PDA

View Full Version : Mark Wahlberg a Felon?


ARRRR-15
03-27-2007, 12:21 PM
I heard Marky Mark spent 2 years in prison on a felony charge. Now if your a felon you are not allowed to hold or use a firearm, correct? For the movie Shooter he had to go through firearms training. Wouldn't this be illegal? It would be cool to make an example out of him. Just a thought.

Technical Ted
03-27-2007, 12:27 PM
He could have easily been handling blank firing and inert replicas. You can't definitively say that he handled and fired actual firearms can you? He didn't really shoot the bad guys with real bullets did he? It's Hollywood.

ETA: A thought just struck me, so I checked IMDB for the shooting locations. A lot of the non urban footage was shot in British Columbia, Canada. Live fire training and filming--if any--could easily have been conducted outside of the United States.

ocabj
03-27-2007, 12:29 PM
If you want to believe the IMDB biography, he was sentenced when he was 16.

Astig Boy
03-27-2007, 12:47 PM
If he committed a felony at 16, it all depends if he was tried as a adult or a minor. If he was a minor he could easily have his file closed and expunged. Also, you can have a felony arrest on your record, and later after you are done with jail time and probation, and show you are now a stand up citizen for a few years, you can have that filed changed from a felony to a misdemeanor...you can have a lawyer do this for you, and sometimes the court system will do this automatically for you. In some cases you just dont know they did it until you look it up yourself.

xenophobe
03-27-2007, 12:50 PM
If he committed a felony at 16, it all depends if he was tried as a adult or a minor.

If you're a minor, I'm pretty sure it is the actual charge that determines if you're eligible. If it's a non-violent, non-firearm related felony, then you might be allowed to purchase and own firearms after you turn 18.

royta
03-27-2007, 12:54 PM
If convicted of a felony as a minor in the state of CA, you can still legally posess, purchase, you name it, firearms as an adult. You can still get CCW's in other states besides CA, and in CA if you happen to live in an issuing county.


If you're a minor, I'm pretty sure it is the actual charge that determines if you're eligible. If it's a non-violent, non-firearm related felony, then you might be allowed to purchase and own firearms after you turn 18.


ETA: I was typing when xenophobe posted. He very well might be right about it being the actual charge. Although, I happen to know for a fact that a minor convicted of a felony theft, of a firearm, can still posess, purchase, you name it, firearms as an adult.

Astig Boy
03-27-2007, 12:55 PM
From http://en.wikipedia.org:

As a teenager, Wahlberg participated in several acts of violence for which he was arrested, later claiming to have been arrested 20-25 times by the Boston Police Department as a youth.[4] At 15 he harassed a group of African American school children on a field trip by throwing rocks (causing injuries) and shouting racist epithets.[5] While under the influence of angel dust when he was 16 (and again using racist language) he knocked a middle aged Vietnamese man unconscious with a wooden stick and left another Vietnamese man permanently blind in one eye. For these crimes Wahlberg was arrested for attempted murder, pled guilty to assault, and spent 45 days in jail at Boston's Deer Island House of Correction.[6][7] In yet another incident when he was 21 Wahlberg fractured the jaw of a neighbour in an unprovoked attack.

That is pretty dam violent if you ask me. With another arrest at 21 and past violent arrests, I would say his felony record would still stand to this day.

----------------------------------


HAHA the funny trivias you find on people. This is off topic but interesting.
He was a scheduled passenger on United Airlines Flight 93 on September 11, 2001, but decided at the last minute to head up to the Toronto International Film Festival instead

x2delight
03-27-2007, 1:01 PM
****in billy badass of the celebritys and ****. Guess he was a real tough kid back then

Astig Boy
03-27-2007, 1:07 PM
If convicted of a felony as a minor in the state of CA, you can still legally posess, purchase, you name it, firearms as an adult. You can still get CCW's in other states besides CA, and in CA if you happen to live in an issuing county.
If you're a minor, I'm pretty sure it is the actual charge that determines if you're eligible. If it's a non-violent, non-firearm related felony, then you might be allowed to purchase and own firearms after you turn 18.

ETA: I was typing when xenophobe posted. He very well might be right about it being the actual charge. Although, I happen to know for a fact that a minor convicted of a felony theft, of a firearm, can still posess, purchase, you name it, firearms as an adult.

Well, just to put this out there also as useful information. My friend was convicted as an adult for battery and assault with a deadly weapon at 17. It was a felony. He remembers trying to buy a firearm in his early 20s and he was denied. After doing probation and keeping clean with no arrests, his charge now shows misdemeanor and he can now buy firearms. However, he does not know how long that took...he is in his 30s now.

JPN6336
03-27-2007, 1:15 PM
From http://en.wikipedia.org:



That is pretty dam violent if you ask me. With another arrest at 21 and past violent arrests, I would say his felony record would still stand to this day.

----------------------------------


HAHA the funny trivias you find on people. This is off topic but interesting.

Assuming of course that Wikipedia is correct.

Astig Boy
03-27-2007, 1:23 PM
Assuming of course that Wikipedia is correct.

Well, Im no Marky Mark fan but I remember watching the news of him being arrested for breaking someones jaw back in the early 90s, and then they brought out his rap sheet saying he did blind a guy.

DarthSean
03-27-2007, 1:26 PM
Alot of actors are felons. It is possible for them to get a judge's permission to use a firearm for the purpose of their occupation, especially since it is extremely rare for them to use live ammo for anything.

ARRRR-15
03-27-2007, 2:17 PM
Here's the link

http://www.keepandbeararms.org/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=2360

4th section it's a long read

Has Mr. Wahlberg's record been expunged?

The answer was "No, it is public record."

Was defendant Wahlberg sentenced as a juvenile or as an adult?

"He was tried as an adult."

Was defendant Wahlberg convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor?

The representative explained to me how the "whole proceeding sounds so strange ... the judge had a penchant for doing strange things." He told me that normal procedures were not followed, and said that he had been involved in the case, but could not remember the details. He could not understand the reason behind the attorney general selecting those particular charges in light of the circumstances of the case, and speculated on the climate of the time, how the area was still adjusting to the issue of bussing, how Marky was pretty typical of kids coming from the area known as "Savage Hill," and how he met him once and he seemed "nice." He assured me that he was not trying to evade my question, but that, without a cite, his answer had to be "I don't know." He then referred me to someone who might, Marky's attorney of record, Francis W. Quinn.

Mr. Quinn informed me that "without acknowledging that [he] was Mr. Wahlberg's attorney," he could not speak to me about the matter unless I had "a written release from Mr. Wahlberg authorizing [him] to do so."

ViPER395
03-27-2007, 2:20 PM
Alot of actors are felons. It is possible for them to get a judge's permission to use a firearm for the purpose of their occupation, especially since it is extremely rare for them to use live ammo for anything.

THAT....IS........CRAP

jumbopanda
03-27-2007, 2:28 PM
I heard he got a special permit to use firearms during the filming of the movie.

ARRRR-15
03-27-2007, 2:40 PM
I heard he got a special permit to use firearms during the filming of the movie.

Then why can't us common folk get one to go hunting with a buddy or shooting for the day at the range?

royta
03-27-2007, 2:43 PM
Then why can't us common folk get one to go hunting with a buddy or shooting for the day at the range?

I think you need a special endorsement from Barbara Streisand.

Wulf
03-27-2007, 4:16 PM
More than two successful movies earns you a suspension of the gun law of your choice in Ca.

ARRRR-15
03-27-2007, 4:19 PM
More than two successful movies earns you a suspension of the gun law of your choice in Ca.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=53165

Perfect. We got a friendly studio in progress. Who wants to be the next rambo?:D

Cisco
03-27-2007, 8:36 PM
He did all his training for this up coming movie at Front Sight..Check out there website.www.frontsight.com

gn3hz3ku1*
03-27-2007, 8:58 PM
and lets not forget.. apparently marky mark was a racist?

thomasanelson
03-27-2007, 9:23 PM
The story I read was that he stuck his thumb into the guys eye socket and popped out his eye :eek: .....something that was apparently not uncommon in his "M*******" neighborhood. From the article I read he was lucky not to get a 25 year to life sentence based on his past record. I work in the entertainment biz and I can tell you that the "Pinko" Hollywood power brokers always turn a blind eye when one of their own is involved. I believe that includes star dazzed judges, DA's, Mayors, AG's, Governors, etc. If they had any sense of justice they would stop harassing law abiding citizens and make examples of all the known violet felon actors who illegally possess firearms....even for one scene.

Bill_in_SD
03-27-2007, 9:49 PM
Hmmm.... he got some pretty good training in Nevada from what he said in this interview:
http://video.msn.com/v/us/fv/fv.htm??g=e23d43b9-8058-43f0-8b48-191e0469049e&f=imbot_us_default&fg=rss

He kind of glosses over the question about if he still goes out to shoot..... (around the 5 minute mark, if you don't want to watch the whole thing)

Bill in SD

billgroves_1984
03-28-2007, 2:18 PM
In California for sure your juvenile record is sealed and a juvenile felon can own a firearm as an adult as long as he or she does not disclose the felony conviction to the gun dealer at the time of purchase. To be tried as an adult the only thing the prosecuters have to articulate is the defendant is able to determine the difference between right and wrong...HOWEVER, the courts will only try him as an adult if it considered a hienous crime such as armed robbery with injury or murder or if the crime was well planned or orchestrated. In Mark's case if they were all just assaults and they weren't conspired on then they will most likely not try him as an adult even though he shows a pattern of misconduct.

CalNRA
03-28-2007, 2:22 PM
and lets not forget.. apparently marky mark was a racist?

sure the hell sounds like it. No matter how many "un_PC" thoughts I have I haven't run into the streets and start attacking people. But hey, he hails from the city of John Kerry and Ted Kennedy, I'm not suprised.

ARRRR-15
03-28-2007, 3:05 PM
In California for sure your juvenile record is sealed and a juvenile felon can own a firearm as an adult as long as he or she does not disclose the felony conviction to the gun dealer at the time of purchase. To be tried as an adult the only thing the prosecuters have to articulate is the defendant is able to determine the difference between right and wrong...HOWEVER, the courts will only try him as an adult if it considered a hienous crime such as armed robbery with injury or murder or if the crime was well planned or orchestrated. In Mark's case if they were all just assaults and they weren't conspired on then they will most likely not try him as an adult even though he shows a pattern of misconduct.


Read post # 13 and the article attached. It states that he was tried as an adult.

ibbryn
03-28-2007, 3:44 PM
Anyone remember the MTV Movie awards some time ago.
Marky Mark took the mic when they were awarding "villian of the year" and said something like "But the real villian is Charleton Heston."

Typical that he's a violent, racist thug making his money using guns as props yet blasts someone who's not around to defend himself.

billgroves_1984
03-29-2007, 3:50 PM
I went back and read 13...I apologise i didnt see that one before but i clicked on the link and it hard to base fact on a very highly opinionated essay. Even the part where the author says he asked the 3 questions is unbelievable because of the nature of the information but for arguments sake we can keep this going...

dadoody
09-20-2010, 11:28 PM
I just read about Marky Mark's history, and I'm livid now.

He attacked a Vietnamese man unprovoked and knocked him unconscious with a stick. He punched another Vietnamese man and left that man PERMANENTLY BLIND IN THAT EYE.

He got 45 days in jail.

He's also harassed Black kids.

He was and is unapologetic, and now I find out he's anti-gun? Another predator who's anti-firearms? Laughable.

Also, if these attacks were perpetrated against gays or Jews, he would not be working in Hollywood right now.

G-forceJunkie
09-20-2010, 11:43 PM
Are you guys forgetting the rich and popular can buy their way out of anything in California?

dadoody
09-20-2010, 11:51 PM
Are you guys forgetting the rich and popular can buy their way out of anything in California?

Yeah, I know man. It's enraging.

Also, Charlton Heston - Great actor. Lived honorably and honestly for the most part. Served honorably in World War 2. Pro-2nd Amendment, and stood up for you and I - All law abiding Americans to be able to defend themselves - include the ones who choose not to. He marched for Civil Rights.

And then there's Marky Mark who bad-mouths him @ the MTV Awards. A pretty crappy actor with a very limited range. A druggie, a felon, a racist, a jackass, and he thinks Heston is the villain? How laughable is that?

huggybear
09-21-2010, 12:03 AM
guns don't kill people, marky mark does...or at least beats them up until they're blind in one eye because they're a different race.

Bhobbs
09-21-2010, 12:08 AM
If you prevented felons from using firearms even for work half of Hollywood wouldn't be able to do action movies which is fine by me. I bet the majority of gun laws were influenced by Hollywood.

jl123
09-21-2010, 12:13 AM
Irish kid from the slums of Boston....pretty standard IMO.

toopercentmlk
09-21-2010, 1:46 AM
Irish kid from the slums of Boston....pretty standard IMO.
That's what I'm getting from all of this... Also "unprovoked?" I know you guys can't be so gullible.

Seesm
09-21-2010, 1:52 AM
Wow I had no idea he was such a freaking tool... I un-officially did not like him.. Now "OFFICIALLY" I hate him.

LAME

jl123
09-21-2010, 1:54 AM
That's what I'm getting from all of this... Also "unprovoked?" I know you guys can't be so gullible.

If you don't think a kid that grew up in a rough area of Boston isn't capable of beating the crap out of someone for no reason......you don't know any kids that grew up in the rough areas of Boston.

My roomy happens to have grown up in similar circumstances in Boston and I know a bunch of his buddies from back there. Really stand up guys, bu many of them don't need much of a reason to get into it with someone.

I've had to stop my roomy from getting into more than one fight after he's had one too many.

dadoody
09-21-2010, 2:02 AM
That's what I'm getting from all of this... Also "unprovoked?" I know you guys can't be so gullible.

Gullible? Even he admits it was unproved. WTF dude?

vincnet11
09-21-2010, 2:25 AM
In the movies the actors can use guns, convict or not.

That dude from Machete was a convict in real life, and he's riding a motorcycle with a minigun.

Colt
09-21-2010, 7:37 AM
Maybe he's anti-gun because if his victims had been armed, he would have been dead a long time ago?

DragRag
09-21-2010, 7:38 AM
Someone in a earlier post said if a minors Felon was non violent or non firearm related he could buy a gun as an adult. Not true, you can buy a can when you are a child felon if your record is sealed, no matter what kind of felony it was. Now that is the truth, I know this first hand.

The Director
09-21-2010, 7:57 AM
The movie exception comes in part due to the fact that the firearm is never really in the actor's care, custody, or control. It's never in any actor's care, custody, or control, felon or not.

The armorer is always standing a few feet away off camera - as soon as we cut, the gun gets handed back to him immediately. The actor would have held the weapon for perhaps a minute or less - the duration of one take. Additionally, on a normal size film, there are like 30+ crew members within ten feet of the guy.

Furthermore, they are always blanks, and most likely, the gun has been adapted for blank fire (i.e. BFA or choke in the barrel).

The combination of all these things is enough to mollify any authorities.

I've directed at least one movie where the lead actor was a felon (multiple felonies, actually). He handled guns throughout the production. No serious hoops were required to be jumped through to obtain this clearance. No favors or any back door deals either. Pretty standard stuff.

I will wager that Marky Mark has not fired a live round of ammunition out of a weapon he has had care, custody, and control over for years, and will not be able to do so for the rest of his life.

RandyD
09-21-2010, 9:07 AM
A druggie, a felon, a racist, a jackass, and he thinks Heston is the villain? How laughable is that?

I was curious about Walberg, and the above sentence from your post sums up what I need to know.

lrdchivalry
09-21-2010, 9:07 AM
I will wager that Marky Mark has not fired a live round of ammunition out of a weapon he has had care, custody, and control over for years, and will not be able to do so for the rest of his life.

If he received training at frontsight, as is being reported, he was firing live rounds from a gun under his control.

wash
09-21-2010, 9:10 AM
In the movies the actors can use guns, convict or not.

That dude from Machete was a convict in real life, and he's riding a motorcycle with a minigun.
I don't get your point.

Are you saying that white felons from Boston with guns are better than Mexican felons with guns?

dieselpower
09-21-2010, 9:14 AM
More than two successful movies earns you a suspension of the gun law of your choice in Ca.

Correct. It has been lowered to one successful movie or one full season on a reality show.

Paris Hilton is not subject to drug laws.

Marky mark did in fact shoot live ammo while training from "We Three Kings" while at a US Army Base.

This is nothing new people... This has been going on in California since the 40s.

rromeo
09-21-2010, 9:27 AM
While his "music" career was terrible, Im not sure if it really should qualify as a felony.

The Director
09-21-2010, 9:50 AM
If he received training at frontsight, as is being reported, he was firing live rounds from a gun under his control.

I didn't know that part. All I can tell you is what happens on set.


If he is a felon and is handling firearms with live ammo, that's totally wrong.

lrdchivalry
09-21-2010, 10:07 AM
I didn't know that part. All I can tell you is what happens on set.

It was cool to get an inside scoop on what happens on a movie set.

dieselpower
09-21-2010, 10:15 AM
I didn't know that part. All I can tell you is what happens on set.


If he is a felon and is handling firearms with live ammo, that's totally wrong.


Its common. Famous persons are not subject to the same rules as common people. We are never going to change this. Scream about it when you can, but don't expect it to go away.

If we raise enough stink over this we could expect to see "feel-good" reports on how he is a changed man...and how his past shouldn't effect his career. We may read an apology in People Magazine. And while we are focused on him..."the show must go on"....another felon working on another movie is handed a gun during training. Even if the Director, Prop Master or Contracted Instructor asks they will be lied to. If they raise a stink, they will get an apology and also get placed on a black list.

We can scream about unfair CCW issuance...and while one one famous person is exposed for getting a CCW, another 5 get one.

lrdchivalry
09-21-2010, 10:27 AM
Its common. Famous persons are not subject to the same rules as common people. We are never going to change this. Scream about it when you can, but don't expect it to go away.

If we raise enough stink over this we could expect to see "feel-good" reports on how he is a changed man...and how his past shouldn't effect his career. We may read an apology in People Magazine. And while we are focused on him..."the show must go on"....another felon working on another movie is handed a gun during training. Even if the Director, Prop Master or Contracted Instructor asks they will be lied to. If they raise a stink, they will get an apology and also get placed on a black list.

We can scream about unfair CCW issuance...and while one one famous person is exposed for getting a CCW, another 5 get one.

Just a thought. Frontsight charges $50 for a background check before someone can take one of their classes. I wonder if they did a background on Walberg? If not, that just adds to what you are saying about special treatment for so-called celebrities.

ZombieTactics
09-21-2010, 10:32 AM
If you don't think a kid that grew up in a rough area of Boston isn't capable of beating the crap out of someone for no reason......you don't know any kids that grew up in the rough areas of Boston. ...

Boston? Try Lodi, CA or just about anywhere.

N6ATF
09-21-2010, 10:36 AM
Maybe he's anti-gun because if his victims had been armed, he would have been dead a long time ago?

+1000

Mstrty
09-21-2010, 11:10 AM
any word on Mel Gibson's restraining order issued by his wife? Has he turned in his firearms? Just a thought.

fullrearview
09-21-2010, 11:32 AM
Im watching Top Gear on Netflix as we speak....Merk is on there. He was arrested for GTA in Boston, umong other things.

dieselpower
09-21-2010, 11:53 AM
any word on Mel Gibson's restraining order issued by his wife? Has he turned in his firearms? Just a thought.

the only way Mel will have to turn over his guns is if people scream about it.....and the next famous person will not have too...unless we again scream about it...and the next famous person will not have too...unless we scream about it..........its not going to change....we can even write a special law saying famous and rich persons are treated the same as common folk...and guess what....it will not change. This is how LA does business, always has always will.

lrdchivalry
09-21-2010, 1:25 PM
I have a question. Is there an exemption in the law for felons who are actors to be in possession of working firearms and shooting live ammo? I didn't see anything under 18USC922(g) that provides such exemption.

I ask because I sent an email to Frontsight in regards to the school allowing Walberg a convicted felon to possess a gun. Their response was:

"The same way it is illegal to explode a bomb on the streets of Washington DC or San Francisco UNLESS YOU HAVE A MOVIE PERMIT to do so.He was trained under the supervision of the movie industry."

Code7inOaktown
09-21-2010, 1:41 PM
I had no idea he was a scumbag...his Wikipedia entry. What gets me is he did 45 days of a two year sentence of attempted murder. What the hell has our justice system come to? If he really thinks he paid, he should report back and finish the rest of his sentence.

Adolescence and criminal issues

Wahlberg claims to have been in trouble 20–25 times with the Boston Police Department as a youth. By the age of 13, Wahlberg had developed an addiction to cocaine and other substances.[5][6] At 15, he harassed a group of African American school children on a field trip by throwing rocks (causing injuries) and shouting epithets.[7] When he was 16, after robbing a pharmacy under the influence of PCP, Wahlberg knocked a middle-aged Vietnamese man unconscious, left another Vietnamese man permanently blinded in one eye, and attacked a security guard (again using racist language).[8][9] For these crimes, Wahlberg was charged with attempted murder, pleaded guilty to assault, and was sentenced to two years in jail at Boston's Deer Island House of Correction, of which he served 45 days (6.16%).[8][10] In another incident, the 21-year-old Wahlberg fractured the jaw of a neighbor in an unprovoked attack.[11] Commenting in 2006 on his crimes, Wahlberg has stated: "I did a lot of things that I regretted and I certainly paid for my mistakes."[12]

dieselpower
09-21-2010, 1:52 PM
I had no idea he was a scumbag...his Wikipedia entry. What gets me is he did 45 days of a two year sentence of attempted murder. What the hell has our justice system come to? If he really thinks he paid, he should report back and finish the rest of his sentence.

Adolescence and criminal issues

Wahlberg claims to have been in trouble 20Ė25 times with the Boston Police Department as a youth. By the age of 13, Wahlberg had developed an addiction to cocaine and other substances.[5][6] At 15, he harassed a group of African American school children on a field trip by throwing rocks (causing injuries) and shouting epithets.[7] When he was 16, after robbing a pharmacy under the influence of PCP, Wahlberg knocked a middle-aged Vietnamese man unconscious, left another Vietnamese man permanently blinded in one eye, and attacked a security guard (again using racist language).[8][9] For these crimes, Wahlberg was charged with attempted murder, pleaded guilty to assault, and was sentenced to two years in jail at Boston's Deer Island House of Correction, of which he served 45 days (6.16%).[8][10] In another incident, the 21-year-old Wahlberg fractured the jaw of a neighbor in an unprovoked attack.[11] Commenting in 2006 on his crimes, Wahlberg has stated: "I did a lot of things that I regretted and I certainly paid for my mistakes."[12]

It gets worse...Many believe he owns firearms. His body guards have them and there are guns all over his home.

toopercentmlk
09-21-2010, 2:18 PM
Gullible? Even he admits it was unproved. WTF dude?
-TF is that nowhere in this thread is there any information suggesting the admittance that the attack was unprovoked until you claimed so.

Vacaville
09-21-2010, 2:26 PM
Marky Mark and the Funky Bunch - that should have been a felony. Crime against society.

http://www.behindthehype.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/markymark.jpg

Eargasm
09-21-2010, 4:38 PM
He was and is unapologetic, and now I find out he's anti-gun? Another predator who's anti-firearms? Laughable.

According to the wikipedia articles, he has apologized and expressed remorse for his past behavior.


Also, if these attacks were perpetrated against gays or Jews, he would not be working in Hollywood right now.

He apparently attacked a gay man and a jew in one of his Hollywood bar brawls as a young man.

dadoody
09-21-2010, 10:01 PM
According to the wikipedia articles, he has apologized and expressed remorse for his past behavior.



He apparently attacked a gay man and a jew in one of his Hollywood bar brawls as a young man.

Didn't know we had a couple of guys here gay for Wahlberg.

Wahlberg has NEVER apologized to Thanh Lam, whom he approached and called "Vietnamese ****ing ****" proceeded to hit over the head with a large wooden stick knocking the guy unconscious.

Later that same day, Hoa Trinh, another Vietnamese male, was punched in the eye by Wahlberg. He later lost the eye.

Mark's thoughts?
"I did a lot of things that I regretted and I certainly paid for my mistakes," Wahlberg says. "You have to go and ask for forgiveness and it wasn't until I really started doing good and doing right, by other people as well as myself, that I really started to feel that guilt go away. So I don't have a problem going to sleep at night. I feel good when I wake up in the morning."

He's never apologized or tried to make amends. 45 days in jail wasn't paying for ****. He's the same bastard now as he was back then. He just acts PC in order to keep making millions in movies.

CHS
09-21-2010, 11:44 PM
In the movies the actors can use guns, convict or not.

That dude from Machete was a convict in real life, and he's riding a motorcycle with a minigun.

No, not legally they can't.

The movie exception comes in part due to the fact that the firearm is never really in the actor's care, custody, or control. It's never in any actor's care, custody, or control, felon or not.

The armorer is always standing a few feet away off camera - as soon as we cut, the gun gets handed back to him immediately. The actor would have held the weapon for perhaps a minute or less - the duration of one take. Additionally, on a normal size film, there are like 30+ crew members within ten feet of the guy.

Furthermore, they are always blanks, and most likely, the gun has been adapted for blank fire (i.e. BFA or choke in the barrel).

The combination of all these things is enough to mollify any authorities.

I've directed at least one movie where the lead actor was a felon (multiple felonies, actually). He handled guns throughout the production. No serious hoops were required to be jumped through to obtain this clearance. No favors or any back door deals either. Pretty standard stuff.

I will wager that Marky Mark has not fired a live round of ammunition out of a weapon he has had care, custody, and control over for years, and will not be able to do so for the rest of his life.

No, this is BS.

A Felon can't TOUCH a gun. Period. Even if the armorer is mere feet away.

Blank-firing movie guns that have been built from real guns are still real guns in the eyes of the law. No matter how permanently they have been converted to fire blanks, they are STILL REAL FIREARMS.

I can't buy an M16 that's been permanently converted to fire blanks from a movie prop house because it would still require an MG permit and 200$ tax because the BATFE, CA law, and Federal law all still consider that firearm a real firearm.

If it's a real firearm, a felon just can't touch one. PERIOD. It makes no difference that they are filming a movie. It makes no difference that they have an armorer steps away. If it's in their hands, it's against the law. Period.

Are you guys forgetting the rich and popular can buy their way out of anything in California? the United States?

This is really what it all comes down to. And I fixed it for you.

haveyourmile
09-22-2010, 12:42 AM
That's a bunch of BS. I used to like Mark Whalberg too. Now I just think he's a giant piece of dog sh1t

Gryff
09-22-2010, 1:21 AM
Wahlberg is a douche and has been quoted in the press saying that he sees no reason why individuals need to own guns (boy, wouldn't that make it easier for dirtbags like him to thrive?). And it makes me shake my head every time I hear Calgunners talk about "how Shooter wasn't too bad" or how the new Stallone (another Brady Bunch cast member) movie is pretty good.

I guess Wahlberg is what you get when you take a 6'4" ******* personality and stick into a 5'8" body.

randy
09-22-2010, 3:08 AM
The term is cinematic immunity which allows the cops to turn a blind eye.

I don't believe a Felon is allowed at a shooting range or a gun store either, regardless if he is handling firearms.

The Director
09-22-2010, 7:51 AM
No, this is BS.

A Felon can't TOUCH a gun. Period. Even if the armorer is mere feet away.

Blank-firing movie guns that have been built from real guns are still real guns in the eyes of the law. No matter how permanently they have been converted to fire blanks, they are STILL REAL FIREARMS.

I can't buy an M16 that's been permanently converted to fire blanks from a movie prop house because it would still require an MG permit and 200$ tax because the BATFE, CA law, and Federal law all still consider that firearm a real firearm.

If it's a real firearm, a felon just can't touch one. PERIOD. It makes no difference that they are filming a movie. It makes no difference that they have an armorer steps away. If it's in their hands, it's against the law. Period.





Uhm....wonder if you saw the username.....I do this for a living, man. I have been on many, many sets both my own and others, and felons did in fact possess weapons to perform the acting. Not getting into details, but on one shoot the guy's probation officer was even there. There are ALWAYS cops on my set, by the way, usually in a security capacity. Most of these cops know full well some of the people are felons. Lots of famous actors, unfortunately, are felons.

For whatever reason there's some sort of exception to this and you'll see it in film after film.

Don't just flat out declare that something is BS when you obviously don't know what you're talking about. There are other, nicer ways to put things besides than that proclamation you just made.

lrdchivalry
09-22-2010, 8:21 AM
Uhm....wonder if you saw the username.....I do this for a living, man. I have been on many, many sets both my own and others, and felons did in fact possess weapons to perform the acting. Not getting into details, but on one shoot the guy's probation officer was even there. There are ALWAYS cops on my set, by the way, usually in a security capacity. Most of these cops know full well some of the people are felons. Lots of famous actors, unfortunately, are felons.

For whatever reason there's some sort of exception to this and you'll see it in film after film.

Don't just flat out declare that something is BS when you obviously don't know what you're talking about. There are other, nicer ways to put things besides than that proclamation you just made.

Can you point to the law that shows the exemption? I didn't see one in 18US922(g). Even with cops and a probation officer on the set, a convicted felon cannot possess a firearm. What seems to be at play is a form of elitism. If your rich and famous we will bend the rules for you, we will have a probation officer on the set even though the law doesn't stipulate that is acceptable. Can a felon go to a range and possess a weapon if his probation officer is with him and he does not have the rich/celebrity status? No!

As I asked Piazza from Frontsight. Can you show me the law that says a convicted felon can possess a firearm if he is making a movie? I have yet to receive that law showing an exemption. Can you show me a law that gives that exemption?

The Director
09-22-2010, 9:01 AM
Can you point to the law that shows the exemption? I didn't see one in 18US922(g). Even with cops and a probation officer on the set, a convicted felon cannot possess a firearm. What seems to be at play is a form of elitism. If your rich and famous we will bend the rules for you, we will have a probation officer on the set even though the law doesn't stipulate that is acceptable. Can a felon go to a range and possess a weapon if his probation officer is with him and he does not have the rich/celebrity status? No!

As I asked Piazza from Frontsight. Can you show me the law that says a convicted felon can possess a firearm if he is making a movie? I have yet to receive that law showing an exemption. Can you show me a law that gives that exemption?

I agree, and no, I cannot point to any exception or exemption. I don't know of any. All I know is that typically, the authorities are well aware in advance of any shoot that involves firearms, also, this requires extensive permitting. Cast names are always provided as well as what we intend to shoot, what hours, etc.

So yes, there is a record of what we were doing and who shot what. I'm not sure why there is no enforcement of these types of things, because the law is ALWAYS the first to know of our activities. If you want a successful, trouble free shoot, you involve law enforcement. It's just the standard deal. You would think they would put two and two together, but I guess not.

Like I said, lots of big Hollywood actors have all kinds of misdemeanors and felonies....they are rarely violent crimes but usually limited to drugs, prostitution, felony DUI, and all the usual traps actors fall into. I know this in and of itself is not an exception, just telling you what I see.

Is it right? No. Does it happen all the time? Yes.

lrdchivalry
09-22-2010, 9:45 AM
I agree, and no, I cannot point to any exception or exemption. I don't know of any. All I know is that typically, the authorities are well aware in advance of any shoot that involves firearms, also, this requires extensive permitting. Cast names are always provided as well as what we intend to shoot, what hours, etc.

That does not change the fact that the movie company is providng weapons to known felons and the felons are breaking the law by having those weapons in their possession. What it boils down to is that it is ok to look the other way when there is money to be made and the person is rich or has a celebrity status. Extensive permitting doesn't provide an exemption to 18USC922(g) and people seem to ignore that.

So yes, there is a record of what we were doing and who shot what. I'm not sure why there is no enforcement of these types of things, because the law is ALWAYS the first to know of our activities. If you want a successful, trouble free shoot, you involve law enforcement. It's just the standard deal. You would think they would put two and two together, but I guess not.

Because there are two classes of citizens, the rich/celebrities who get to break the rules and the regular people who don't get to break the rules.

Like I said, lots of big Hollywood actors have all kinds of misdemeanors and felonies....they are rarely violent crimes but usually limited to drugs, prostitution, felony DUI, and all the usual traps actors fall into. I know this in and of itself is not an exception, just telling you what I see.

The problem is when the industry turns a blind eye in order to make money and the celebrities think they are above the rules because of their status.

Is it right? No. Does it happen all the time? Yes.

Money talks!

The Director
09-22-2010, 10:00 AM
lrdchivalry.....not sure where you're going with this discussion. It's as if you've just noticed that there are inequities in life...that some people get away with things that others can't.

That's the way life is. I didn't make it that way.....it's not limited to the film industry either. Wherever there's lots of money involved, there will be corruption of sorts.

We already know this is going on. Besides my personal experiences, we have the Whalberg case before us....we KNOW he is a convicted felon and we KNOW he has handled firearms. As a matter of fact, I know the tactical consultant who did Shooter.....a really great guy, Marine scout sniper (retired).

Not sure if you're about to wage some sort of campaign against the film industry or Whalberg specifically. My advice to you would be "pack a lunch" because it's going to be a long, expensive road.

I'm just a director for hire and thus I'm rarely in control of these types of things, but you're planning on going up against some rich and powerful people.

To give you an example...do you have any idea who Mark Wahlberg's agent is? His name is Ari Emanuel. He is one of the biggest agents in Hollywood....he's probably worth half a billion dollars, and he controls lots and lots of A list actors.

You know who Ari Emanuel's brother is? You may have heard of him.......Rahm Emanuel.

I'd say Wahlberg's gonna be just fine.

lrdchivalry
09-22-2010, 10:08 AM
lrdchivalry.....not sure where you're going with this discussion. It's as if you've just noticed that there are inequities in life...that some people get away with things that others can't.

That's the way life is. I didn't make it that way.....it's not limited to the film industry either. Wherever there's lots of money involved, there will be corruption of sorts.

We already know this is going on. Besides my personal experiences, we have the Whalberg case before us....we KNOW he is a convicted felon and we KNOW he has handled firearms. As a matter of fact, I know the tactical consultant who did Shooter.....a really great guy, Marine scout sniper (retired).

Not sure if you're about to wage some sort of campaign against the film industry or Whalberg specifically. My advice to you would be "pack a lunch" because it's going to be a long, expensive road.

I'm just a director for hire and thus I'm rarely in control of these types of things, but you're planning on going up against some rich and powerful people.

To give you an example...do you have any idea who Mark Wahlberg's agent is? His name is Ari Emanuel. He is one of the biggest agents in Hollywood....he's probably worth half a billion dollars, and he controls lots and lots of A list actors.

You know who Ari Emanuel's brother is? You may have heard of him.......Rahm Emanuel.

I'd say Wahlberg's gonna be just fine.

Just ranting. I know nothing will change, the elites will always get treated differently and as I said in my previous post. Money talks.

Edit: Off topic, what movies have you worked on?

Eargasm
09-22-2010, 10:46 AM
Didn't know we had a couple of guys here gay for Wahlberg.

Wahlberg has NEVER apologized to Thanh Lam, whom he approached and called "Vietnamese ****ing ****" proceeded to hit over the head with a large wooden stick knocking the guy unconscious.

Later that same day, Hoa Trinh, another Vietnamese male, was punched in the eye by Wahlberg. He later lost the eye.

Mark's thoughts?


He's never apologized or tried to make amends. 45 days in jail wasn't paying for ****. He's the same bastard now as he was back then. He just acts PC in order to keep making millions in movies.

I never said I was a fan of MW, nor was I defending him, I just pointed out that both of your statements were incorrect. Do a little more research instead of just passing off what you read on wikipedia as absolute fact and then calling those who disagree with you 'gay'.

Mr. Wahlberg, who is soft-spoken and genial in person, is resigned to questions about his past. The only time he becomes uncomfortable during the interview is when he is asked if he has ever sought out Tranh Lam, the man who lost his eye in the attack, and apologized to him. (The Boston police say Mr. Lam apparently moved out of Dorchester and his current whereabouts are unknown.)

Mr. Wahlberg says he apologized to Mr. Lam in court but has not had contact with him since. ''It would be unfair to all the other people that I messed up if I only singled him out,'' he said. ''I'm certainly sorry for what I did. I did this every day until I was sent to prison.''
http://www.danakennedy.com/profiles/wahlberg.html

The Director
09-22-2010, 11:58 AM
I never said I was a fan of MW, nor was I defending him, I just pointed out that both of your statements were incorrect. Do a little more research instead of just passing off what you read on wikipedia as absolute fact and then calling those who disagree with you 'gay'.


http://www.danakennedy.com/profiles/wahlberg.html

My opinion in this is that it would be EXTREMELY bad for his career to state anything other than that he is repentant. Hollywood tolerates alot, but not a big star brutalizing people and then not being repentant/contrite.

My personal opinion of Wahlberg is thus:

1. I believe that he probably is sincerely repentant. Have to be inhuman to be otherwise.
2. I don't fault his success or his ability to make money. To do so is the definition of communism
3. If he has served his time in prison he has paid his debt to society
4. He must never be allowed to touch a firearm again, because unfortunately that is one of the permanent consequences of being a felon.

If I was a producer or director on one of his flicks, we would just have to go the CGI/digital muzzle flashes route. In the grand scheme of things, not being able to operate a firearm is not that big of a handicap to his career....why?

Because you never use a real firearm on set unless you absolutely have to. Most guns people carry in film are non firing replicas (i.e. airsoft). The only time a real firearm is brought in is when shots need to be fired. Even in an action film this is a very small portion of the shoot. So Wahlberg gets his muzzle flashes painted in in post. No big deal.

CHS
09-22-2010, 12:11 PM
Uhm....wonder if you saw the username.....I do this for a living, man. I have been on many, many sets both my own and others, and felons did in fact possess weapons to perform the acting. Not getting into details, but on one shoot the guy's probation officer was even there. There are ALWAYS cops on my set, by the way, usually in a security capacity. Most of these cops know full well some of the people are felons. Lots of famous actors, unfortunately, are felons.

For whatever reason there's some sort of exception to this and you'll see it in film after film.

Don't just flat out declare that something is BS when you obviously don't know what you're talking about. There are other, nicer ways to put things besides than that proclamation you just made.

So you're saying that there is a legal exemption?

I agree, and no, I cannot point to any exception or exemption. I don't know of any. All I know is that typically, the authorities are well aware in advance of any shoot that involves firearms, also, this requires extensive permitting. Cast names are always provided as well as what we intend to shoot, what hours, etc.

So yes, there is a record of what we were doing and who shot what. I'm not sure why there is no enforcement of these types of things, because the law is ALWAYS the first to know of our activities. If you want a successful, trouble free shoot, you involve law enforcement. It's just the standard deal. You would think they would put two and two together, but I guess not.

Like I said, lots of big Hollywood actors have all kinds of misdemeanors and felonies....they are rarely violent crimes but usually limited to drugs, prostitution, felony DUI, and all the usual traps actors fall into. I know this in and of itself is not an exception, just telling you what I see.

Is it right? No. Does it happen all the time? Yes.

Oh wait, here you're saying there is no legal exemption.

So was I right or wrong?

Glock22Fan
09-22-2010, 12:14 PM
I must say I had to read somewhat into this thread to discover who Mark Wahlberg is or what he does. You may gather that I'm not a big movie follower, although I do like watching them from time to time.

However, this thug, and I can't think of a better word, no matter that apparently (being Boston Irish) he can't help it (what a comment on the Boston Irish!), isn't going to get much of a following from me now I know who he is and what he is like.

And maybe he does repent - but there's a lot of good people who have never done anything like this and therefore have nothing like this to repent over.

No tears lost for him here, I'm afraid.

And he is probably anti-gun for a good reason - he probably realizes that he is one of the people who should never be trusted with one and, like most of them, tar the rest of us with the same brush.

One of the most anti-gun people I know became so because he nearly shot a lover. As I pointed out to him - he restrained himself in time, what makes him think that the rest of us would show any less restraint.

tacticalcity
09-22-2010, 12:28 PM
I must say I had to read somewhat into this thread to discover who Mark Wahlberg is or what he does. You may gather that I'm not a big movie follower, although I do like watching them from time to time.

Apparently you don't have HBO either. He is the creator of the hit TV show Entourage.

He had his troubles in his youth, but grew up to be a pretty decent human being as an adult. I do not agree with his politics, but he grew up surrounded by liberals in both Boston and Hollywood. The guy has been brain-washed since birth to blame the guns and not the criminals. He does charity work, is very cool to his fans, and very cool to his coworkers. His rowdiness mellowed with age. I am not going to hate the guy just because he is clueless about guns. He is NOT Barbra Boxer. He is not making bad gun laws. He might vote for them, but he is not the one writing them. I'd much rather focus on getting the politicians out of office who really should know better and really do harm our 2nd amendment rights than boycott Mark's movies, which I happen to enjoy (except for The Truth About Charlie).

I cut liberals who grew up in overwhelmingly liberal states a minor amount of slack. Odds are no one ever told him the truth out they simply were not convincing about it. Mean while he has liberals coming at him from every direction like zombies in Dawn of the Dead.

I've managed to change several minds simply by exposing them to positive experiences with firearms and responsible gun owners. Victims of violent crime such as rape were very quick to change their minds once they realized they were indeed the kind of person who could safely master a firearm and through proper and guided exposure lost their fear and paranoia about guns in general.

In Mark's case, he's surrounded by left wing nut jobs. So I don't doubt they recruited him to their side. If he had a few more positive role models from the right, he would likely feel differently.

So that's our job. To be positive role models and educate people. We're not going to change any minds by demonizing non-political figures who make a random comment here or there about views that are different than ours. We make progress by getting our own message out in a positive light.

Wherryj
09-22-2010, 1:04 PM
Here's the link

http://www.keepandbeararms.org/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=2360

4th section it's a long read

This part seems to support Wiki's claims:
"Part Two: Missing the Mark

"I believe Charlton Heston is America's best villain because he loves guns so much," Wahlberg snottily proclaimed at the MTV Movie Awards. "Maybe he should get the award for being president of the National Rifle Association."

Upon meeting Heston on the set of Apes, Wahlberg rudely told him that it was "very disturbing meeting you."

I can see why. The last person a violent criminal wants to meet is someone who understands that people have a right to bear arms, and that Mr. Wahlberg is a disturbed young man is evident. Still, if anyone should have been wary, it was Heston, who instead graciously offered his respects.

Because "respected actor" Wahlberg, formerly Calvin Klein underpants model and rapper Marky Mark, formerly a Dorchester, MA street thug, has an ugly and scary past. And if anyone's behavior illustrates why people need effective tools for self defense, this guy is quite an example.

Dropping out of school in the ninth grade, young Marky settled into a street life of petty crimes, stealing cars and selling drugs, whacked out on angel dust and with "a serious cocaine problem" by 14.

He "shoplifted habitually, now recalling how he used to try on sneakers he fancied then run out of the shop, without troubling the cashiers."

He was arrested in June of 1986 at 15, after he and two companion thugs chased some black kids from their neighborhood, throwing rocks at them and yelling racist epithets, obscenities and death threats.

"Kill the n-----s! Kill the n-----s!" Marky and his brave band screeched maniacally. "We don't like black n-----s in the area, so get the f--- away," they warned, giving chase.

The next day, encountering their victims again, heroic leading man Marky and company repeated their performance and succeeded in hitting two girls with rocks.

The complaint filed by the state was a civil rights action enjoining "the defendants from interfering with these rights by threats, coercion and intimidation." The Final Judgment prohibited Marky and his hate crime cohorts from "assaulting, threatening, intimidating or harassing...persons or property...because of that person's race color or national origin..." and was signed by Marky and his mother.

OK, so he was just a kid. Kids sometimes do stupid and hateful things, and people grow, people change. Marky grew and changed so much in the following two years, that in April of 1988, he attacked a Vietnamese man with a stick in an attempt to steal two cases of beer, later admitting being on alcohol and PCP at the time.

"Vietnam f---ing sh--!" Marky snarled, savagely hitting his victim in the head with a stick, knocking him senseless to the ground. After begging a second Vietnamese man to let him hide from the police, Marky sucker-punched the man in the eye, causing him to fall to the ground. After being placed under arrest, Marky "made numerous unsolicited racial statements about 'gooks' and 'slant-eyed gooks.' "

The victim Marky assaulted with the stick lost one of his "slanted" eyes. Marky, who had violated the terms of his earlier judgment, pled guilty to two counts of criminal contempt, each count carrying "a maximum penalty of ten years in a house of correction or ten thousand dollars or both." The Commonwealth's Sentencing Memorandum supported "the recommendation that the Defendant be sentenced to two years at the Deer Island House of Corrections, ninety days committed, with the balance suspended for two years."

Marky served 45 days. And he takes great pains these days to attest to how the experience turned his life around.

But it must not have turned him around too much, because in 1992, a complaint was filed against him that, while at a tennis court, "the defendant, Mark Wahlberg, a.k.a. Marky Mark, without provocation or cause, viciously and repeatedly kicked the plaintiff...in the face and jaw."

And, according to the complaint, it wasn't even a fair fight, but was actually pretty damn cowardly. At the time of the attack, it states, Marky's partner in assault "was holding the plaintiff...down on the ground. The plaintiff...had done nothing to provoke or warrant the attack by Mark Wahlberg, a.k.a. Marky Mark."

Reports of additional hate-filled violent attacks include:

People Magazine cites a [1993] brawl that broke out after he allegedly called one of Madonna's friends "a homo."

From React.com: "Marky Mark" Wahlberg has faced the judge four times on assault charges. He served 45 days in jail for participating in two attacks against Vietnamese men in 1988. In 1990, he was arrested in Boston for assaulting a police officer. And in 1992 he was arrested twice for assault, once for fighting with a security guard and the second time for participating in an assault on a teen by Wahlberg's bodyguard."

Uxi
09-22-2010, 1:06 PM
any word on Mel Gibson's restraining order issued by his wife? Has he turned in his firearms? Just a thought.

Was he convicted of anything like Wahlberg (or Trejo)?

Wherryj
09-22-2010, 1:07 PM
Apparently you don't have HBO either. He is the creator of the hit TV show Entourage.

He had his troubles in his youth, but grew up to be a pretty decent human being as an adult. I do not agree with his politics, but he grew up surrounded by liberals in both Boston and Hollywood. The guy has been brain-washed since birth to blame the guns and not the criminals. He does charity work, is very cool to his fans, and very cool to his coworkers. His rowdiness mellowed with age. I am not going to hate the guy just because he is clueless about guns. He is NOT Barbra Boxer. He is not making bad gun laws. He might vote for them, but he is not the one writing them. I'd much rather focus on getting the politicians out of office who really should know better and really do harm our 2nd amendment rights than boycott Mark's movies, which I happen to enjoy (except for The Truth About Charlie).

I cut liberals who grew up in overwhelmingly liberal states a minor amount of slack. Odds are no one ever told him the truth out they simply were not convincing about it. Mean while he has liberals coming at him from every direction like zombies in Dawn of the Dead.

I've managed to change several minds simply by exposing them to positive experiences with firearms and responsible gun owners. Victims of violent crime such as rape were very quick to change their minds once they realized they were indeed the kind of person who could safely master a firearm and through proper and guided exposure lost their fear and paranoia about guns in general.

In Mark's case, he's surrounded by left wing nut jobs. So I don't doubt they recruited him to their side. If he had a few more positive role models from the right, he would likely feel differently.

So that's our job. To be positive role models and educate people. We're not going to change any minds by demonizing non-political figures who make a random comment here or there about views that are different than ours. We make progress by getting our own message out in a positive light.

The guy did not "grow to be a pretty decent human being". He has attacked and maimed people based solely on their skin color. He is trash that shouldn't be wasting the precious air of the planet.

tacticalcity
09-22-2010, 1:15 PM
His last incident was when he was 21. He's cleaned up his act since then. Like a lot of child stars, he was pretty out of control for a while there. Probably decided to change his act because he became a father. He's involved in a lot of charities, and is extremely cool to his fans, family and coworkers. The chip on his shoulders seems to have faded away. He is in his what? Late 30's now? 21 was a life time ago.

If I were being judged based on the decisions I made at 21 I would be ruled a scumbag too. If you say otherwise about yourself I call B.S. 16-21 is the time when the crazies take over. Maybe not to Mark's extreme, but everything about his life was a little extreme. He's not the same guy. It is absolutely absurd to judge who he is now based on something he did at 16 and 21 and completely ignore the good things he's done since then.

As for his racism, I seriously doubt he holds true racist beliefs. The incidents of racism in his past sound more like a white kid in a poor white neighborhood getting out of control and trying to prove something to the older punks he was hanging out with. It is no more acceptable than the rest of the things he did. However, if he had been a black kid harassing white kids or asian kids I doubt the racism would have been so heavily emphasised in the press. The race card has a serious double standard. Don't get me wrong, it is not acceptable no matter what the cirmcumstances and he was punished for it and his crimes. I am just saying there is a difference between saying and doing something out of line as a kid, and being a card carrying member of the KKK as an adult. Neither is acceptable, but they are very different things.

Basically, I am willing to chalk up his behavior at 16-21 as a youth in revolt and not a true reflection of who is now as an adult. He's stayed out of trouble since then. It's a pretty common thing. Some of the most decent human beings I know, including myself and most police officers I know how similiar, if not less public incidents in their background. We're good people. We just had a troubled youth. We out grew it.

The Director
09-22-2010, 1:22 PM
So you're saying that there is a legal exemption?



Oh wait, here you're saying there is no legal exemption.

So was I right or wrong?

Not only wrong....dead wrong, and here's why:

1. Felon cannot touch a gun
2. No exception to this rule in the law for filming purposes...

but and here's the rub.....

3. There is a defacto exemption in place because this activity happens all the time. it happened in the case of Wahlberg. I've witnessed it on other shows. And the authorities are perfectly aware of it and to a degree sanction it.

So while I can't cite the appropriate code (because it doesn't exist), what you have here is a defacto exemption available to a limited number of people under tightly controlled circumstances.

One poster mentioned that in film, you can get permits to do all kinds of things you could never normally do....detonate high explosives, crash vehicles, destroy things, fire automatic NFA weapons, possess military vehicles such as tanks and helicopters, fly aircraft at altitudes in violation of FAA regulations, shut down entire city blocks.....I can go on and on.

The only explanation I can offer for Wahlberg's exemption is the extraordinary powers granted to film productions...his being a relatively minor one compared to the activities listed in the above paragraph.

Glock22Fan
09-22-2010, 1:24 PM
If I were being judged based on the decisions I made at 21 I would be ruled a scumbag too. If you say otherwise about yourself I call B.S. 16-21 is the time when the crazies take over. Maybe not to Mark's extreme, but everything about his life was a little extreme. He's not the same guy. To say so is very unfair.

Call it all you like, doesn't matter to me, I was boringly upright at that, and all ages. Just a couple of minor traffic offences such as riding a bicycle without lights.

but everything about his life was a little extreme.

Much more than a little extreme. Not many of us, however rowdy, have blinded someone for life. Not many of us get into unprovoked rages and kick people in the jaw. Not many of us get into hurling racial epithets in gangs.

And all you can say is "He's cool now?" Well, if you want to mix with the likes of him, that's your choice. Frankly, he sounds like a waste of atmosphere to me.

And no, I don't have HBO and have never heard of the show you mention.

Gryff
09-22-2010, 1:26 PM
His last incident was when he was 21. He's cleaned up his act since then. Like a lot of child stars, he was pretty out of control for a while there. Probably decided to change his act because he became a father. He's involved in a lot of charities, and is extremely cool to his fans, family and coworkers. The chip on his shoulders seems to have faded away. He is in his what? Late 30's now? 21 was a life time ago.

If I were being judged based on the decisions I made at 21 I would be ruled a scumbag too. If you say otherwise about yourself I call B.S. 16-21 is the time when the crazies take over. Maybe not to Mark's extreme, but everything about his life was a little extreme. He's not the same guy. It is absolutely absurd to judge who he is now based on something he did at 16 and 21 and completely ignore the good things he's done since then.

Did you permanently maim someone for fun?

tacticalcity
09-22-2010, 1:46 PM
Only by the grace of God did no one get seriously hurt in the stupid antics I did as kid. My issues where not based on violence as much as other shameful behavior. What little violence I had in my past stopped (for the most part) in junior high school when I discovered wrestling, and later football. That allowed me a way to vent within the system. However, I still had a huge chip on my shoulder and a major rebellious streak that did not go away until I was an adult serving in the military. Can't tell you how good the military was for me.

My high school sweetheart married a guy who in high school was the head of gang. Now he has a ministry that gets kids out of gangs. He is a loving father of (get this) seven children, one of which is from before he married her. The guy is an absolute saint. Yet he probably killed people in his youth. He certainly maimed them. No question racist remarks were made while beating rivals to a bloody pulp in his youth. All kinds of drug use, and all kinds of crimes committed.

Should he be judged by the same standard you are judging mark? Is he still a scumbag despite saving both the lives and souls of countless youths in revolt? Or does he get a pass because he is a minister and not an actor?

My best friend is a police office, and all around model citizen. He grew and sold pot in college. Is he still a scumbag drug dealer because he screwed up in his youth or is he the model police officer he is today?

When does the throwing rocks at glasses houses start and stop?

Where do you draw the line between the mistakes you made as a youth defining you and how you are now being how you are defined? Or is there no such thing as change?

I judge people for who they are now, not who they were at 21.

But if you want to judge me for who I was at 13-19 then I am an arrogant jerk who sees women as objects to be used rather than caring feeling human beings to be respected and treated as equals and has a tendency to steel things. It's not who I am now. I don't steel and I deeply respect women. If you want to judge me for who I was at 11-13, then yes I am a violent bully who will hit you in the face simply because I feel like. Never mind the fact that I have not hit anyone (with the extremely rare occasion of absolute self defense) since turning 13. If you're gonna judge, go all out. Why bother seeing me for who I actually am? When you can just ask my classmates from junior high and high school?

How is the flaw in your logic not self evident?

Wherryj
09-22-2010, 1:54 PM
His last incident was when he was 21. He's cleaned up his act since then. Like a lot of child stars, he was pretty out of control for a while there. Probably decided to change his act because he became a father. He's involved in a lot of charities, and is extremely cool to his fans, family and coworkers. The chip on his shoulders seems to have faded away. He is in his what? Late 30's now? 21 was a life time ago.

If I were being judged based on the decisions I made at 21 I would be ruled a scumbag too. If you say otherwise about yourself I call B.S. 16-21 is the time when the crazies take over. Maybe not to Mark's extreme, but everything about his life was a little extreme. He's not the same guy. It is absolutely absurd to judge who he is now based on something he did at 16 and 21 and completely ignore the good things he's done since then.

As for his racism, I seriously doubt he holds true racist beliefs. The incidents of racism in his past sound more like a white kid in a poor white neighborhood getting out of control and trying to prove something to the older punks he was hanging out with. It is no more acceptable than the rest of the things he did. However, if he had been a black kid harassing white kids or asian kids I doubt the racism would have been so heavily emphasised in the press. The race card has a serious double standard. Don't get me wrong, it is not acceptable no matter what the cirmcumstances and he was punished for it and his crimes. I am just saying there is a difference between saying and doing something out of line as a kid, and being a card carrying member of the KKK as an adult. Neither is acceptable, but they are very different things.

Basically, I am willing to chalk up his behavior at 16-21 as a youth in revolt and not a true reflection of who is now as an adult. He's stayed out of trouble since then. It's a pretty common thing. Some of the most decent human beings I know, including myself and most police officers I know how similiar, if not less public incidents in their background. We're good people. We just had a troubled youth. We out grew it.

How many people did you attack in a fit of racially motivated rage? How many have you blinded? I don't care if he was a "kid", he knew better but did these things anyway. My FIVE year old knows not to act like this. He is a predator who got lucky in the entertainment biz and hired a good PR agent. He is still the same predator underneath-don't be fooled.

I feel about Mark Wahlberg much the same way that Jeremy Clarkson feels about the Toyota Prius.

tacticalcity
09-22-2010, 2:05 PM
I think you need to read the post above yours. It answers your questions fully. My friend Jesus, who is an ex-gang leader turned minister and loving father is a better example of what you are looking for. But I was a pretty out of control myself. My antics never landed me in criminal trouble, but I did hurt a lot of people because I myself was hurting. Who we were as kids has nothing to do with who we are as adults. If anything, it gave us a greater appreciation for how fragile life is, and how important it is to treat everyone we meet with kindness and respect. As wild as we were in our youth, we are the absolute picture of citizenry now. That is very, very common place.

Since I've seen plenty of people out grow the chip on their shoulder that lead them to be terrors as children, and since I've done it myself, I choose to give others the same benifit of the doubt when they have nothing on their record for long periods of time. It is pretty common for people to out grow this behavior, and in fact make a complete U-turn in the life somewhere in their early to mid 20s. That is the point when the realities of life start to kick (no matter how dense you are) and you either change, end up in prision for life, or die. That pattern that I have seen time and time again seems pretty consitent with Mark's public record. Lots of incidents up until the age of 21, then nothing. He's got to be in his mid-to-late 30s now. If he were still the same punk, he would have more incidents on his record. When you are out of control, there is no hidding it. You get arrested or at the very least it makes the papers.

It doesn't really matter. He's not someone we know in real life. I am just saying I am really glad people don't hold me to the same standard you are holding him to. It would really be unfortunate because the person I am now is kindhearted, trust worthy and extremely loyal. Once I make a friend, I work hard to keep them for life. In business I treat the janitor like the CEO of the company and place my customer's needs ahead of my own. So I am really glad they look past my mistakes as a youth or life would be really lonely, for all of us.

dadoody
09-22-2010, 3:17 PM
I never said I was a fan of MW, nor was I defending him, I just pointed out that both of your statements were incorrect. Do a little more research instead of just passing off what you read on wikipedia as absolute fact and then calling those who disagree with you 'gay'.


http://www.danakennedy.com/profiles/wahlberg.html

"Mr. Wahlberg, who is soft-spoken and genial in person, is resigned to questions about his past. The only time he becomes uncomfortable during the interview is when he is asked if he has ever sought out Tranh Lam, the man who lost his eye in the attack and apologized to him. Mr. Wahlberg says he apologized to Mr. Lam in court but has not had contact with him since. ''It would be unfair to all the other people that I messed up if I only singled him out,'' he said."

That article is absolute BULL****. He never apologized to anyone, and he took the eye of Hoa Trinh.

And you're calling ME out on research?

I realize Asians all probably look the same two you, but these are 2 different men, and that Article is crap.

What really happened:
At approximately 9:00 p.m. on April 8, 1988 Thanh Lam, a Vietnamese adult male who resides in Dorchester, traveled by car to 998 Dorchester Avenue, Dorchester, Massachusetts. At 998 Dorchester Avenue, Thanh Lam left his car carrying two cases of beer. As he crossed the sidewalk, Mark Wahlberg attacked Thanh Lam. Wahlberg was carrying a large wooden stick, approximately five feet long and two to three inches in diameter. Wahlberg approached Thanh Lam calling him a "Vietnam fu-king *****," then hit him over the head with the stick. Thanh Lam was knocked to the ground unconscious. Th[e] stick broke in two and was later recovered from the scene. Thanh Lam was treated overnight at Boston City Hospital.

After police arrested Wahlberg later on the night of April 8, 1988, Wahlberg was informed of his rights and returned to the scene of 998 Dorchester Avenue. In the presence of two police officers, he stated: "You don't have to let him identify me, I'll tell you now that's the mother-fu-ker who's head I split open," or words to that effect.

As a police officer arrived at the scene of 998 Dorchester Avenue, Wahlberg and two other youths who were with him fled up Dorchester Avenue toward Pearl Street .

Shortly after 9:00 p.m. on April 8, 1988, Hoa Trinh, an adult Vietnamese male who resides in Dorchester, was standing several blocks away from 998 Dorchester Avenue, near the corner of Dorchester Avenue and Pearl Street. Hoa Trinh was not aware of the altercation outside of 998 Dorchester Avenue.

Wahlberg ran up to Hoa Trinh, put his arm around Hoa Trinh's shoulder, and said: "Police coming, police coming, let me hide." After a police cruiser passed, Wahlberg punched Trinh in the eye, causing him to fall to the ground.

Police arrived and Hoa Trinh identified Wahlberg as the person who punched him. Wahlberg was placed under arrest and read his rights. Thereafter he made numerous unsolicited racial statements about "g@@ks" and "slant-eyed g@@ks." After being returned to 998 Dorchester Avenue, Wahlberg identified Thanh Lam as the person he hit over the head with a stick.

Trinh lost one of his "slanted" eyes due to the attack. Wahlberg plead guilty to two counts of criminal contempt, was sentenced to two years imprisonment, and was released after 45 days.

Eargasm
09-22-2010, 3:26 PM
That article is absolute BULL****. He took the eye of Hoa Trinh.

And you're calling ME out on research?

I realize Asians all probably look the same two you, but these are 2 different men, and that Article is crap.


Are you kidding me? First I'm supposedly gay for Wahlberg, and now I see all Asians as being the same?

I'm sorry I responded to your original post; if I'd known you were a loon, I'd never have clicked 'reply'.

Edit: bolded text

dadoody
09-22-2010, 3:35 PM
Are you kidding me? First I'm supposedly gay for Wahlberg, and now I see all Asians as being the same?

I'm sorry I responded to your original post; if I'd known you were a loon, I'd never have clicked 'reply'.

Edit: bolded text

Yeah, I'm pretty crazy. What's your measurements? Also, you're in SF, so for all I know, ALL TRUE.

And my post still stands. Your research skills need sharpening :(

Gryff
09-22-2010, 4:11 PM
My high school sweetheart married a guy who in high school was the head of gang. Now he has a ministry that gets kids out of gangs. He is a loving father of (get this) seven children, one of which is from before he married her. The guy is an absolute saint. Yet he probably killed people in his youth. He certainly maimed them. No question racist remarks were made while beating rivals to a bloody pulp in his youth. All kinds of drug use, and all kinds of crimes committed.

Now out of curiousity, does he make his living evangelizing the word of god, but bad-mouths god after he pulls his collar off? Because Marky Mark sure likes cashing the checks for his pro-gun movies, and then bad-mouthing gun owners/proponents in his off hours.

Making money may have made him less of a thug, but it doesn't keep him from being a full-blown douche.

citystar
09-22-2010, 8:40 PM
Making money may have made him less of a thug, but it doesn't keep him from being a full-blown douche.

:hurray:

bellson
09-22-2010, 8:57 PM
Hmmm, Mark Wahlberg.....


Exactly why has this thread been punted around for 4 years?????

If you did not know;

1. The Law is the Law.
2. You need a Lawyer to interpret the Law for you, because you are stupid.
3. Lawyers, when properly fueled by your wallet can give the Judge the "Hi Sign".
4. The Judge grants the permit, or stay, or whatever they call in in Dolphin....

Is this really a mystery to anyone?

CHS
09-22-2010, 9:31 PM
Not only wrong....dead wrong, and here's why:

1. Felon cannot touch a gun
2. No exception to this rule in the law for filming purposes...

but and here's the rub.....

3. There is a defacto exemption in place because this activity happens all the time. it happened in the case of Wahlberg. I've witnessed it on other shows. And the authorities are perfectly aware of it and to a degree sanction it.

So while I can't cite the appropriate code (because it doesn't exist), what you have here is a defacto exemption available to a limited number of people under tightly controlled circumstances.

One poster mentioned that in film, you can get permits to do all kinds of things you could never normally do....detonate high explosives, crash vehicles, destroy things, fire automatic NFA weapons, possess military vehicles such as tanks and helicopters, fly aircraft at altitudes in violation of FAA regulations, shut down entire city blocks.....I can go on and on.

The only explanation I can offer for Wahlberg's exemption is the extraordinary powers granted to film productions...his being a relatively minor one compared to the activities listed in the above paragraph.

So it's legal then for a felon to touch a gun as long as they are filming a movie?

the_quark
09-22-2010, 9:41 PM
So it's legal then for a felon to touch a gun as long as they are filming a movie?

Well, it's unenforced, apparently.

You know, someone should get the Brady Campaign on this. Give them something useful to do with their time while they await the next big court case result. :rolleyes:

N6ATF
09-22-2010, 9:42 PM
It's "The Show Must Go On" unwritten law.

CHS
09-22-2010, 9:45 PM
Well, it's unenforced, apparently.

You know, someone should get the Brady Campaign on this. Give them something useful to do with their time while they await the next big court case result. :rolleyes:

Well according to "The Director" it's perfectly legal because it's unenforced.

Something being enforced or not doesn't change it's legal status. Something is either illegal or legal.

But the director keeps telling me I'm wrong and that it's legal for Mark Wahlberg to possess firearms on movie sets.

The Director
09-22-2010, 10:03 PM
So it's legal then for a felon to touch a gun as long as they are filming a movie?

You need to go look up the meaning of the words de facto. I'm telling you it happens frequently. Is it legal? I'd wager probably not.

Something that is illegal but is not enforced is de facto legal. There's that word again!

The Director
09-22-2010, 10:05 PM
Well according to "The Director" it's perfectly legal because it's unenforced.

Something being enforced or not doesn't change it's legal status. Something is either illegal or legal.

But the director keeps telling me I'm wrong and that it's legal for Mark Wahlberg to possess firearms on movie sets.

I never said it was legal. I said you were wrong for calling BS on what I wrote. And we can debate this ad nauseam....either Marky Mark shot real guns on the set of shooter, or he didn't. Probably millions of people including all kinds of authorities watched that movie and did exactly nothing about it.

What conclusion does all this empirical evidence lead you to?

dantodd
09-22-2010, 10:52 PM
Sounds to me like an equal protection claim for any felon who now wants to own a firearm. The evidence is right there in Technicolor. At least if they want to own one in L.A.

M14 Junkie
09-22-2010, 11:24 PM
[QUOTE]His last incident was when he was 21. He's cleaned up his act since then. Like a lot of child stars, he was pretty out of control for a while there. Probably decided to change his act because he became a father. He's involved in a lot of charities, and is extremely cool to his fans, family and coworkers. The chip on his shoulders seems to have faded away. He is in his what? Late 30's now? 21 was a life time ago.

If I were being judged based on the decisions I made at 21 I would be ruled a scumbag too. If you say otherwise about yourself I call B.S. 16-21 is the time when the crazies take over. Maybe not to Mark's extreme, but everything about his life was a little extreme. He's not the same guy. It is absolutely absurd to judge who he is now based on something he did at 16 and 21 and completely ignore the good things he's done since then..

I strongly disagree. Once a sociopath, always a sociopath. Like those who rape, molest children, or kids who torture animals. There is a mental defect there, that one doesn't "outgrow".

Some of the most decent human beings I know, including myself and most police officers I know how similiar, if not less public incidents in their background. We're good people. We just had a troubled youth. We out grew it

Sorry, but I call BS on this.

masameet
09-23-2010, 1:37 AM
As much as folks think Wahlberg is a felon, apparently under Massachusetts law he is not. Specifically, General Laws of Massachusetts - Chapter 274 Felonies, Accessories and Attempts to Commit Crimes. - Section 1 - Felonies and misdemeanors (http://law.onecle.com/massachusetts/274/1.html) states:

"A crime punishable by death or imprisonment in the state prison is a felony. All other crimes are misdemeanors."

Even though Wahlberg's 2-plus year sentence was suspended, he was still confined to 45 days in the local county jail. Which conviction, or so I would guess, means that the DOJ/FBI/ATF, etc. do not consider him a felon either. Thus he is not considered a federally prohibited person.

Cpl. Haas
09-23-2010, 2:10 AM
Even though Wahlberg's 2-plus year sentence was suspended, he was still confined to 45 days in the local county jail. Which conviction, or so I would guess, means that the DOJ/FBI/ATF, etc. do not consider him a felon either. Thus he is not considered a federally prohibited person.

If he was given a 2 year suspended sentence, then it was a felony. He was still convicted of the crime and "sentenced" to 2 years in prison... the judge simply opted to suspend the sentence, which means he wouldn't have to actually serve the time unless he violated his probation.

inbox485
09-23-2010, 10:51 AM
Didn't Wahlberg get trained for precision rifle at Front Sight?

masameet
09-24-2010, 9:15 AM
My bad. Shoulda done more research. From an interview he did after "Max Payne" (2008) debuted:
ďI donít collect guns. Iím a convicted felon,Ē says Wahlberg. ďSo itís against the law for me to own a gun and I donít like guns unless itís in the proper hands to protect the innocent people. So movies are one thing. Iím able to differentiate between entertainment and reality but no I think the world would be a much better place if all the guns were taken away.Ē
Source: http://ifmagazine.com/feature.asp?article=3068

RRichie09
09-24-2010, 9:54 AM
If I were being judged based on the decisions I made at 21 I would be ruled a scumbag too.

Me too.

RRichie09
09-24-2010, 10:00 AM
I strongly disagree. Once a sociopath, always a sociopath. Like those who rape, molest children, or kids who torture animals. There is a mental defect there, that one doesn't "outgrow".

Sorry, but I call BS on this.


I believe people can change. A lot do not. Out of the people I used to hang with many are still the same, but I have out grown my past. I also became friends with someone who has a similiar background as Mark Walhberg, very violent childhood, but he is a good guy and is actually walking the straight path.

I'm sure Mark Walhberg has racist views on life, as was his up bring. Hopefully he has learned to see beyond that, but whether or not that is true it is hard to judge. From what I see he has indeed shed his crimminal background.

I believe in second chances, whether you do or not.

Wherryj
09-24-2010, 10:17 AM
[QUOTE=tacticalcity;5000833].

I strongly disagree. Once a sociopath, always a sociopath. Like those who rape, molest children, or kids who torture animals. There is a mental defect there, that one doesn't "outgrow".



Sorry, but I call BS on this.

I agree. Wahlburg's behavior was well beyond the line of "roudy juvenile antics". He wasn't putting burning bags of dog excrement on neighbor's doorsteps-he was putting out eyes, breaking jaws, throwing rocks in a bigoted rage...

These are sociopathic tendencies. While it may be possible for him to learn to control his public behavior, once a sociopath always a sociopath. He's still umconcerned and unaware of the damage that he does to others. He's still a danger to repeat.

the_quark
09-24-2010, 10:22 AM
My bad. Shoulda done more research. From an interview he did after "Max Payne" (2008) debuted:

Source: http://ifmagazine.com/feature.asp?article=3068

Masameet, I don't know when, and I don't know how, but that quote is someday going to get a good man out of prison. Thank you.

N6ATF
09-24-2010, 10:27 AM
What he really meant...
ďI donít collect guns legally. Iím a convicted felon,Ē says Wahlberg. ďSo itís against the law for me to own a gun and I donít like guns unless itís in the proper hands to protect the innocent people violent criminals like me. So movies are one thing that let me express my violent nature without having to wear a ski mask. Iím able to differentiate between entertainment and reality but no I think the world would be a much better place if all the guns were taken away from law-abiding citizens, so me and my brethren can commit all the crimes we want with impunity.Ē

lrdchivalry
09-24-2010, 10:48 AM
I believe people can change. A lot do not. Out of the people I used to hang with many are still the same, but I have out grown my past. I also became friends with someone who has a similiar background as Mark Walhberg, very violent childhood, but he is a good guy and is actually walking the straight path.

I'm sure Mark Walhberg has racist views on life, as was his up bring. Hopefully he has learned to see beyond that, but whether or not that is true it is hard to judge. From what I see he has indeed shed his crimminal background.

I believe in second chances, whether you do or not.

People can change, the problem is that part of his conviction/punishment is the loss of the right to possess or own a gun. Just because he claims to have changed doesn't negate the punishment, he must live with the consequences of his actions. It is also hypocritcal when the authorities will turn a blind eye to a convicted felon in possession of a gun because he is rich and famous but arrest the non-rich/famous felon for being in possession of a gun. It is also hypocritical when Fronsight will charge people $50 to conduct a background check to weed out the felons yet also turn a blind eye to a rich and famous felon by providing access to weapons and training.

The Director
09-24-2010, 10:50 AM
^+1000

enginematrix
09-24-2010, 2:41 PM
I just found this thread and this is the first I've heard any of this about Wahlberg. I am completely fuming right now.

I am going to let all my friends and family know about Wahlberg's unapologetic violent past and hypocritical gun control stance.

RRichie09
09-24-2010, 7:25 PM
People can change, the problem is that part of his conviction/punishment is the loss of the right to possess or own a gun. Just because he claims to have changed doesn't negate the punishment, he must live with the consequences of his actions. It is also hypocritcal when the authorities will turn a blind eye to a convicted felon in possession of a gun because he is rich and famous but arrest the non-rich/famous felon for being in possession of a gun. It is also hypocritical when Fronsight will charge people $50 to conduct a background check to weed out the felons yet also turn a blind eye to a rich and famous felon by providing access to weapons and training.


I never said he needs to have his right to own a gun restored... he doesn't want that right anyways.

I do agree frontsight should not have given him training, but the training could have involved guns firing blanks. He didn't need to learn how to be accurate, he just needed to learn how to look the part, body movements etc.

lrdchivalry
09-24-2010, 8:10 PM
but the training could have involved guns firing blanks. He didn't need to learn how to be accurate, he just needed to learn how to look the part, body movements etc.

Do you actually believe that? I highly doubt he was firing blanks.

The Director
09-24-2010, 8:51 PM
I never said he needs to have his right to own a gun restored... he doesn't want that right anyways.

I do agree frontsight should not have given him training, but the training could have involved guns firing blanks. He didn't need to learn how to be accurate, he just needed to learn how to look the part, body movements etc.

Actually, It doesn't matter if it was firing candy lollipops - he had a firearm in his hand, and therefore was breaking the law. The ammunition is of no relevance.

CHS
09-24-2010, 8:51 PM
I do agree frontsight should not have given him training, but the training could have involved guns firing blanks.

Uhh, still illegal dude.

RRichie09
09-25-2010, 8:44 AM
Uhh, still illegal dude.

Not if he got legal permission to do so.


And to be honest, I don't really care. This thread is our version of the TMZ lol.

lrdchivalry
09-25-2010, 8:47 AM
Not if he got legal permission to do so.

Can you show me in 18USC922(g) that gives someone the authority to grant a felon permission to possess a gun.

N6ATF
09-25-2010, 9:06 AM
It would have to be a judge ruling that 18USC922(g) is unconstitutional. I gather from what the_quark said at #110, that hasn't happened yet.

RRichie09
09-25-2010, 9:21 AM
Can you show me in 18USC922(g) that gives someone the authority to grant a felon permission to possess a gun.

Apparently there is a way to get around it. I'm not a lawyer, you're asking the wrong guy.

fusionstar
09-25-2010, 9:27 AM
Hes a horrible actor anyway. He is barely a step above Keanu Reeves. He wasn't even good in the Departed, good thing every other guy was good. Who cares if he grew up in the worst neighborhood, he made his choices. Another racist actor if you ask me. If you have money and fame, you can do anything. Look at Arnold, hes dumber than stone.

Cato
09-25-2010, 12:26 PM
From http://en.wikipedia.org:



That is pretty dam violent if you ask me. With another arrest at 21 and past violent arrests, I would say his felony record would still stand to this day.

----------------------------------


HAHA the funny trivias you find on people. This is off topic but interesting.

WTF?

So Marky Mark can throw rocks at black kids and call them racist names and beat a Vietnamese guy nearly to death, and Hollywood says boys will be boys?

Oh, but Mel Gibson can go on a drunken rant about Jews, and he's black balled?

lrdchivalry
09-25-2010, 12:27 PM
Apparently there is a way to get around it. I'm not a lawyer, you're asking the wrong guy.

Yes... It's called money and fame.

masameet
09-25-2010, 12:34 PM
WTF?

So Marky Mark can throw rocks at black kids and call them racist names and beat a Vietnamese guy nearly to death, and Hollywood says boys will be boys?

Oh, but Mel Gibson can go on a drunken rant about Jews, and he's black balled?

I think there's a big difference from being a youth, as Wahlberg was when he committed these offenses, and being an old man, as Gibson is.

I've watched only a few of Wahlberg's movies but I've seen most of Gibson's. The disappointment I felt regarding Gibson's drunken, anti-Semitic rants was acute. One of my sisters met him when both of their children were going to the same school in Malibu and I liked the stories she told about him over the years. Anyway Gibson's words and actions only reinforced the negative impression I got regarding one of his sons. Seemingly he and his son are both bad apples from the same poisoned tree, that of their respective father and grandfather, Hutton Gibson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutton_Gibson), a well-known Holocaust denier.

inbox485
09-27-2010, 12:10 PM
I think there's a big difference from being a youth, as Wahlberg was when he committed these offenses, and being an old man, as Gibson is.

I've watched only a few of Wahlberg's movies but I've seen most of Gibson's. The disappointment I felt regarding Gibson's drunken, anti-Semitic rants was acute. One of my sisters met him when both of their children were going to the same school in Malibu and I liked the stories she told about him over the years. Anyway Gibson's words and actions only reinforced the negative impression I got regarding one of his sons. Seemingly he and his son are both bad apples from the same poisoned tree, that of their respective father and grandfather, Hutton Gibson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutton_Gibson), a well-known Holocaust denier.

Hate to say it, but the ethnic make up of most of Hollywood makes it hard for me to believe that there isn't some direct bias between the two. The industry turns a blind eye to just about anything except anti-semitism.