"Just Wondering" wrote in message news:FIzpy.164979$8u4....@fx39.iad...
On 1/25/2016 3:02 PM, Wayne wrote:
>
> "Just Wondering" wrote:
>
> On 1/24/2016 12:44 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/16-Year-Old-Found-With-Assault-Rifle-Under-Coat-in-Brooklyn-PD--365944151.html
>>
>> The 16-year-old was arrested and charged with criminal possession of a
>> weapon, criminal possession of a firearm and criminal possession of
>> stolen property.
>>
>> ==========================
>> "We're also going to charge him with criminal possession of a gun,
>> criminal possession of a rifle, criminal possession of an arm,
>> criminal possession of a sling, criminal possession of a bullet,
>> criminal possession of another bullet, criminal possession of yet
>> another bullet, criminal possession of a clip, criminal possession of
>> a magazine, criminal possession of a coat, criminal possession of a
>> nylon bag, and criminal possession of a strap," said the police
>> chief. "We oughta be able to make one of them stick."
>>
>
> # From the picture and story, it was this:
> #
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kel-Tec_SUB-2000
> # In other words, NOT an assault rifle.
>
> True. Assault rifles have been pretty much illegal for years.
> It might be an "assault weapon" if the state of NY has specifically
> defined it as one in NY.
> But, if legally bought, it won't be an "assault weapon" either.
>
# Basically, it's just a long-barreled pistol with a shoulder buttstock.
# So it wasn't an assault rifle or an "assault weapon". Those terms are
# just name calling by gun control harpies. But it WAS stolen. So there's
# no need to vilify the weapon, lock him up on the "possession of stolen
# property" charge.
Last I checked, there was a CA legal version of that gun. I don't recall
what the difference was, but perhaps it was a feature that stopped it from
being fired with the stock folded.
And you're right. The crime was not a function of what gun it was, and
there was no need to lie about what kind of gun it was. Well, for rational
people there was no need.