregory didn’t go out on the street and get a 30-round clip himself.”

“Maybe the NRA can fund his defense,” he joked.

Axe on January 9, 2013 at 11:32 AM

If this had been an actual crazy gunman, he might not be aware of the legal status of high-capacity magazines in a particular area. Is this lawyer saying that we need crazed gunmen to attend gun law education courses before they can be charged with some of these crimes?

hawksruleva on January 9, 2013 at 11:57 AM

“Gun Appreciation Day” January 19
http://gunappreciationday.com/index

Americans nationwide urged to go to local gun shows, ranges,
and stores to show support for 2nd Amendment.

Southern by choice22 on January 9, 2013 at 11:58 AM

so much for the “ignorance” part.

Tim_CA on January 9, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Well, gregory is pretty ignorant.

VegasRick on January 9, 2013 at 11:59 AM

Just another liberal “feel good” law. Doesn’t do a damned thing, but it makes liberals FEEL GOOD that they ‘did something’.

Which is why we have so many laws that are either difficult to enforce or simply not enforced at all. Just having them on record is the primary accomplishment pols can point to.

hawkeye54 on January 9, 2013 at 12:02 PM

I’d still like knowing there that magazine went and from whom he got it. Wouldn’t it be interesting if Gregory also owns the rifle that takes the magazine?

Liam on January 9, 2013 at 12:03 PM

[Logus on January 9, 2013 at 11:46 AM]

Under normal circumstances and on the whole you would be right, the exceptions to that being what are the ‘No Tolerance’ laws that are in fashion at the time, and how public the case is.

It is harder to apply that more general point, though, because it is a specific case, so venue is also important, and those exceptions apply. Another condition, that will spring from a decision to prosecute and affect the outcome will be the jockeying for the judge that is given the case.

Dusty on January 9, 2013 at 12:05 PM

His intent was to deny others their Constitutional rights. That seems pretty serious to me.

munseym on January 9, 2013 at 12:08 PM

If his name was Dejuan G, instead of David Gregory, he’d be in jail.

Never trust a man with 2 first names, anyway…..

Ben Hur on January 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Does doing something like this automatically get him a place on the No Fly List? ummmm….

RalphyBoy on January 9, 2013 at 12:13 PM

There is no journalistic privilege for violating gun laws …

.
… but there will be … under the Penumbra of “He’s an NBC Journalist“.
.
Just wait.

Arbalest on January 9, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Does doing something like this automatically get him a place on the No Fly List? ummmm….

RalphyBoy on January 9, 2013 at 12:13 PM

oh hell no….but accidently leave a 1″ knife on your key-chain or smuggle a pair of nail-clippers on a plane…and the TSA will strip-search you for life.

Tim_CA on January 9, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Awww…it was only a fake puppet arm not Gregory’s.

tinkerthinker on January 9, 2013 at 12:23 PM

If you honestly think that, then you have obviously never been in a court room let alone as the defendant.

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 11:49 AM

True. Other than traffic court, I’ve never been in a court room as a defendant.

It’s entirely probable that the prosecutors were pushing for the full punishment in the case I’m aware of. The individuals weren’t very forthcoming with me other than to note that anger management classes were ordered. I believe a guilty plea was also necessary. Still, the person saw no time and nearly hit police officers and emt workers/an ambulance with their tow truck.

Logus on January 9, 2013 at 12:25 PM

The “Twinkie Defense” seems to be applicable here.

I hope he goes there.

Lily on January 9, 2013 at 12:26 PM

In related news, FOX is reporting that Obama is already planning to use executive orders and bypassing Congress to implement gun control measures he knows will not make it through the legislature…

A year or two ago, I was thinking about buying a Dillon reloading press… I really dropped the ball…

PointnClick on January 9, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Awww…it was only a fake puppet arm not Gregory’s.

[tinkerthinker on January 9, 2013 at 12:23 PM]

Good point. Good enough to haul in everyone at NBC for interrogation so as to assess the probability of conspiracy to violate the gun control laws of Washington, DC.

Dusty on January 9, 2013 at 12:28 PM

The “Twinkie Defense” seems to be applicable here.

I hope he goes there.

Lily on January 9, 2013 at 12:26 PM

If this sees the inside of a courtroom, I wouldn’t be surprised if Gregory and NBC claim he’s not guilty under the First Amendment on freedom of the press grounds.

Liam on January 9, 2013 at 12:29 PM

The “Twinkie Defense” seems to be applicable here.

I hope he goes there.

Lily on January 9, 2013 at 12:26 PM

Hostess was put out of business by the union goons before this happened. He needs to find another excuse. I think he should plead “stupidity” – that one is at least believable.

VegasRick on January 9, 2013 at 12:31 PM

merriam webster:

Definition of BRANDISH
1: to shake or wave (as a weapon) menacingly
2: to exhibit in an ostentatious or aggressive manner

Definition of MENACE
1: a show of intention to inflict harm : threat
2a : one that represents a threat : danger b : an annoying person

I don’t have the DC Statute, but as a former prosecutor, I wouldn’t file…. where is the menacingly?

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 12:32 PM

If they don’t bring the charge, then there is a small chance that magazine possessors might be able to utilize a selective prosecution defense (based on due process rights) to avoid liability for similar violations.

blammm on January 9, 2013 at 12:33 PM

Those wishing to contact the Attorney General of DC about this, here is the contact information.

Office of the Attorney General

Office Hours
Monday-Friday, 8:30am – 5:00pm

How to Reach Us
441 4th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
oag@dc.gov

Phone: (202) 727-3400
Fax: (202) 347-8922
TTY: (202) 727-3400

FOIA Information
Agency Performance
Website: http://www.oag.dc.gov

ratamacue on January 9, 2013 at 12:37 PM

Ask yourself where this case would be if the ‘brandisher’ had been Sean Hannity, on his tv show.

slickwillie2001 on January 9, 2013 at 12:40 PM

Nothing but a sternly worded letter, at best. Expect more likely that there will be ‘due consideration of the higher purpose of mr Gregory’s action, serving he public interest, so the matter will be dropped. They’re dragging this out hoping attention will wander / shift.

rayra on January 9, 2013 at 12:40 PM

The only justice we’ll ever have with this government and treasonous media is that which we seize for ourselves.

rayra on January 9, 2013 at 12:41 PM

David Gregory wasn’t a threat to public peace.

Are you sure?

trigon on January 9, 2013 at 12:41 PM

The real fun here is going to be his lawyers arguments for the defense.

meci on January 9, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Its time for Gregory and NBC to both be fined $1,000 each and Gregory to spend 30 days in the tank for defying the cops in brandishing that dangerous and illegal magazine clip that Obama is about to decree outlawed in any minute now.

Gregory should have a felony mark on his record that will preclude him from every owning any kind of gun in the future, and confiscation of any guns he now has in his house. It should also apply to bodyguards who follow him around who are armed and presumably dangerous as they are taking orders from a convicted felon.

kens on January 9, 2013 at 12:43 PM

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 12:32 PM

You wouldn’t file what? Isn’t mere possession a violation of the D.C. law?

NotCoach on January 9, 2013 at 12:43 PM

If they don’t bring the charge, then there is a small chance that magazine possessors might be able to utilize a selective prosecution defense (based on due process rights) to avoid liability for similar violations.

blammm on January 9, 2013 at 12:33 PM

Always great to see that some understand there’s a professionalism component to how these matters are handled…and not necessarily persecution or hypocrisy.

verbaluce on January 9, 2013 at 12:43 PM

Ask yourself where this case would be if the ‘brandisher’ had been Sean Hannity, on his tv show.

slickwillie2001 on January 9, 2013 at 12:40 PM

In the exact same place.
Though don’t for a minute think Hannity isn’t extremely envious that isn’t the case.
Imagine the showboating opps?

verbaluce on January 9, 2013 at 12:47 PM

Hostess was put out of business by the union goons before this happened. He needs to find another excuse. I think he should plead “stupidity” – that one is at least believable.

VegasRick on January 9, 2013 at 12:31 PM

Hostess may be out of business but Gregory is still a twinkie. So I guess it would be the “On Account of My Being a Twinkie and Don’t Know What I am Doing Defense”

Lily on January 9, 2013 at 12:47 PM

I don’t have the DC Statute, but as a former prosecutor, I wouldn’t file…. where is the menacingly?

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 12:32 PM

And where exactly were you a prosecutor? Did it have a population greater than 50,000? Because NEWS FLASH for you, District Attorneys are not interested in the truth or justice, that is not their job. Their job is to get a conviction against anyone brought before the judiciary and accused of violating a legal statute.

What does this have to do with metropolitan areas with populations over 50,000… Competition. The larger the metropolitan areas the more ruthless the competition becomes because their are more people competing for just a few key openings.

Convictions equal promotions. It works the exact same with judges.

In other words, the only way David Gregory isn’t prosecuted is because of unequal justice. The DC statute in question isn’t “Brandishing”, it’s possession. And it’s a slam dunk case.

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Ask yourself where this case would be if the ‘brandisher’ had been Sean Hannity, on his tv show.

slickwillie2001 on January 9, 2013 at 12:40 PM

No, ask yourself where this case would be if Gregory were some 25 year old Black man who was neither rich or famous, but instead caught sitting at a table at Denny’s showing that magazine to someone else sitting at his table.

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 12:51 PM

“There is no journalistic privilege for violating gun laws, no matter how absurd they are ”

Unless, of course, you are a visible part of the Democratic media who helped elect Obama through biased reporting and lies. Then you get a pass.

After all, some animals are more equal than others. It is a progressive principle, in as much as progressives have any principles at all.

iconoclast on January 9, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Does the rule of law apply equally to all citizens, even when “the law is a ass,” to quote Charles Dickens?

No, it doesn’t, Ed. Repeat after me, John Corzine, Black Panthers, Eric Holder, and on and on. It has nothing to do with celebrity and everything with money, power, politics and race.

It really annoys me to read and hear people spout this BS that, “we are a nation of laws!” No we aren’t. The law is a joke and a yoke used beat down most of us. Judges, lawyers and politicians apply the law where they want and ignore it when they like. They game it everyday. You can fear the law, but anyone who respects it sees a fool every time he looks in the mirror.

Jury nullification – the masses way of telling the man to stick it up his wazoo. Use it most every time you are on jury duty, especially when the only witness is a cop.

woodNfish on January 9, 2013 at 12:52 PM

DG should be tried, convicted and sentenced. Then Eric Holder should drop the case. Then DG should invite NBP member Shabaaz and Bill Ayers for an on-air tv special:

Guilty as Hell, Politically Connected and Free As a Bird.

ROCnPhilly on January 9, 2013 at 12:52 PM

You wouldn’t file what? Isn’t mere possession a violation of the D.C. law?

NotCoach on January 9, 2013 at 12:43 PM

where is the menacingly? the state has the burden beyond a reasonable doubt to prove gregory was menacingly….. was the guest fearful of that cartridge….. did he complain to law enforcement…. remember, it’s the state’s duty to prove these elements….

it appears the word in the statute was brandish, not mere possession.

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 12:53 PM

It is a progressive principle, in as much as progressives have any principles at all.

iconoclast on January 9, 2013 at 12:51 PM

The only principal that Marxist liberal progressives have, is that the end justifies the means and Gregory was demonstrating that principal in its entirety when he, in full knowledge that his actions were illegal, waved that magazine in front of a television camera.

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 12:55 PM

My child saw that and she won’t leave the room now…she thought she could be shot through the tv.

tomas on January 9, 2013 at 12:56 PM

And where exactly were you a prosecutor? Did it have a population greater than 50,000? Because NEWS FLASH for you, District Attorneys are not interested in the truth or justice, that is not their job. Their job is to get a conviction against anyone brought before the judiciary and accused of violating a legal statute.

What does this have to do with metropolitan areas with populations over 50,000… Competition. The larger the metropolitan areas the more ruthless the competition becomes because their are more people competing for just a few key openings.

Convictions equal promotions. It works the exact same with judges.

In other words, the only way David Gregory isn’t prosecuted is because of unequal justice. The DC statute in question isn’t “Brandishing”, it’s possession. And it’s a slam dunk case.

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 12:48 PM

thank you for telling how my profession of 25 years works!

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 12:57 PM

it appears the word in the statute was brandish, not mere possession.

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 12:53 PM

Wrong answer Dr.

D.C. Official Code 7-2506.01,

(b) No person in the District shall possess, sell, or transfer any large capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm. For the purposes of this subsection, the term large capacity ammunition feeding device means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The term large capacity ammunition feeding device shall not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

Now, would you like to reconsider your official position?

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 1:00 PM

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 12:53 PM

This is the statute in question, high-lighted for convenience.

The law in question is titled: DC High Capacity Ammunition Magazines – D.C. Official Code 7-2506.01:

(b) No person in the District shall possess, sell, or transfer any large capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm. For the purposes of this subsection, the term large capacity ammunition feeding device means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The term large capacity ammunition feeding device shall not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

Liam on January 9, 2013 at 1:01 PM

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 12:48 PM

thank you for telling how my profession of 25 years works!

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 12:57 PM

Well somebody had to tell the truth, since it’s obvious you have no intention of doing so.

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 1:02 PM

Now, would you like to reconsider your official position?

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 1:00 PM

yes…. i said i didn’t see the statute

i still haven’t seen the statute

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 1:04 PM

In the exact same place.

verbaluce on January 9, 2013 at 12:47 PM

And your proof of this is?

Have you read this story? What do you think the difference is between these two individuals? Might it be one is practicing his God given right to carry and the other is demanding our liberties be stripped? You really think Hannity would be treated the same when D.C. prosecutes those with the wrong thoughts despite no crime having been committed?

I would call you naive, but I think you are actually a dishonest douchetard.

NotCoach on January 9, 2013 at 1:04 PM

D.C. prosecutor now weighing whether to charge David Gregory over magazine

Is he also now weighing whether to go back to court and ask for the conviction/plea/sentence of former Army Spc. Adam Meckler be overturned/stricken/dismissed?

Two systems of justice: David Gregory walks free while Iraq vet was jailed

In July, The Washington Times highlighted the plight of former Army Spc. Adam Meckler, who was arrested and jailed for having a few long-forgotten rounds of ordinary ammunition — but no gun — in his backpack in Washington. Mr. Meckler, a veteran of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, says he had no idea it was illegal to possess unregistered ammunition in the city. He violated the same section of D.C. law as Mr. Gregory allegedly did, and both offenses carry the same maximum penalty of a $1,000 fine and a year in jail.

Mr. Meckler was charged with the crime and was forced to accept a plea deal to avoid the cost and time of a protracted legal fight. The indefensible nature of Mr. Meckler’s case led directly to a new law passed by the D.C. Council in December that allows prosecutors to file civil instead of criminal charges, but only if the accused was unaware of the city’s laws.

That exemption probably wouldn’t apply to Mr. Gregory, who held up a 30-round rifle magazine on his show on Dec. 23 to make his point about the need to ban them. NBC asked the police in advance for permission to bring the contraband into Washington for the interview with National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre, but it was not granted.

“I unknowingly broke the law,” Mr. Meckler told The Washington Times. “Mr. Gregory knowingly broke the law. While both are seemingly harmless, both acts were deemed illegal under the District’s obscure firearms laws.” Mr. Meckler said he would never have intentionally left the rounds in his bag.

The former Army medic is still upset about being left with a criminal record and being enrolled on the police list of firearms-related criminals.

“I think if you had to measure the criminality of the two instances, [David Gregory's actions] should be interpreted as more severe. At the very least, he should be put on probation, pay a fine and be added to the District’s Gun Offender Registry, as I was ordered to do,” Mr. Meckler said.

Resist We Much on January 9, 2013 at 1:05 PM

What about all the others involved in this illegal action? Was Gregory the only person that ever held it? There had to be others. Who got it? Where did they get it? Who brought it in? Who handled it on stage. There is possibly a great many people involved in this crime and I would like to see them all named, get fined and maybe probation or community service.

What will happen is that they will all be cleared because it will be determined that it was a stage prop and thus didn’t violate the law.

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 9, 2013 at 1:05 PM

Well somebody had to tell the truth, since it’s obvious you have no intention of doing so.

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 1:02 PM

quick wit this one…..

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 1:05 PM

it appears the word in the statute was brandish, not mere possession.

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 12:53 PM

That may be true, but they prosecute based on mere possession. See the story I linked above.

NotCoach on January 9, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Congrats, Rocks. I think you just inspired a graphic. :)

Axe on January 9, 2013 at 11:23 AM

In case you missed it…

The Post Turtle’s Post Turtle Cabinet

lol

Resist We Much on January 9, 2013 at 1:08 PM

Biden: Obama Might Use Executive Order to Deal With Guns
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-executive-order-deal-guns_694984.html

Vice President Joe Biden revealed that President Barack Obama might use an executive order to deal with guns.

Chip on January 9, 2013 at 1:09 PM

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 1:02 PM

quick wit this one…..

Dr. Demento on January 9, 2013 at 1:05 PM

Quicker and more honest than you.

SWalker on January 9, 2013 at 1:21 PM

He didn’t intend on using the magazine in a weapon. Intent does matter in criminal prosecution, although it’s not entirely dispositive either.

I’ve been seeing a lot of confusion over the concept of criminal intent, or malum in se.

Whether any form of intent is required, and what form of intent is required, depends on the particular law. Some laws are strict liability in the sense that no intent of any kind is required, only the performance of a particular act. Some courts have found in some cases that the absence of an intent requirement invalidates a law, or that the nature of the required intent is inferred if not explicit.

In other words, it is complicated.

But in this case no intent is required in the statute, and the only possible inferrable intent Gregory had to have was the intent to possess the hi-cap magazine. That intention was amply established by the act of picking up the magazine, and no doubt by other circumstances.

Whether Gregory intended to do harm is absolutely irrelevant in terms of this law. Scores of people have been arrested and prosecuted under this law, and many of them had no intention of violating any law. Some were actually trying to comply with applicable law as they knew it or had been advised. DC cops and prosecutors have shown these people no mercy and prosecuted them to the fullest extent possible.

I’m guessing AG Nathan is going to use an out, no matter how preposterous, to claim he can’t prosecute. I predict he will claim they can’t find the actual mag used and therefore can’t prove it was contraband under DC law.

novaculus on January 9, 2013 at 1:31 PM

A member of the ‘media effete’ should never be held to the same level of scrutiny as the peasant class. Next you’ll be saying you don’t want them to smuggle nuclear weapons into the country just to point out the flaws in border security.

CitizenEgg on January 9, 2013 at 1:33 PM

Comment pages: 1 2