Pictured are unwanted firearms from one household in Farmington, NM. Our gun buyback was cancelled by the City, but local residents asked us to show up anyway. So, we spent today dismantling guns house by house. #GunsToGardens @vivarioarriba pic.twitter.com/YlgwT9qaxV
— NMPGV (@NMPGVnow) December 17, 2023
The city of Farmington, New Mexico recently decided they weren’t going to waste time with another useless gun “buyback” event. Word seems to be getting out that they don’t work, and it’s becoming clear that they’re a total waste of public resources and money. But one of the organizers wouldn’t take no for an answer. So, they decided to go do a “buyback” themselves.
Blissfully unaware of state law, a gun control advocacy operation called New Mexicans to Prevent Gun Violence visited the homes of some people who wanted to get rid of a firearm and trade it for a gift card. Then, right there on site, they used an angle grinder to cut the gun’s receiver in half.
Once that was done, they took the two pieces to a local high school. The parts were then given to young gun control activists, who used the bits of wood and metal to build anti-gun “works of art.”
Shoutout to @NMPGVnow for joining forces with the “rogue sheriffs” and “bad-faith critics” by refusing to comply with laws criminalizing private firearm transfers in NM. #2a https://t.co/iZ80RFU906
— NM Shooting Sports Association (@NM_SSA) December 17, 2023
There’s just one problem with all of that. A few years ago, the group helped pass a law in New Mexico prohibiting private firearm transfers. Worse, the group’s destruction of receivers don’t comply with ATF guidelines for rendering them permanently inoperable. So, when they took these guns (which were still legally guns) onto school grounds and transferred them to minors, they broke all kinds of laws — laws NMPGV itself supports — including state and federal felonies.
As a result, the local Sheriff has announced that he is investigating them. Strangely, NMPGV doesn’t think that’s fair at all.
“We have been doing this for years,” the organization wrote on social media. “Often, police give people our phone number when they want to turn in an unwanted firearm. This doesn’t violate any background check laws as there is no transfer of firearms. We simply dismantle them. All that is left is wood and metal.”
We have been doing this for years. Often, police give people our phone number when they want to turn in an unwanted firearm. This doesn’t violate any background check laws as there is no transfer of firearms. We simply dismantle them. All that is left is wood and metal. https://t.co/f8ZPpJjC4j
— NMPGV (@NMPGVnow) December 17, 2023
The local sheriff, however, isn’t convinced.
“Reviewing the law I do not see where they are exempt from having to undergo a background check and are required to like anyone else,” San Juan County Sheriff Shane Ferrari wrote in a Facebook post. “A sale is taking place (gift cards $100 and up), it is advertised as a purchase and called a ‘buy back.’ ” He went on to explain that the law prohibits all transfers, and that the gift cards were definitely “consideration” under state law, triggering the prohibition.
The sheriff, however, is awaiting an opinion about the entire kerfuffle from the state’s attorney general. The AG is a Democrat who previously refused to assist in the enforcement of the governor’s bogus, unconstitutional “public health” order banning the carry of firearms in Bernalillo County where the state’s largest city, Albuquerque, is located. It’s possible the DA may decide to give the gun control group a pass.
If he does, it would create a two-tiered system of laws in New Mexico. Gun control groups should be subject to the same laws they want the rest of the state’s residents to be subject to. Laws they helped pass. Anything less than charges and a trial for the members of the NMPGV who participated in this boondoggle would be an affront to the cause of justice in the state.
What is good for the goose is good for the gander!
The group merely provided a service for the gun owners, they utilized the angle grinder to de-mil the guns and turn them into scrap metal and wood which they then disposed of for the individual firearm owners.
In any case, they can’t be successfully prosecuted because they had no criminal intent:
“A person cannot be found guilty of a crime if there is no proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the person had the intent to commit the crime. The concept is known as “mens rea,” which is a Latin term that means “guilty mind.” In other words, you cannot be convicted of a crime if you did not act knowingly or purposefully to commit the crime”
Can I count on the ATF to go easy on me as long as I didn’t intend to break the law or have criminal intent? You know the answer. My chances might be better if I was the right kind of political activist.
Some members of the group are probably Prohibited Persons. We need background checks on every member of the organization.
For The Safety of Our Children !
Ignorance is no excuse for the law. Plenty of people have been charged and convicted of crimes they didn’t INTEND to commit. They also created SBRs in at least a few of those cases. So, when exactly did the ATF give a shit about “intent”? On the state level, they certainly knew about the background check law.
Try telling that to a police officer when you are caught going 70mph in a 30mph zone. It is your responsibility to know. Ignorance of the law is NO excuse.
I’ve actually done that twice. I got lucky. They both let me go. It was more like 55-60 in a 35. They both happened on highways where the speed limit suddenly changed (getting close to a town). I didn’t notice it. They could tell I was being sincere.
Except that they didn’t deactivate them. And then they gave working firearms to teenagers. Ignorance is not a defense.
Shouldn’t be hard for a prosecutor to establish that they did INTEND to take people’s guns for compensation w/o a background check, thereby violating the law. They fully intended to commit the crime, whether or not they knew it to be against the law (which they should have, being supporters of it).
The few pieces and parts in the photo look like they were beautiful shotguns and rifles in near-mint condition–works of art in-and-of-themselves–and anyone who mutilated those should go to prison for that reason alone!
We are destroying the gunms that will last 500 years and keeping the plastic fantastics that might last 100.
Disarming by design.
“We are destroying the gunms”
No, the people who actually own the guns are having them destroyed. This is what is known as ‘private property rights’, if you own property it is yours to do with what you will and if you choose to have it destroyed and disposed of that’s your business.
If the donors knew how much money they could have gotten from a Gun Store for these gems, they would sue NMPGV for FRAUD.
So if I own a gun it is mine to do with as I chose? Private property rights? I can carry or sell without permits or background checks.
You’re just phoning it in now, miner. You’ve become a bad parody of yourself.
This ^
“So if I own a gun it is mine to do with as I chose? Private property rights?”
Yes, just remember that under the United States Constitution you are bound by laws passed by Congress and various state legislatures that have been signed in law by the chief executive.
“I can carry or sell without permits or background checks.“
Yes, if your conduct is within the applicable laws and statutes.
I’m glad I could clear that up for you!
Sounds like you just convicted this group in NM. They being subject to those same laws and all.
You’re not even trying anymore, miner. You really are here just to troll, aren’t you.
@Miner49er
”
Yes, just remember that under the United States Constitution you are bound by laws passed by Congress and various state legislatures that have been signed in law by the chief executive.”
100% false. there is no such provision in the Constitution which binds people to the law by congress or a state. instead the laws are passed by, under the constitution, the consent of the people who agree to obey them by giving that consent by electing representatives to create those laws.
Except that by doing so without a background check for the people they sold their guns to, they also broke the law.
RE: “We have been doing this for years,”
The Gun Control they adore states that’s enough to cuff ’em up. Supplying school kids with Guns…what else will those wacky Gun Control slimeballs do next?
That’s the end-game. The law is the law, but is flexible for the elites and their lackeys.
“We have been doing this for years,”
So aside from posting evidence of your current crimes on the internet for the world to see and then confessing publicly that you did indeed commit these crimes, lets count them up counting federal and state laws broken and that comes to about 6 crimes per gun, now you admit publicly you have been committing these crimes for “years”.
“…now you admit publicly you have been committing these crimes for “years”.”
First reaction is that we should give them a pass; no one got hurt, no crimes committed with the receivers.
However…..
Gun grabbers being who they are…go for the throat. And….any cop related “buybacks” that do not involve an actual FFL to do the background checks and transfers, should be subject to all state and federal laws regarding firearm transfers.
An aside: once lived where firearms collected from scenes of firearm incidents, or accidents (even criminal arrests) were not returned to owners because police did not have an FFL, nor did they have authority to hire an FFL. Thus, firearms could not be transferred back to lawful owner. Am surprised every police dept didn’t copy the legal gimmick.
Why would they need to be transferred back? They were still legally property of the owners and held in evidence by the police. If the cops seize a vehicle they don’t have to take it to the DMV to transfer it back to the original owner. The police seizing it as evidence isn’t a change of ownership to the police.
“The police seizing it as evidence isn’t a change of ownership to the police.”
Thinking it amounts to the owner losing control over the weapon, thus a “transfer”. Never did understand the legal theory, and police not interested in explaining. It’s all distant in the rear view mirror.
Washington’s private transfer ban has a specific exemption for turning guns over to the government. I suspect most states gave themselves a similar exemption.
But in this case it wasn’t the government collecting the firearms but a volunteer group.
“that comes to about 6 crimes per gun,”
then, multiply that by the number of illegal purchases and people to which you illegally transfered the gun and it comes up to about 60 felony gun crimes comitted by this criminal anti-gun group, then count the posession of each illegally purchased gun by what are ‘prohibited persons’ (due to no background check) in a school zone…and it comes up to almost 100 gun crimes comitted by this criminal anti-gun group.
And now we see why our criminal justice system should only prosecute acts which directly harm someone, where that direct harm could be physical, emotional, and/or financial harm.
Of course scumbags can even foul-up that simple standard and claim that our criminal justice system should also prosecute acts which are “dangerous” even if those acts do not actually harm someone. There is significant merit to this concept and, unfortunately, it is nearly impossible to ever quantify how “dangerous” something was/is much less agree on a “danger” threshold which requires criminal prosecution.
(An example of a truly “dangerous” act is shooting a rifle into the air at a low angle and having no idea where the bullet will land. Since the bullet could just as easily injure/kill a human as stop in a pile of dirt, it is a truly “dangerous” act that we should, as a society, discourage via criminal prosecution.)
I’ve been banging that drum for a while. No harm, no crime. No crime, no prosecution. Seems simple to me. That mindset on the part of the criminal justice system would pretty much eliminate the concept of a “possession crime.” How can my merely having something, virtually anything, be, in and of itself, a crime. I can appreciate the “dangerous” act or thing argument but, similar to how self defense law requires imminence to justify response, “dangerous” should as well. Using your example, firing at a low angle into the distance could be imminently dangerous in a populated area but, in rural Alaska?
They should be able to buy any gunm that anyone wants to sale them.
The school grounds might be a thing.
We POTG dont want background checks n bullsht but when our “enemies” fck up we are all for dropping the hammer.
Not the way its supposed to work.
Equal justice for all.
This is equal justice. They pushed those laws in place. Either they do the time or nobody caught dealing guns out of a car trunk should do any time.
Did not read whole article just skimmed through.
My goodness, in New Mexico its illegal to sale a firearmn face to face. That ain’t right ,however if that’s the law, then they broke the law.
“nobody caught dealing guns out of a car trunk“
Clearly you do not understand jurisprudence.
The individuals selling guns out of their trunk have a clear intention to circumvent the law regarding firearm sales, their goal is to sell firearms without obeying the law.
That criminal intent is missing in the article above, and the state prosecutor will not bring charges.
Pretty much the same reason that our friend dude didn’t get the speeding tickets he richly deserved (even though he was in fact, exceeding the speed limit significantly), he did not set out with the intent to break the law so the cop did not charge him with the crime.
The issue isn’t the intent, it is the act itself.
Did they actually learn how hard it is to legally transfer firearms in that state or do they choose to stay ignorant? They were the ones who pushed the laws requiring background checks on all transfers. They also committed felonies when improperly “destroying” the firearms violating ATF protocols by using only one cut. They actually created SBRs with a few of those cuts.
Person to person sale.
Legally transfer.
I’m confused.
Well the “seller’s” are also at fault. Anyone stupid enough to give their vintage gats away deserves the same punishment that needs to be meted out to these dumbazz Karen’s🙄
dem AG dem laws, where is the conflict?
Nail them to the wall and then bury them underneath the jail.
Shouldn’t miner49er be here demanding they are convicted without a trial?
Minor69er is busy, he’s salivating over the recently released trailer for the “Civil War” flick while figuring out the best place to hide when Ultra MAGA rolls into town.
He’ll have to paddle to Hawaii and beg Zuck to let him into the bunker.
“hide when Ultra MAGA rolls into town“
No, just spend a little extra time on the perimeter walk, making sure the shit-dipped punji sticks are fresh and virulent.
Your not Miner49, it never talks that way.
And I’m still pissed cause I thought me n you was going to take a ride to a civilized country. I had all my stuff ready to go. Dang it. Dreaming about sitting on your lap with my head out the window while my gumns flapped in the wind.
Dreams and Hope’s dashed.
Your evil, pure evil.
Number one, I don’t allow my puppies to put their heads out the window because it is very dangerous and I would not allow an opossum to do so either. All it would take is one bug in the eye at 65 mph to create significant damage.
Evil? Here’s some real down low, child molesting evil revealed:
“Republican Congressman Tim Burchett theorised that some of his GOP colleagues were the victims of “honey pot” operations, and that nefarious entities had recorded their indiscretions to use as blackmail leverage.
Mr Burchett made the comments while chatting with far right-wing content creator Benny Johnson on a podcast, according to Mediaite.“
https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/gop-representative-blackmail-honeypot-congress-b2468559.html
Remember when Republican congressman Madison Cawthorne revealed the drug fueled sex orgies by Republican politicians in Congress?
Yeah, that got swept under the rug pretty fast.
Lock ’em up! Lock every last one of them up including the school administrators/teachers who allowed the firearms on campus and the Hoggesque political activist “minors” who obtained & possessed the firearms “illegally”
They’ll get off on the “good intentions” loophole lefties always invoke. As in “I’m not an ignorant self-righteous wannabe fascist ass, I’m just an innocent heart with good intentions.”
This is a opportunity for Pro-2nd Amendment groups to hire someone to prosecute the case when the local DA and state AG refuse to act. Some states allow this type of prosecution.
No criminal intent, no prosecution:
“A person cannot be found guilty of a crime if there is no proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the person had the intent to commit the crime. The concept is known as “mens rea,” which is a Latin term that means “guilty mind.” In other words, you cannot be convicted of a crime if you did not act knowingly or purposefully to commit the crime.”
They knowingly did what they did. Maybe they didn’t know it was illegal but their actions were deliberate and intentional. Ignorantia juris non excusat.
They had intent.
They wrote the law and knew what it said, yet they intentionally and knowingly planned and carried out their crime by knowingly and intentionally literally purchasing the guns with gift cards thus transferring them without the state law required background check.
Not only this group … but in other states these anti-gun groups, and sometimes police (if no exemption for them in state law), do the same thing when the state requires a background check to transfer. There are literally over 3,000 of these types of crimes committed annually by these anti-gun groups, and sometimes police, with their falsely termed ‘gun buy backs’. That’s not even considering that ~66% of the guns purchased by these anti-gun groups, and sometimes police, in their falsely termed ‘gun buy backs’ turn up later after the ‘buy back’ on the street in the hands of criminals.
“That’s not even considering that ~66% of the guns purchased by these anti-gun groups, and sometimes police, in their falsely termed ‘gun buy backs’ turn up later after the ‘buy back’ on the street in the hands of criminals“
~66%?
That is quite the claim, I look forward to you posting a citation to back up your claim.
@Miner49er
“~66%?
That is quite the claim, I look forward to you posting a citation to back up your claim.”
its been posted before with other articles, and if you use ‘uncurated’ search engines you can find it there too…so like I’ve told you many times before, learn what research means and stop being so ignorant.
So, you got nothing. Got it.
In other news, Republicans election meddling efforts continue to be exposed:
“Trump, RNC chair caught on tape meddling in Michigan 2020 vote, report says
The Detroit News obtained recordings of a phone call from Nov. 17, 2020 where then-President Trump and RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel personally pressured local officials in Michigan to overturn the vote in the state’s largest county“
Lordy, turns out there are more tapes.
I got plenty… you got nothing because you don’t know what research means.
@Miner49er
stop trying to excuse the blatant criminal activity of this group. the had intent, means, motive, and opportunity. The NM law is very clear on the point of transfers, and this group wrote it. The ATF is very clear on how firearms are to be destroyed, federal law is clear on firearms destruction and being in school zones and this group has acknowledged they knew these laws. they, with intent, transfered firearms illegally, and took ‘operable’ (under federal law because they were not destroyed IAW law, thus under law they are still considered operable firearms) into a school zone and further illegally transfered them to under age (for firearms legal posession) kids for their use in their ‘sculpture’. Plus now it’s been discovered some of the firearms thkse students received were not actually cut in half but remained completely intact and 100% fully capable of being loaded and fired.
this group, knowing what the laws said, intentionally acted contrary to those….that is intent, period.
What is Mens Rea and What are the Types?
“A person cannot be found guilty of a crime if there is no proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the person had the intent to commit the crime. The concept is known as “mens rea,” which is a Latin term that means “guilty mind.” In other words, you cannot be convicted of a crime if you did not act knowingly or purposefully to commit the crime.”
A DIRECT QUOTE, lifted without credit, from the website of the Manchester, Tennessee legal firm of Burch, Morrison, & Stewart. Nothing original here, this guy’s flakey..
“A DIRECT QUOTE, lifted without credit, from the website of the Manchester, Tennessee legal firm“
Yes, a direct quote from the legal community because neither you I are an attorney, and a rational person seeks the subject matter expert information rather than just making up shit.
“Nothing original here, this guy’s flakey“
Nothing original? Of course not, the concept of ‘criminal intent’ is hundreds of years old and well settled law.
NMPGV will get a bye on this one, just like Rev. Jeremy Lucas of Christ Church Episcopal Parish in Lake Oswego Oregon. Anyone who violates the law with pure motives is innocent. Anyone who’s against guns has pure motives. Because that’s how it always works.
It’s hard for me to believe that a state can pass a law that makes selling firegunm illegal.
As long as they are allowed. Especially considering ‘Qualified Immunity’ protects them from criminal or monetary repercussions.
This one is kinda a tough call for me. What they did is technically illegal under NM law as I understand it but that law is a stupid one that shouldn’t exist. I do like the fact that a gun control group is learning that complying with stupid laws that shouldn’t exist is a hassle, but I doubt they will suffer any real repercussions due to their ideological congruence with the state’s government. Will they learn to be more circumspect about the laws they push for in the future? Sadly, probably not. “Guns r bad, mkay,” seems to be about as deeply as these groups think. I find it interesting that, in their opinion, there was no firearm transfer because they just collected “wood and metal.” Clear ignorance of what constitutes a firearm, and a transfer – seems that they should know their own rules a bit better. Also, before they cut them up, those firearms were just “wood and metal.” Why should it be illegal to sell, give, loan, transfer a chunk of wood and metal under any circumstances.
This does serve to highlight how patently absurd several firearms laws are, at least. NMPGV is, IMO, correct that they did nothing “wrong” (stupid and wasteful, but not morally wrong) but they did do something “illegal”. This is a conundrum that many a firearms enthusiast finds themselves in on a regular basis. Doing something perfectly moral and legal, i.e. carrying a loaded gun in the car, might cease to be legal the moment one drives across a state border but, did it become wrong?
As an aside, why cut the scope?
“This does serve to highlight how patently absurd several firearms laws are, at least. NMPGV is, IMO, correct that they did nothing “wrong” (stupid and wasteful, but not morally wrong) but they did do something “illegal”.”
I understand your point with that, but it seems more of they did it assuming they had some sort of self granted ‘legal AND moral right’ when in reality they never had that and self-granted that unto them selves. It is only after they did it, basically publicly confessed to it and even provided the evidence against them, that they tried to justify their actions as ‘not wrong and legal’.
1. They had the intent. They intentionally, knowing what they were doing, went to these homes and actually ‘paid’ for the firearms by giving monetary value in the form of gift cards. The state law, they actually wrote, says that’s illegal without a background check to transfer the firearms. So they knew it was illegal and ‘wrong IAW law’ to begin with but they self-granted a ‘legal AND moral right’ unto them selves putting them selves above the law to do what they did.
2. They had the means and motive and opportunity to do what they did.
3. They had the access to do what they did.
Now their excuse is claiming ignorance of the law with ‘we did nothing wrong’. And it wasn’t just state law violated it was multiple federal laws as well (especially the school zone thing of which they were well aware).
If this had been a pro-2A law abiding person (e.g. ‘law abiding’ in this context of discussion meaning one truly not intending to commit a crime and truly had no intent to commit a crime and was not a prohibited person) wanting to exercise their constitutional right, but instead keeping the guns after buying them with gift cards, would their excuse of claiming ignorance of the law with ‘I did nothing wrong’ or ‘I made a mistake and didn’t understand the law’ have stopped them from being charged under state law and being arrested and prosecuted and sent to prison?
If this had been a pro-2A law abiding person (e.g. ‘law abiding’ in this context of discussion meaning one truly not intending to commit a crime and truly had no intent to commit a crime and was not a prohibited person) wanting to exercise their constitutional right, and they took their now purchased guns into a school zone and handed them over to underage (thus prohibited persons) students in the school would their excuse of claiming ignorance of the law with ‘I did nothing wrong’ or ‘I made a mistake and didn’t understand the law’ have stopped them from being charged under state law and federal law and being arrested and prosecuted and sent to prison?
If this had been a pro-2A law abiding person (e.g. ‘law abiding’ in this context of discussion meaning one truly not intending to commit a crime and truly had no intent to commit a crime and was not a prohibited person) wanting to exercise their constitutional right, and they gave or allowed access, unknowingly, to their now purchased guns to a prohibited person (some of that group have prior disqualifying convictions that make prohibited persons), would their excuse of claiming ignorance of the law with ‘I did nothing wrong’ or ‘I made a mistake and didn’t understand the law’ have stopped them from being charged under state law and/or federal law and being arrested and prosecuted and sent to prison?
What this group did is a little different from a 2A pro-gun law abiding person (e.g. ‘law abiding’ in this context of discussion meaning one truly not intending to commit a crime and truly had no intent to commit a crime and was not a prohibited person). This is an anti-gun group that claims to have known the law and even wrote about writing the law their selves, yet, they knew it was illegal and ‘wrong IAW law’ to begin with but they self-granted a ‘legal AND moral right’ unto them selves putting them selves above the law to do what they did.
This group had intent and means and motive and opportunity and access…they were wrong IAW law, they acted contrary to the law, they knew what the law said having written the law, they intentionally violated the law. If this group thinks them selves as not having been ‘wrong’ or acting ‘illegally’ is moot. The fact is they did violate the law (even for the state law knowing what the law said because they wrote it), and as the old saying goes ‘ignorance of the law is no excuse’ and that concept would be applied to a pro-2A law abiding person (e.g. ‘law abiding’ in this context of discussion meaning one truly not intending to commit a crime and truly had no intent to commit a crime and was not a prohibited person) wanting to exercise their constitutional right and that pro-2A law abiding person would be charged, arrested, prosecuted, and sent to prison and a ‘I did nothing wrong’ or ‘I made a mistake and didn’t understand the law’ excuse would not have stopped that.
This anti-gun group, the people involved in these crimes they have according to their leaders own words been committing for years, should be charged and arrested and prosecuted and and sent to prison just as the law would do to to a pro-2A law abiding person (e.g. ‘law abiding’ in this context of discussion meaning one truly not intending to commit a crime and truly had no intent to commit a crime and was not a prohibited person) wanting to exercise their constitutional right.
(note: for those that don’t know, IAW means ‘In accordance with’, e.g. ‘IAW law’, or in my above ‘wrong IAW law’ meaning it may not have been morally wrong but IAW law they were wrong because they knew what the law said because they wrote it.)
I understand where you are coming from and agree with your points about what would happen to Joe Citizen gun owner in related circumstances. Problem is, I don’t think Joe Citizen *should* be prosecuted under this law and to remain consistent, I can’t easily accept that someone I don’t like should be. I have no power either way as I am not a resident of NM. In my ideal world (which this one is not) I would like to see this law repealed either because this case highlights its absurdity or because there is unequal treatment under the law. Ultimately, it is the law I have the big problem with, the NM gun control folks are just fools.
I also don’t think Joe Citizen *should* be prosecuted under this law. But here we are with the law being written as it is and this anti-gun group who knew exactly what the law said as they, according to the words of their leader, wrote it so they knowingly and willfully and intentionally violated it.
Which brings up another question too – why are special interest groups writing laws? They are not our elected officials, no one elected them to office, they have no official standing… so why are elected officials, the law makers, our president, our governors, our government (federal and state) letting them have defacto official ‘elected representative’ (or ‘government employee’) status and funding their ‘law making’ efforts with tax payer dollars? This is not only unconstitutional, its illegal. I don’t live in NM, but if I did I’d be raising all kinds of questions to that government about why they allowed a special interest group to write what is in effect (because of their interaction) an unconstitutional and illegal law.
“why are special interest groups writing laws? They are not our elected officials“
I completely agree, special interest groups should not be writing our laws, but they do, I am thrilled to hear that you are opposed to this practice!
“Models are drafted with deceptive titles and descriptions to disguise their true intent. The Asbestos Transparency Act didn’t help people exposed to asbestos. It was written by corporations who wanted to make it harder for victims to recoup money. The “HOPE Act,” introduced in nine states, was written by a conservative advocacy group to make it more difficult for people to get food stamps.“
https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2019/04/03/abortion-gun-laws-stand-your-ground-model-bills-conservatives-liberal-corporate-influence-lobbyists/3162173002/
They have to be prosecuted for every single violation so they can understand how silly these laws are which they fully support.
Problem is, they probably won’t understand anyway. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
True.
Just shows what ass holes the gun grabbers are! Lock em up Sheriff for having weapons on school grounds!
No mercy, prosecute them.
Make people understand the power of making dangerous tools.
those are all fudd guns by the looks, not even likely crime guns.
A Move So Dumb, It Makes the New Mexico Governor Look Smart.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRwzBrA-oTs
Gun controllers like all lefties feel they are above the law and lefty DA’s give them a pass because “their intentions are good.”
Comments are closed.