Welcome to the wild wild....

darthtang aw

Active Member
The guy had no reason to lie. He mentioned the same fines and punishments if he would've kept the gun. I believe him. You don't want to because it's simply evidence that any type of gun is easily accessible if you want it. There's no reason to turn anyone in because it was simply a mistaken identification of the gun. AGAIN, this is an antique auction, their expertise isn't with firearms. The previous owner could've sold the thing in the local classified ads and the results would've been the same.
Now you are defending their right to sell an illegal firearm? The auction was done at the auction house. It the responsibility of the auction house to know if they are selling contraband. The is the legal resposibility of the auction house when they engage in selling firearms. You complain gun laws are to lax, yet excuse the violation of gun laws on the books currently. If the previius owner had sold the gun in a classified add it would still be a crime and should be prosecuted. Your "guy" as I stated isn't very knowledgeable. The gun would have clearly been marked M2. the auction house would have seen this as well. If it wasn't it was an M1 with the modified reciever, which could have been dissassmebled and the gun kept. Not turned into the ATF for destruction as you said he claimed.
Where did you associate poverty with race? Why reference Chicago's poverty at all in regards to gun violence? Are you saying if you're poor, you're automatically stereotyped as a felon? The majority of individuals living in Chicago are minorities, so of course they must be poor, right?
Are you Bi-Polar? You said this
Of course the statistics are high in cities like Detroit and Chicago, because they do have a large population of low income/poverty level minorities. Desperate times begat desperate measures.I just responded with stats for poverty and the gun crime. Apparently you are the one saying poverty is directly attributed to Felons.
As for race...you said this...
Poverty levels? You sound like that moron Cruz and he idiotic statement associating poverty levels to Blacks.
You brought up Race. I never even commented on it till this statement.
Brother. One Google search and Houston is a Mecca for drug cartels. If they're here, they must hide themselves pretty we'll from where I live, work, and play.
Did I say Mecca? You said their were no issues in Houston tied to drug Cartels. I just proved you wrong. Just because you don't see the bear shit in the woods, doesn't mean it doesn't do it.
You miss the entire point of the comparison. The culture, lifestyles, and environments between Chicago and Albuquerque are night and day, total opposites. It's like comparing NYC to Omaha, Nebraska. You look at the statistics bases on simple numbers. You don't look at how 100,000 people in Chicago are living within a 5 mile radius of one another, when it Albuquerque, that same radius is 15 miles. Your town shuts down before midnight, and things are just picking up at that time in Chicago. Factor in culture, the type and style of living environments (how more people are concentrated in the same areas), and it's understandable why there's more violence in a major metropolis compared to some semi-rural sprawl like the towns in New Mexico
Your five mile radius number is way off. But for purpose of debate I get your point. You asked me to compare Albuquerque to Chicago. So that is what I did. Now I can't compare the two/ Can you please make up your mind.
The person who took the guns to the auctioneer for him to sell was some old widow who was getting rid of her dead husband's firearm collection.  He probably brought the thing back with him from WW2 or the Korean War, and this woman had no inkling or idea about the nature of the weapon.  I guarantee you the auction house is clueless, because of their lack of knowledge of the guns they were selling when I was there last.  The exteriors of an M1 and M2 are not that different.
except for the very noticeable stamp of M2. You are correct, they look similar. But regardless...ignorance of the law is not an excuse.
 

aggiealum

Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397395/welcome-to-the-wild-wild/40#post_3542017
Now you are defending their right to sell an illegal firearm? The auction was done at the auction house. It the responsibility of the auction house to know if they are selling contraband. The is the legal resposibility of the auction house when they engage in selling firearms. You complain gun laws are to lax, yet excuse the violation of gun laws on the books currently. If the previius owner had sold the gun in a classified add it would still be a crime and should be prosecuted. Your "guy" as I stated isn't very knowledgeable. The gun would have clearly been marked M2. the auction house would have seen this as well. If it wasn't it was an M1 with the modified reciever, which could have been dissassmebled and the gun kept. Not turned into the ATF for destruction as you said he claimed.
Are you Bi-Polar? You said this
I just responded with stats for poverty and the gun crime. Apparently you are the one saying poverty is directly attributed to Felons.
As for race...you said this...
You brought up Race. I never even commented on it till this statement.
Did I say Mecca? You said their were no issues in Houston tied to drug Cartels. I just proved you wrong. Just because you don't see the bear shit in the woods, doesn't mean it doesn't do it.
Your five mile radius number is way off. But for purpose of debate I get your point. You asked me to compare Albuquerque to Chicago. So that is what I did. Now I can't compare the two/ Can you please make up your mind.
except for the very noticeable stamp of M2. You are correct, they look similar. But regardless...ignorance of the law is not an excuse.
LMAO! Read that statement back and find the lie in the statement. Because that would also be illegal. Sounds like your auction house is into breaking all kinds of federal law.
LMFAO. You'll do anything to keep from losing an argument. This was a guy I just happen to be standing next to at the auction who was also interested in the guns being sold that day. He simply told me what he found after purchasing the firearm. I have no clue what the circumstances were prior to him buying the thing, whether he did some kind of close inspection, what markings were on the rifle, whether it was modified or what. Once he got it home and I suppose tore it apart or really look at it, did he realize what he had. As far as the auction house, they're not required to validate anything since it came from a private collection. That's the beauty of our recent lax laws regarding purchasing guns from private individuals. The auction house has disclaimers about anything they sell, stating they are not responsible for the misrepresentation of anything they sell in regards to condition, description of the item, and whether the item is an original or fake. It's up to the buyer to determine that prior to bidding on the item. If this guy would've realized what the gun was prior to bidding on it, he most likely would've informed the auction owners (he told me he'd been going to their auctions for over 15 years, and knew the owner personally), and I'm sure the auctioneer would've removed it from the auction immediately.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
That's the beauty of our recent lax laws regarding purchasing guns from private individuals.  The auction house has disclaimers about anything they sell, stating they are not responsible for the misrepresentation of anything they sell in regards to condition, description of the item, and whether the item is an original or fake.  It's up to the buyer to determine that prior to bidding on the item.  If this guy would've realized what the gun was prior to bidding on it, he most likely would've informed the auction owners (he told me he'd been going to their auctions for over 15 years, and knew the owner personally), and I'm sure the auctioneer would've removed it from the auction immediately.
You know an awful lot about this "guy" you just happened to be talking to. But anyway.
That disclaimer does NOT protect them from federal prosecution for selling an illegal firearm. Which they did. They took ownership of the firearm for the sale on their premises under the eyes of the law. They facilitated and completed the sale. The sale was done on their premises. Therefore they violated a SERIOUS federal law and committed a MAJOR felony. That "disclaimer" protects them from lawsuits from their customers. Nothing more. Once again, you defend the illegal sale of a fully automatic machine gun.
I edited my posted at the same time you must have quoted me. I misread something and so deleted a comment.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
LMFAO.  You'll do anything to keep from losing an argument. 
I am not the one that keeps inserting comments then backtracking on those comments. That would be you. I am also not the one that keeps changing the debate because the numbers aren't what you thought they would be. Each time you have asked for something I have presented it.
 

aggiealum

Member

You know an awful lot about this "guy" you just happened to be talking to. But anyway.
That disclaimer does NOT protect them from federal prosecution for selling an illegal firearm. Which they did. They took ownership of the firearm for the sale on their premises under the eyes of the law. They facilitated and completed the sale. The sale was done on their premises. Therefore they violated a SERIOUS federal law and committed a MAJOR felony. That "disclaimer" protects them from lawsuits from their customers. Nothing more. Once again, you defend the illegal sale of a fully automatic machine gun.
I edited my posted at the same time you must have quoted me. I misread something and so deleted a comment.
They didn't take ownership of anything. I've had them sell antiques I had in the past. You have the option of setting reserves on anything you want to sell. If it doesn't meet the reserve price, you get the item back and pay a seller's premium. If you don't set a reserve, it sells for whatever the highest bid goes for and they pay you that amount minus the seller's premium. At no time do they take the ownership of anything they sell. They go by the descriptions that are given to them, or in the case of guns, whatever manufacturer information is on it. Since they are not experts on firearms, I doubt they bother to research the validity of the gun, and whether it's legal or not. Unless you Are a gun expert, you probably wouldn't know the difference unless you took it apart or checked the serial numbers. IT WAS. a GUN FROM A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL. THE GUY WHO WAS FAMILIAR THE GUN DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE WHAT HE HAD UNTIL HE GOT IT HOME. You think some auctioneer who specializes in antiques would? I've been to auto auctions where it was later found that a car was stolen, and the VIN was changed prior to it being sold. So was that auctioneer breaking the law for selling a stolen car he didn't realize was stolen?
Your pious attitude is a load of crap. I can see it now. If you were in the same situation, I 'M SURE you'd be on the phone calling the FBI as a "concerned citizen" about an auctioneer you've known for years selling illegal guns. Problem is, you wouldn't have known about the gun until you got it home. So YOU would be breaking the law for buying an illegal weapon before insuring it was legal in the first place. I could hand you a pre-85 Colt AR-15 and I GUARANTEE you couldn't tell it was a full auto from the outside. If you bought one of those at an auction like this, what would YOU do?
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
You are correct. I erred when I used the word ownership. They took Possession since the auction was done on their premises. had it been down at the home of the estate then they do not take possession.. Therefore under ATF law are held responsible. Feel free to look it up.
I will address the rest later when I am home.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
As to your colt ar15 full auto comment. Yes i could tell it was a full auto just by the outside. If it was a legalfull auto it would be stamped machine gun. Even if it was not stamped it would have an extra sear pin in the lower receiver that is painfully obvious. The selector switch would also move to a third setting. The third setting if done legally would be stamped auto. If illegal it would still move to the third setting. All noticeable without openning the gun. All characteristics not found on semi auto ar15s.
So much for your guarantee.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
Oh. And yes i would turn anyone in For selling illegal guns. Gun ownership and laws are something i take seriously. All of mine are registered. The two i bought privately i made sure an ffl transfer was done to protect my own self. One of them was from my father in law even. He bought it from a private seller years ago and never had it registered. He wasnt concerned about it. But i want to make sure my equipment is legit. Dont need my children see their father go to jail for be stupid and blindly trusting.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
This is just sad. He calls for stricter gun laws and then this happens.
State Sen. Leland Yee indicted on arms trafficking, corruption charges
By Howard Mintz, Josh Richman and Jessica Calefati
Staff writers
Posted: 03/26/2014 08:49:02 PM PDT79 Comments | Updated: about 3 hours ago
‹›
SAN FRANCISCO -- Known for navigating the state Capitol's backrooms and this city's complicated political landscape, state Sen. Leland Yee now is accused of consorting with notorious felons, accepting money for his cash-strapped political campaigns in exchange for favors and promising undercover FBI agents he could deliver connections to international gun runners.
In a stunning development that almost certainly torpedoes Yee's quest for statewide office, the San Francisco Democrat wound up glum and disoriented in a federal courtroom Wednesday. The politician who introduced anti-gun-violence legislation is now charged with trafficking in firearms and public corruption in an FBI undercover operation that could land him in prison for years.
Democratic leaders in Sacramento, already stung by another recent federal corruption case, exhorted Yee to immediately step down. Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, called the allegations against Yee "shocking" and "surreal."
"Senator Yee should leave the Senate and leave it now," he said.
With scenes resembling the recent movie blockbuster "American Hustle," Yee is depicted in a startling, 137-page FBI affidavit of repeatedly offering to broker illegal firearms sales in exchange for campaign contributions. He allegedly took part in dealmaking meetings with undercover agents, often arranged by San Francisco political consultant Keith Jackson, a close associate among two dozen figures charged in the case.
Yee is linked to a host of wrongdoing to pad his political warchest, charged with seven felonies in a case with two dozen defendants accused of everything from money laundering to murder-for-hire. The defendants include Raymond "Shrimp Boy" Chow, a reputed ringleader of a Chinese syndicate federal investigators have been trying to crack since the late 1980s.
A federal magistrate judge released Yee on $500,000 bond, and he brushed past a swarm of reporters and left the courthouse in a dark blue BMW. Paul DeMeester, Yee's lawyer, said he was encouraged the senator was released and added: "The future will hold a lot of work."
The government's case will no doubt be challenged as the case unfolds. It rests largely on the FBI's accounts of Yee's meetings with undercover agents, which include alleged attempts to improperly land cash for his current secretary of state campaign.
But as recently as last month, Yee was engaged in the secretive meetings, at one point telling an undercover operative with whom he was trying to cut an arms deal that he was ready to cash in on his connections in Asia if he lost his current bid to become secretary of state, according to court papers.
Yee, who once championed a California law that would have outlawed violent video games, told undercover operatives that he had ties to an international arms dealer with connections as far-flung as Russia, during one meeting saying: "Do I think we can make some money? I think we can make some money," according to the FBI affidavit.
The charges surfaced during a whirlwind day of law enforcement raids around the Bay Area, where Yee was arrested early in the morning at home and Chow was hauled from bed by federal agents. In all, the criminal complaint unsealed Wednesday charges 26 people -- including Yee and Chow -- with crimes including firearms trafficking, money laundering, murder-for-hire, drug distribution, trafficking in contraband cigarettes and "honest services" fraud. That last charge is the centerpiece of the case against Yee and Jackson and effectively alleges they attempted to secure political donations in exchange for their help, including arranging the firearms deals. But federal agents never culminated the arms deals through Yee, though they did give him cash, the affidavit says.
Yee is charged with conspiracy to traffic in firearms without a license and to illegally import firearms, and six counts of scheming to defraud citizens of honest services. Each corruption count is punishable by up to 20 years in federal prison and a fine of up to $250,000, while the gun-trafficking count is punishable by up to five years and $250,000.
The charges are particularly shocking given that Yee has been among the state Senate's most outspoken advocates both of gun control and of good-government initiatives.
"I'm just astonished," said Corey Cook, director of the University of San Francisco's Leo T. McCarthy Center for Public Service and the Common Good. "Political corruption is one thing, but this is a whole other level."
Jackson, a former school-board president, allegedly was the link between Yee and undercover agents, as well as Chow, who federal prosecutors say is the current "Dragonhead," or leader, of the San Francisco-based Ghee Kung Tong organization, spelled in court documents as Chee Kung Tong.
Chow introduced an undercover agent who had infiltrated his organization to Jackson. With his son, Brandon Jackson, and another man, Marlon Sullivan, Keith Jackson allegedly sold the agent guns and bulletproof vests. The Jacksons and Sullivan also allegedly conspired in a murder-for-hire scheme requested by the undercover agent, as well as other crimes, including sale of stolen credit cards and purchase of cocaine. There is no link in the FBI document between Yee and the murder-for-hire scheme.
An FBI affidavit says Keith Jackson last August told one of the undercover agents that Yee was "associated with a person who was an international arms dealer who was shipping large stockpiles of weapons into a foreign country." At later meetings in August and December, Jackson said Yee had agreed to help set up an arms deal; the agent first gave Jackson $1,000 cash for his help and later cut a $5,000 check from a bogus company to Yee's campaign.
At one meeting, agents pressed Yee and Jackson for shoulder-fired weapons or missiles, the affidavit says; Yee asked whether he wanted automatic weapons, and the agent confirmed he did -- about $500,000 to $2.5 million worth. Yee told the agent "he saw their relationship as tremendously beneficial," the affidavit says, adding he wanted the agent and Jackson to make all the money because he didn't want to go to jail. The agent replied he would pay Yee and Jackson hundreds of thousands of dollars over time and more immediately would pay $100,000 for the first arms deal. "Senator Yee said 'All right, take care.' The meeting ended."
But during one meeting, Yee appeared spooked by the federal indictment of state Sen. Ronald Calderon; the two shared a desk on the Senate floor. Yee, the affidavit alleges, discussed specific locations in the Philippines and Florida that might be ideal for moving the guns, which he said would include M-16-type automatic rifles.
Yee, Jackson and Wilson Lim and the agent met again later; Yee said the arms deal wouldn't be done until after this year's elections. "Senator Yee explained, 'Once things start to move, it's going to attract attention. We just got to be extra-extra careful,'" the affidavit says.
Finally, they all met March 14, where they discussed how they would break up the undercover agent's money into legitimate campaign donations. The agent told Yee he was prepared to give Yee $6,800 cash and a list of weapons he wanted; Yee replied "he would take the cash and have one of his children write out a check."
Yee is the state's third Democratic legislator recently targeted in corruption allegations. In February, state Sen. Ron Calderon, D-Montebello, surrendered to authorities after being indicted on bribery charges. In January, state Sen. Roderick Wright, D-Inglewood, was convicted of voter fraud and perjury stemming from a 2010 indictment.
Staff writers Thomas Peele, Robert Salonga, Mark Gomez and Erin Ivie contributed to this report
 

aggiealum

Member
Here's an interesting "whose in the right" when it comes to gun rights. Here in Texas, it's legal to walk down the street with a long rifle in the open, as long as it's unloaded. There was this 19 year old kid in some San Antonio neighborhood that decided to go walking down the street in the middle of the night with this rifle slung over his shoulder. Concerned neighbors didn't know who he was, or what his intentions were walking around in the dark with a rifle slung over his shoulder, so they called the cops. When the cops arrived, they approached the person and asked him what he was doing. He said he was just exercising his 2nd Amendment rights and abiding by the state law carrying his rifle. The officer asked him if it was loaded, and he said yes. One officer told him he respected his rights, but due to the nature of what he was doing, the officer was concerned some other neighbor may come out and confront him with a gun, and someone could possibly be shot. The officer then said he would be happy to escort the person back to his home to insure he got home safe. At that time, another officer asked him whether the gun was loaded. When he said yes again, the officer said he was violating the ordinance for having it loaded, and told the individual he was going to take the firearm off his shoulder. When the individual refused to drop the weapon and continued stating he was doing nothing wrong, a struggle ensued, and the officer tased him and arrested him on the spot. Now some redneck leader of a group called Open Carry Texas is demanding an apology from the police department, and is going to hold some rally in front of a local police station defending this guy's actions.
So whose in the right? Should the cops just let the guy go on his merry way, or should the person have complied to the officer's orders and relinquish the gun for violating the ordinance, and the cops had every right to arrest him?
 

2quills

Well-Known Member

So whose in the right? Should the cops just let the guy go on his merry way, or should the person have complied to the officer's orders and relinquish the gun for violating the ordinance, and the cops had every right to arrest him?
The officers should have explained that he was violating the local ordinance. Clearly the kid didn't realize that since he claimed over and over that he wasn't violating any laws. It wasn't until the second cop showed up, realized the loaded gun was a no no in the city so they took him down right then and there. They basically told him it was a violation as they jumped him. Sucks for the kid but what do you expect? Ignorance is no excuse. He'll know better next time.
 

reefraff

Active Member
The cops did the right thing BUT it appears the cops are enforcing a local law that violate Texas state law. I suspect this might have been a setup to create a court case to have the local ordinance out.

Personally I think Cops have a hard enough time dealing with real scumbags, people don't need to be doing this crap.
 

aggiealum

Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Quills http:///t/397395/welcome-to-the-wild-wild/40#post_3542560
The officers should have explained that he was violating the local ordinance. Clearly the kid didn't realize that since he claimed over and over that he wasn't violating any laws. It wasn't until the second cop showed up, realized the loaded gun was a no no in the city so they took him down right then and there. They basically told him it was a violation as they jumped him. Sucks for the kid but what do you expect? Ignorance is no excuse. He'll know better next time.
Based on the article, the first officer did explain the ordinance. He didn't even question whether the gun was loaded or not, and told him he had the right to carry the rifle. He simply asked the guy to allow him to follow him back to his house just to insure there was no confrontation with one of his neighbors who may think he had some bad intentions for carrying a gun around in the middle of the night. As reef stated, I think this kid's entire intention was to get someone to call the cops just so he could "test the waters" regarding this specific carry law. Common sense dictates that there's no justifiable reason to go walking around your neighborhood at night with a gun on your shoulder simply because you can. I could see if he was taking the gun over to a friend's or relative's house to show it to them, clean it, or whatever reason, but he made no indication that was what he was doing. Even if he was, logic also dictates he should've been carrying it in a case just for the sake of not alarming any of his neighbors seeing a gun out in the open.
 

2quills

Well-Known Member
The kid recorded the whole conversation on his phone. It's on YouTube. Can't see much in the video but you can here the whole thing. The first cop did ask if the gun was loaded and the kid flat out told him yes at least twice. The first cop never said he was violating any laws. In fact, he told the kid several times he was not under arrest and was free to go home. He was just going to follow him home to make sure he made it safe. The kid wasn't being combative but I agree he was probably up to something. A 19 year old walking the streets with a ruffle is a bad idea. Especially in a state where there is a gun in pretty much every house with a person who's not afraid to use it to defend their property.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
I actually dislike these types of actions. I do carry a revolver on me. In New mexico it is legal to conceal carry in my car, business, and home. But I don't do it Blatantly. We had a guy carry his AR15 into the capital building here just because he could. made a you tube video of it. .  I could see if he was taking the gun over to a friend's or relative's house to show it to them, clean it, or whatever reason, but he made no indication that was what he was doing. 
Gun Cleaning parties! Why hadn't I thought of that?
 

2quills

Well-Known Member
I nominate your post for the award of silliest post of the year.
I don't know, the whole "I'm closer to the border than you are and we don't deal with the cartels" was a doozy as well.
I think this last one puts him in the running for the bronze, silver and gold all in the same thread.
 
Top