View Single Post
Old 11-09-2012, 10:08 AM
greg36f greg36f is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,739
iTrader: 0 / 0%

Originally Posted by CitaDeL View Post
The 'Eye' shrunk back from properly describing the Calguns Foundation as the can of whoop *** for when you need to sue every motherf***er in the room, but they did get the general description right.

I find it perplexing that Chapman has decided to double down explaining to the media his justification for confiscating lawfully owned property for what he admits is not 'a technical violation of any code or existing law'. That statement there, you almost cannot put a price on. Like I said, almost... (I think going rate might be somewhere in the mid $30K range and a remedial class on the 4th amendment.).

Chapman's best course of action would have been to STFU. Apparently counsel neglected to advise him.

Good luck getting that number past a jury. You know, a group of people that are expected to make a reasonable decision based upon the totality of the facts and circumstances. There may not be enough ALL OR NOTHING, MY WAY or the highway or “reasonable will NEVER factor into a second amendment decision” Cal Guns members in that pool…

I mean; the guy has to have a loaded magazine and real body armor real body armor for a costume? Was it a prop or a tool to defend himself? Against what? The Green Lantern and Honey BooBoo two costumes over?

Supporting this guy either as a group or as an individual just makes you look radical and foolish and turns the public against you and your cause. There go those gun nut jobs again!!!

Support this guy and you become lumped in with the whale chasers, PETA nut jobs and Westborough Baptist church nuts…..Yeah, they have a “right”, but they are so far out there that they erode support for the idea / cause in general.

I know that I am beating a dead horse but the news story brought up a few new points.....
Reply With Quote