Vet Arrested in Wash DC for Possession... of Ammunition!

**Chuckiechan** · July 5th, 2012, 11:08 AM

MILLER: D.C. arrests vet for unregistered ammunition (part 1) - Washington Times

Obamatown wants to thank it's veterans... like they did this soldier!

**tony_j15** · July 5th, 2012, 11:37 AM

I missed the part where the President was directly responsible for DC gun law. Can you point that out to me?

**GroundZero3** · July 5th, 2012, 11:44 AM

DC has always been strict when it comes to guns before Obama came into term Chuckie, the rules have allowed been changed when it comes to registering guns last year (not that Obama had anything to do with that).

MILLER: Applying to register a gun in D.C. - Washington Times

I wonder what happened to the other guy the guard mentioned in the story and would there be an article if this was a civilian? I don't think it matters he is a veteran to be honest, the law applies to both active duty, civilian and retired. Granted bullets by themselves dont kill people, its a law in place and I believe this is considered a federal building. Is it silly? I think so because the worst those bullets could do is leave some red marks on a person. But hey the law is the law, maybe he should properly store his ammo when he is done at the range, any time I go shooting I always take my ammo out of my bag and keep it with the rest. *shrug*

**Chuckiechan** · July 5th, 2012, 12:32 PM

If Obama is so fond of executive orders and all, he can tell DC to back off and leave this guy alone. It was accidental and without malice. What's he going to do, throw bullets at people?

DC is administered by the US Congress. Obama, as the chief law enforcement officer, can ask congress to pass an immediate exemption. Or just tell them to back the f' off.

This is one "troop" who really needs his support.

**tony_j15** · July 5th, 2012, 12:59 PM

I missed the part where Obama was so fond of executive orders. Can you point out the part where he has issued drastically more than his predecessors?

And here's your answer:
Reagan: 47.5 per year.
Bush I: 41.25
Clinton: 45.375
Bush II: 36.25
Obama: 42 (through three years)

**Chuckiechan** · July 5th, 2012, 10:20 PM

I'm only suggesting he write one. We aren't keeping score here...

**Epidemic** · July 6th, 2012, 09:09 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckiechan

I'm only suggesting he write one. We aren't keeping score here...

I guess tony is so busy trying to keep score and protect his man that he does not care that this guy is getting screwed royally by a stupid law where no harm was intended nor was anyone ever put at risk.

**tony_j15** · July 6th, 2012, 12:57 PM

Apologies for the "score-keeping". However, when someone states that a President is "so fond of" executive orders, it implies that this President is somehow an exceptional case. All I did was point out that this was not the case.

Epi, I missed the part where I ever said Obama was "my man" or stated I ever voted for him. Care to point out that out for me?

I'm not saying the law isn't stupid. But that was never really the point of this thread. We all know the law is rather silly. But instead of dealing with that issue, Chuck turned this into one of his partisan, illogical rants about how this was all somehow Obama's fault. As such, he invited my responses.

**Chuckiechan** · July 6th, 2012, 02:21 PM

Tony, do you have any idea who administers Washington DC, which for your information is not a state.

Crack a book Tony...

**tony_j15** · July 6th, 2012, 02:31 PM

really? The District of Columbia is not a state?!?!?!

What won't I learn next...

Since '73, D.C. has had a Mayor and 13 member City Council that approves the budget and handles all affairs. Congress does hold supreme control and may over-turn law if it so chooses. The Executive and Judicial Branches have no direct control over the city.

**Epidemic** · July 6th, 2012, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by tony_j15

Epi, I missed the part where I ever said Obama was "my man" or stated I ever voted for him. Care to point out that out for me?

You may or may not have voted for him. But you defend him in virtually all cases that I can currently recall, so I think it is fair to conclude that he is your man.

If he is not then sorry for the misunderstanding.

**Theophylact** · July 6th, 2012, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by Epidemic

You may or may not have voted for him. But you defend him in virtually all cases that I can currently recall, so I think it is fair to conclude that he is your man.

You wouldn't even have to support Obama to defend him against the inane ravings of Chuckiechan. That is, if truth has any value to you.

**Epidemic** · July 6th, 2012, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by Theophylact

You wouldn't even have to support Obama to defend him against the inane ravings of Chuckiechan. That is, if truth has any value to you.

I will buy that but it seems that the defense goes way beyond just attacks by Chuckiechan.

**Theophylact** · July 6th, 2012, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by Epidemic

I will buy that but it seems that the defense goes way beyond just attacks by Chuckiechan.

Yeah, sometimes it's mad1.

**Epidemic** · July 6th, 2012, 03:29 PM

**Chuckiechan** · July 6th, 2012, 04:12 PM

How many of you agree with this person being arrested for possession of ammunition?

**tony_j15** · July 6th, 2012, 04:33 PM

I understand the arrest. I'm against the prosecution and the law, but I understand why it was enacted considering the rather atrocious crime rate that DC endured.

Originally Posted by Epidemic

You may or may not have voted for him. But you defend him in virtually all cases that I can currently recall, so I think it is fair to conclude that he is your man.

If he is not then sorry for the misunderstanding.

Eh, not trying to defend him on purpose. But "truth has a well known liberal bias". So it probably seems that way.

**Taxmancometh** · July 6th, 2012, 06:37 PM

Isn't funny that in the District Of Columbia where the constitution stands, where the right to bear arms is in plain sight you can't poses ammunition? What a infringement on our rights. Obama's Chicago land can go to hell too!

**GroundZero3** · July 7th, 2012, 01:06 AM

Uh the laws were in place behind Obama came into office, I really dont know what this has to do with him

**sharder8** · July 7th, 2012, 01:47 AM

Originally Posted by GroundZero3

Uh the laws were in place behind Obama came into office, I really dont know what this has to do with him

It really doesn't.

Fact is, the law has been in-place for a long time. The SCOTUS ruled down the weapons ban, but that didn't cover the ammo ban.

The guy was wrong, Vet or not . . . pay the fine and don't do it again.

Vet's have earned a lot of privileges, but breaking the law isn't one of them. (That's reserved for politicians.