Comments on: DC Cops Investigating Whether NBC’s Gregory Violated Gun Law

By: oonogil

oonogil — Fri, 28 Dec 2012 23:06:54 +0000

Paulet

One of my daughter’s college professors was a former Israeli Army officer with a CHL. If anyone in the world knows how to handle an emergency it would be him. The classes he teaches are all on the graduate level which means that all of his students are college graduates over the age of 21. Even under those circumstances he is not allowed to carry a weapon on campus. Several of his students have a CHL including my daughter. They could carry a gun across the street from campus but not on campus. How do you think I felt when she was working in the lab alone late at night? …. Please explain how a bullet from a semi-auto will do more damage than a bullet from a revolver or anything else.

By: paulet

paulet — Fri, 28 Dec 2012 21:53:25 +0000

I doubt it if any laws broken — funny how when you show the clip the president recoiled.
I want to comment on Teachers and Principals carrying guns — first it is way above pay grade! Second — every teacher who carries a gun should visit ER and look at what gunshot wounds do to people. Third they need to take courses on how to stop the bleeding from a gun shot so when they shot first they will know how to save a person shot accidently. People carrying guns should see what semi automatic bullets do to humans close up I think if first responders spoke to all who want to carry in a school and should look at films and talk with the teachers before they are allowed to carry. I doubt if many could stomach the results.

By: howardfrombroward

howardfrombroward — Fri, 28 Dec 2012 00:07:28 +0000

addcu: another durty donk cover-up. felony criminal david gregory will get a free pass even though he blatantly violated dc law. why it was just a harmless plastic prop (yep, sure, uh-huh, promise, absolutely, yessirree)even though it wasn’t. also, expect the inevitable blow-off “misunderstanding” excuse.

By: TexBork_2012

TexBork_2012 — Thu, 27 Dec 2012 19:38:27 +0000

He should be treated like any conservative would have been and had his house raided by the police and he hauled away, until someone can come up with a few more trumped up charges, no bail, and a lengthy trial heavy fines, and imprisonment, but he won’t have to worry about any of that thanks to hypocrisy.

By: DryPowder

DryPowder — Thu, 27 Dec 2012 18:59:32 +0000

“Here is a magazine for ammunition that carries 30 bullets,” Gregory said while holding up a clip. “Now, isn’t it possible if we got rid of these … that we could reduce the carnage in a situation like Newtown?” —- Well, apparently David Gregory has proven to the entire country that a ban would in fact NOT prevent crazy or non-law abiding people from obtaining or possessing a high capacity feeding device. DC HAS “got rid of these ” by making them illegal by law, but somehow he still was able to easily procure and brandish a high capacity feeding device. Nice work idiot. You have proven what many intelligent people already know; making it illegal for law abiding citizens from owning certain firearms or firearm accessories will not prevent lawbreakers from obtaining and brandishing such devices. By non-law abiding person or lawbreaker I mean someone who knowingly violates the law. (an example would be calling the police department and being told what you have proposed is illegal and you should not do it, then carrying out said proposal anyway).

By: Dalmation

Dalmation — Thu, 27 Dec 2012 18:37:40 +0000

“You really think that your children are just as much a target then the children of the president of the united states….really!!!!!?”
Posted by: thefirstone00 | December 27, 2012, 1:03 pm

Sidwell Friends has it’s own armed security, regardless of whether the President’s daughters are attending or not.

The guy who works behind the counter at a convenience store in D.C. is probably at much greater risk than the kids at Sidwell Friends -but he can’t arm himself.

By: catman

catman — Thu, 27 Dec 2012 18:32:20 +0000

thefirst….it must be your ego to assume that any child is more important than your own and they should be provided adequate protection. taking guns away from law abiding citizens doesnt protect anyone and if schools are not safe they should have a police presence as bill clinton previously advocated.

i find it quite hypocritical that the same people advocating gun laws have their own police protection. its kind of like trying pin the whole deficit on 2% of the country.

liberalisms common goal is shared misery.

no ones children are more important than anyone elses….get it?

By: thefirstone00

thefirstone00 — Thu, 27 Dec 2012 18:03:48 +0000

i am sure the presidents kids have adequate protection why dont ours? are someone elses kids more important than ours? apparently so. Posted by: catman | December 27, 2012, 12:41 pm 12:41 pm ___ You are just tooooooo funny. You really think that your children are just as much a target then the children of the president of the united states….really!!!!!? WOW that is some ego you have.

By: catman

catman — Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:41:01 +0000

where i live our school has a police presence and our kids are safe. gun laws do nothing to protect anyone, having a good defense against criminals is your best chance.just go off the cliff and in the meantime arrest david gregory for breaking the law.

i am sure the presidents kids have adequate protection why dont ours? are someone elses kids more important than ours? apparently so.

By: Dalmation

Dalmation — Thu, 27 Dec 2012 16:38:25 +0000

From iowahawk blog:

1. call yourself a journalist.
2. list laws you support.
3. break them.
4. Pulitzer!

When the cops pull you over, just explain “journalism.”

On my way to rob the liquor store, almost forgot my press pass. Whew! That was a close one!