Snowflakes points to a case where the police insist on testing a gun that the owner handed over after a traffic accident.
I think it is a waste of time and resources for the police to run a ballistics test on any firearm that happens to come into their possession, especially from situations that are not crime scenes.
From the article it seems to me that the police have a “policy” that is at odds with the law.
From the associated press Threats, jeers saturate angry health care debate. Clearly the AP feels that the level of rhetoric (and attending protests armed) is “hate” and goes on to raise concerns about armed protests inciting violence. The AP certainly isn’t on the side of gun rights but they do shape peoples opinions.
Open Carry at a protest where Obama is going to be. I am not sure how I feel about this one. It’s good that the police aren’t overreacting, but this has a lot of potential for going sideways in a hurry. A crackpot or a plant could create a lot of bad (worse) press.
Headline: “Gun Dealer Sold Guns to Various Shooters”
From the first sentence “An online weapons dealer who sold a gun or accessories…” (emphasis mine.)
And from reading the whole article I find the sales consisted of: A holster, some magazines, a mag loader and finally a .22-caliber handgun. Nowhere does it mention that to “buy a gun online” one is still going to have to do an FFL Transfer. I am not surprised they are anti-gun. I am surprised they do such a bad job of feigning balanced reporting.
Subscribe to 