http://adage.com/article?article_id=146906
Those guns don't look CA legal to me...and they weren't props.
Awesome commercial though.
Those guns don't look CA legal to me...and they weren't props.
Awesome commercial though.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Are Kobe Bryant and Jimmy Kimmel Felons?
- Thread starter glide
- Start date
bfm
NES Member
Arnold signed a law while he was Gov in CA allowing fellons to handle firearms for the purpose of filming. Turns out someone finally asked hey, even with blanks aren't those real guns, and isn't it illegal in CA for a convicted fellon to even handle an empty firearm? Could have shut Hollywood down.
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,821
This has been discussed to death. Yes, technically hollywood actors like gibson and others are FIP when they film scenes like this but the ATF won't charge them ever. It isn't worth the hassle and let face it, they aren't a danger given the circumstances.
And frankly, if the ATF were to file charges, it would send the wrong message to the public. That being that people who are FIP are not allowed to even possess fake guns. Wanna see the result of that message, look to Australia and England. 'nuff said.
And frankly, if the ATF were to file charges, it would send the wrong message to the public. That being that people who are FIP are not allowed to even possess fake guns. Wanna see the result of that message, look to Australia and England. 'nuff said.
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,821
But CA has it's own version of the federal law. It helps to have state versions of things like that so you don't have to beg the ATF to prosecute someone.
FIP??? Felons in Practice??? Not familiar with the acronym.
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,821
Felon in possession. Yeah, my use of that acronym is going to cause issues one of these days.
Well... the "wrong message" being, of course, that they don't want to send is that the law is completely f**king stupid. The ATF and others want to keep that law around as long as possible, so they can use it opportunistically. They won't ever charge anyone prominent with it because that would draw negative attention to the idiocy of many federal gun laws.
-Mike
The question is, could you use the fact that the ATF refuses to prosecute when there is overwhelming evidence as part of a defense?
Possession is the P you're looking for.
Edit: doh, forgot that I opened this tab a while ago.
The most obvious example of Hollywood Felon in Possession is probably Mark Wahlberg. I'm curious what would happen if some US Attorney decided to make a point.
Edit: doh, forgot that I opened this tab a while ago.
The most obvious example of Hollywood Felon in Possession is probably Mark Wahlberg. I'm curious what would happen if some US Attorney decided to make a point.
Last edited:
No. "Prosecutorial sloth" or selective enforcement, is not a defense. The feds would never want to be forced to admit that they've created so many inadvertent felons, that if they actually attempted to prosecute every individual that broke some obscure federal law, the federal prisons would be full and the fed courts would be backed up for years. They pick and choose cases based on whatever will get them the best PR score, or whatever is the most blatant offense. Even thugs and gangbangers frequently referred to the feds never get prosecuted unless the guy has already been through the local system like 5 times already.
-Mike
You've hit on one of the major problems with government these days. Laws are created not with the idea of universal application but to be used like tools. If one extension doesn't quite get you there, pick another, or stack them with a wobble adaptor and a deep socket.
You've heard of "pardons",... the president isnt the only one handing them out for contributions. Governor's do too!! ![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
I believe Attys can file papers for pardons too,... still. Not just sealed records for otherwise unpermited permits <shrug>
I believe Attys can file papers for pardons too,... still. Not just sealed records for otherwise unpermited permits <shrug>
Last edited:
AZ recently passed its own version of a federal law.
AG Eric Holder quickly filed a lawsuit that attempts to get the AZ law declared unconstitutional.
If AZ/SB1070 is struck down on federal supremacy clause grounds, than I'd say all state gun control laws are soon to be thrown out.
[I wish <g>]
Similar threads
