Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8852 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-15-2018 2:31 PM
192 online now:
Aussie, caffeine, frako, jar, NoNukes, PaulK, ringo, Tanypteryx (8 members, 184 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: rldawnca
Post Volume:
Total: 836,926 Year: 11,749/29,783 Month: 771/1,642 Week: 185/460 Day: 24/62 Hour: 1/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
11121314
15
16Next
Author Topic:   Gun Control III
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10860
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 211 of 235 (831829)
04-24-2018 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 210 by Modulous
04-24-2018 9:19 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
Depends where you are.

Sure. Now is that a relevant observation for this particular argument? We know where this particular shooter lives and the laws he lives under. Why not assume that I am referring to that?

Unless they give knowingly give assistance to their child in the commission of a crime. I'm not saying that is the case here, incidentally.

It is not the case here. It is also the case that I said "generally" not responsible. What is your point here?


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith


This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by Modulous, posted 04-24-2018 9:19 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by Modulous, posted 04-25-2018 2:00 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

    
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(2)
Message 212 of 235 (831842)
04-24-2018 11:16 PM
Reply to: Message 207 by NoNukes
04-24-2018 6:50 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
NoNukes responds to me:

quote:
No, that is not correct. The police also take cars away from drunk folks. They may even give the car to a family member when they arrest the drunk. That does not imply that the owner cannot have his car back.

Having actually lived through your example (my father had his license suspended for drunk driving), I have first-hand knowledge: You are incorrect. He doesn't get to drive. If he has his car taken away and I somehow get it out of impound, he is still not allowed to drive it until he is legally allowed to do so. I got to drive him to work. If I had decided to give him a car to drive (such as his own car), knowing as I did that he had a suspended license, I would be involved if he were to then run somebody over. The extent of my liability? Well, that's for the courts to decide, but it is clear that I am involved in him violating the law in driving without a license and the results of that violation.

And before you toss a red herring into this, you are allowed to own a car without a license. You can't drive it without a license, but you can own it. But to own a gun requires you to have a license in Illinois. He was not allowed to have a gun. His father knew it. His father gave him a gun anyway.

quote:
When you say that he was not supposed to have a gun, what kind of legal "not supposed" do you mean?

His license was revoked (you did know this, didn't you? Have you actually done any homework on this issue?), his guns confiscated, and his father took possession of them. For his father to then give them back to his son means he is involved.

quote:
quote:
After all, the cops are not in the habit of just giving guns to people.

I don't know what to make of this statement. How does it advance your case?

It would help if you provided the complete context. The father didn't give guns to his son just out of the blue. It's not like the kid left his guns at his father's house and his father, unaware that the cops had revoked the son's license, called up his son to say, "Hey, you left your AR-15 in the shed. I'll bring it by tomorrow."

No, he got it from the cops. And it wasn't like the cops were having a sale on confiscated firearms and the father just happened to coincidentally acquire the gun that was seized from his son. Instead, everybody involved in this transfer of the weapons from the son to the cops to the father knew precisely what these guns were, why the cops had them, and the process by which the father was getting them back.

The father knew his son had his license revoked and weapons seized. For him to then acquire them from the cops and give them back to his son means he is involved.

quote:
quote:
There is a reasonable case to be made. Whether it survives scrutiny in the court is precisely why the court is there. But, this is not a frivolous charge.

Then make the case.

I did.

Did you pay attention?

I will give you some things to think about while you re-read the post before you respond:

1) Did I say anything about his mental health?

2) Did I say that the shooter's father was responsible simply because he was his father? Or was there some other reason regarding how the son re-acquired the weapons? Specifically: What did the person who acquired the guns from the cops know about the reason why the cops had the guns? Note: The relationship between the person who acquired the guns from the cops and the shooter is irrelevant.

3) What did the father know about why the cops had the guns? For that matter, why did the cops have the guns?

4) How does the police's assumption that the father wouldn't give guns to his unlicensed son absolve the father from responsibility in giving guns to his unlicensed son? It doesn't matter where he got the gun. In this particular case, in acquiring the gun, he learned of the reason why his son no longer had his guns. But that is irrelevant to the point: He knowingly gave weapons to someone whom he knew was not supposed to have them.

So, I think you have an uphill battle pretending to be as ignorant as you are making yourself out to be.

But I'm willing to entertain arguments. Have you just not read anything about this case?


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by NoNukes, posted 04-24-2018 6:50 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by NoNukes, posted 04-25-2018 2:08 AM Rrhain has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10860
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 213 of 235 (831845)
04-25-2018 2:08 AM
Reply to: Message 212 by Rrhain
04-24-2018 11:16 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
The relevant question is not when your dad got to drive, but when he got his car back. You did not report that, but I am going to suggest that it was less than a week after he was arrested. That would be a typical time frame.

And the fact that your dad got his car back despite not being allowed to drive is not a red herring. It is exactly the point.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith


This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Rrhain, posted 04-24-2018 11:16 PM Rrhain has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by Rrhain, posted 04-25-2018 7:47 PM NoNukes has responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 214 of 235 (831861)
04-25-2018 2:00 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by NoNukes
04-24-2018 9:40 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
Sure. Now is that a relevant observation for this particular argument? We know where this particular shooter lives and the laws he lives under. Why not assume that I am referring to that?

I did assume you were referring to that. But there's more than one place of relevance here with regards to laws: Illinois - where there are laws allowing the State to take weapons away, and laws regarding giving weapons to people who have had a licence revoked and where the father's crime, if it was one, occurred. Tennessee, where the shooter lived. And Federal law.

I referenced all three in my response to you, so why not assume I was referring to all three?

It is not the case here. It is also the case that I said "generally" not responsible. What is your point here?

I think including the actual requirements for somebody to be considered an accomplice was kind of on point in a discussion about whether someone should be treated as an accomplice.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by NoNukes, posted 04-24-2018 9:40 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(1)
Message 215 of 235 (831873)
04-25-2018 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by NoNukes
04-25-2018 2:08 AM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
NoNukes responds to me:

quote:
The relevant question is not when your dad got to drive, but when he got his car back.

And thus, you threw in the red herring I specifically asked you not to.

You are allowed to own a car without a license to drive it. Therefore, when he got his car back is irrelevant. Giving a car to someone who is not licensed to drive it, in and of itself, is of no concern. If said unlicensed driver then drives the car, it would be a dereliction of duty for the authorities not to ask, "Where did you get this car?" And if it turns out that said unlicensed driver got it from someone else to ask that other person about the details because they just might be involved in the consequences of this unlicensed driver.

However, you are not allowed to own a gun without a license. Therefore, giving a gun to someone whom you know to be ineligible to have one, which the father was since the guns were confiscated specifically because the son had his license revoked and the father was taking possession of his son's guns specifically because they were being confiscated due to the son no longer having a license, means you are in trouble.

I notice you didn't answer my question: Have you done any homework regarding this? Do you know what the law is in Illinois regarding guns, licensing, and the transfer of weapons? For example, did you know that there is an exemption for family members? If a close relative (and do you know how the statute defines that?) gives a "bona fide gift" of a weapon, you don't need to check to see if they have a license. Do you honestly think that this is a "bona fide gift"? Especially since the father specifically knew that his son was ineligible to own a gun?

And that is why it's a red herring. Repeat this to yourself before responding:

You are allowed to own a car without a license.

You are NOT allowed to own a gun without a license.

You are allowed to own a car without a license.

You are NOT allowed to own a gun without a license.

You are allowed to own a car without a license.

You are NOT allowed to own a gun without a license.

...


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by NoNukes, posted 04-25-2018 2:08 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 216 by NoNukes, posted 05-03-2018 3:16 PM Rrhain has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10860
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 216 of 235 (832433)
05-03-2018 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by Rrhain
04-25-2018 7:47 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
And thus, you threw in the red herring I specifically asked you not to.

Right. I don't have to honor your requests.


However, you are not allowed to own a gun without a license.

Wrong. You don't need a license to own a rifle. All adults have a right to own a rifle absent some legal disqualification. Your premise is just wrong. Surely you have heard of the 2nd amendment?

There are licenses for carrying a firearm, and for concealed carry. There are even licenses required for purchasing. But generally speaking no license is required to own a rifle.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith

No it is based on math I studied in sixth grade, just plain old addition, substraction and multiplication. -- ICANT


This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Rrhain, posted 04-25-2018 7:47 PM Rrhain has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by Modulous, posted 05-03-2018 3:57 PM NoNukes has responded
 Message 222 by Rrhain, posted 05-04-2018 7:30 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 217 of 235 (832440)
05-03-2018 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 216 by NoNukes
05-03-2018 3:16 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
Wrong. You don't need a license to own a rifle.

You need a FOID in Illinois.

All adults have a right to own a rifle absent some legal disqualification.

Which is the case here.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by NoNukes, posted 05-03-2018 3:16 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by NoNukes, posted 05-03-2018 4:11 PM Modulous has responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10860
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 218 of 235 (832444)
05-03-2018 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by Modulous
05-03-2018 3:57 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
You need a FOID in Illinois.

That is obviously irrelevant here. My comment that generally speaking, no license is required to own a gun is correct. Even in Illinois, the police have to give you the FOID unless there is a legal prohibition on you owning a firearm.

NoNukes writes:

All adults have a right to own a rifle absent some legal disqualification.

Modulous writes:

Which is the case here.

Apparently not. The police are not the folks who get to decide whether you can own a gun. They can disarm you, but they don't get to decide whether you can own a gun. A court can, and of course, the police can enforce a law passed by the legislature. But they cannot otherwise deprive citizens of the right to own a gun.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith

No it is based on math I studied in sixth grade, just plain old addition, substraction and multiplication. -- ICANT


This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Modulous, posted 05-03-2018 3:57 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by Modulous, posted 05-03-2018 4:18 PM NoNukes has responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 219 of 235 (832446)
05-03-2018 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by NoNukes
05-03-2018 4:11 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
That is obviously irrelevant here.

Why's that?

Apparently not. The police are not the folks who get to decide whether you can own a gun. They can disarm you, but they don't get to decide whether you can own a gun.

Actually in Illinois the FOID is issued, and can be rescinded, by the Illinois State Police Department.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by NoNukes, posted 05-03-2018 4:11 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by NoNukes, posted 05-03-2018 7:55 PM Modulous has responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10860
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 220 of 235 (832451)
05-03-2018 7:55 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by Modulous
05-03-2018 4:18 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
NoNukes writes:

That is obviously irrelevant here.

Modulous writes:

Why's that?

Didn't all of the shooting happen in Tennesse?


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith

No it is based on math I studied in sixth grade, just plain old addition, substraction and multiplication. -- ICANT


This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by Modulous, posted 05-03-2018 4:18 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by Modulous, posted 05-03-2018 8:21 PM NoNukes has responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 221 of 235 (832452)
05-03-2018 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 220 by NoNukes
05-03-2018 7:55 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
Didn't all of the shooting happen in Tennesse?

But we're talking about the actions of the father, who lives in Illinois.

All the media reports I've seen still say it's an open question as to whether the father handing the weapons to his son constitutes a crime. It is an offence to give someone a weapon knowing they have had their FOID rescinded. The question to this end is that it is unknown when - and thus where - exactly the father handed the weapons over to his son, and whether the action falls under the exceptions in the law.

If the handover took place in Illinois, that's a problem. But there is also information recently released that suggests it happened when the son was no longer an Illinois resident - which means several legal exemptions may apply.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by NoNukes, posted 05-03-2018 7:55 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 224 by NoNukes, posted 05-05-2018 10:34 AM Modulous has responded

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 222 of 235 (832509)
05-04-2018 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 216 by NoNukes
05-03-2018 3:16 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much MediReinkinga Attention
NoNukes:

quote:
I don't have to honor your requests.

Of course not. I tried to help you, but I can't stop you from making a fool of yourself.

Not only did the father know that the son had his gun license taken away and thus his son was ineligible to own guns, he promised the cops he wouldn't give them to his son:

Waffle House Shooting Suspect Got His Confiscated Guns Back After Moving to Tennessee

He said deputies returned the guns to Reinking’s father on the promise that he would “keep the weapons secure and out of the possession of Travis.”

And thus, we're back to my original point: Reinking's father could face charges. There is a reasonable case to be made. Whether it survives scrutiny in the court is precisely why the court is there. But, this is not a frivolous charge.

quote:
Wrong. You don't need a license to own a rifle. All adults have a right to own a rifle absent some legal disqualification. Your premise is just wrong. Surely you have heard of the 2nd amendment?

(*chuckle*)

I asked you repeatedly to do your homework regarding this, and still you refuse to consider this advice and thus, you make yourself look foolish.

I even quoted some of the law and give you really good hints as to what you should be looking for, and you still decided to speak without any authority.

In Illinois, you need a license to own any firearm. Surely you have heard of the Second Amendment? Notice how it refers to a "well-regulated" militia? Surely you have read the various SCOTUS decisions that indicate it is not an infringement of your rights to require you to be licensed in order to own a firearm.

It is hereby declared as a matter of legislative determination that in order to promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, it is necessary and in the public interest to provide a system of identifying persons who are not qualified to acquire or possess firearms, firearm ammunition, stun guns, and tasers within the State of Illinois by the establishment of a system of Firearm Owner's Identification Cards, thereby establishing a practical and workable system by which law enforcement authorities will be afforded an opportunity to identify those persons who are prohibited by Section 24-3.1 of the Criminal Code of 2012, from acquiring or possessing firearms and firearm ammunition and who are prohibited by this Act from acquiring stun guns and tasers.
(Source: P.A. 97-1150, eff. 1-25-13.)

That's just the introduction. Are you going to do your homework to find out what the full extent of the law is?

Hint: The law doesn't talk about "ownership." Do the words "acquire or possess" mean anything to you?

quote:
But generally speaking no license is required to own a rifle.

You sure about that? Have you looked up the relevant law in Illinois? Because it isn't the case all over the US. Don't confuse North Carolina's law (which requires a license to have a "pistol" but makes an exemption for "long guns") with Illinois' law.

You did, didn't you? You thought that the laws in North Carolina were applicable across the entire country, didn't you?


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by NoNukes, posted 05-03-2018 3:16 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 223 by xongsmith, posted 05-04-2018 7:45 PM Rrhain has not yet responded

    
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 1850
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 223 of 235 (832512)
05-04-2018 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 222 by Rrhain
05-04-2018 7:30 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much MediReinkinga Attention
Rrhain notes again
And thus, we're back to my original point: Reinking's father could face charges. There is a reasonable case to be made.....

Right. As I also alluded to in Message 203


- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by Rrhain, posted 05-04-2018 7:30 PM Rrhain has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10860
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 224 of 235 (832558)
05-05-2018 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by Modulous
05-03-2018 8:21 PM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
All the media reports I've seen still say it's an open question as to whether the father handing the weapons to his son constitutes a crime. It is an offence to give someone a weapon knowing they have had their FOID rescinded. The question to this end is that it is unknown when - and thus where - exactly the father handed the weapons over to his son, and whether the action falls under the exceptions in the law.

I think your summary is quite accurate. But I'd take it a bit further. If dad handed his son the guns in Illinois knowing that his son was leaving the state, at best the dad is technically guilty of a crime. But it is not illegal for the son to have those guns in most places other than Illinois.

Bottom line. The law won't hold Dad responsible for what a 29-year old adult does in Tennessee with a gun, where his possession was completely legal. I'd also point out that Illinois law does not even apply to non-residents who are within the state. If the son's intent was to permanently move out of Illinois, at least arguably, the dad could give him his guns back without violating the law.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith

No it is based on math I studied in sixth grade, just plain old addition, substraction and multiplication. -- ICANT


This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by Modulous, posted 05-03-2018 8:21 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by Modulous, posted 05-07-2018 8:24 PM NoNukes has responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 225 of 235 (832672)
05-07-2018 8:24 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by NoNukes
05-05-2018 10:34 AM


Re: Shooters Get Too Much Media Attention
at best the dad is technically guilty of a crime.

Exactly. Technically guilty is the best kind of guilty.

The law won't hold Dad responsible for what a 29-year old adult does in Tennessee with a gun, where his possession was completely legal.

I wouldn't go that far. If the father has contravened the law - they would likely look the other way in most cases if it was known the son was leaving the State. Given what the son did, however, the people who operate the law may decide that they won't look the other way.

Since it's the USA and guns, I expect nothing will happen to the father - but we'll see.

I'd also point out that Illinois law does not even apply to non-residents who are within the state. If the son's intent was to permanently move out of Illinois, at least arguably, the dad could give him his guns back without violating the law.

This being one of the exemptions from the law I was discussing that may come into play. There is some information that suggests the son was not an Illinois resident at the time, and this may be sufficient to absolve the father.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by NoNukes, posted 05-05-2018 10:34 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by NoNukes, posted 05-22-2018 1:19 AM Modulous has acknowledged this reply
 Message 228 by NoNukes, posted 05-22-2018 1:20 AM Modulous has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
11121314
15
16Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018