Jump to content
Sniper

Woo Hoo.... Murphy Grabs His First Felon With a Large Capacity ClipaZine

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, pjd832 said:

The courier post link said 12 rounds fired 3 remained in magazine, but call it a 30 rnd magazine clip charge....

 

Guess that means they'll be changing from 9 counts of aggravated assault to 12 counts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said he was an upstanding law-abiding citizen I don’t know the guy all I did was to read the linked article and did the math 12 fired three in a magazine equals 15 why would someone only put 15 rounds into a 30 round magazine and why 15 and not 13 or 17 just saying. 

Up until last month how many of you had 15/30 mags?...while some may have had a visible pop rivet/epoxy .... I’ve seen some that were very inconspicuously done. And is it unreasonable to think that not EVERY officer is a gun guy and doesn’t see a 30 round mag body and just call it a 30 incorrectly? 

As an example I went to all 3 days of the joke of the “gun buyback” in Baltimore to claim my chunk of bloomturds money and can confirm  the self announced “armorer” handling/clearing/catagorizing the turn ins to the person writing the vouchers was clearly not a “gun gun”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, pjd832 said:

I never said he was an upstanding law-abiding citizen I don’t know the guy all I did was to read the linked article and did the math 12 fired three in a magazine equals 15 why would someone only put 15 rounds into a 30 round magazine and why 15 and not 13 or 17 just saying. 

Up until last month how many of you had 15/30 mags?...while some may have had a visible pop rivet/epoxy .... I’ve seen some that were very inconspicuously done. And is it unreasonable to think that not EVERY officer is a gun guy and doesn’t see a 30 round mag body and just call it a 30 incorrectly? 

As an example I went to all 3 days of the joke of the “gun buyback” in Baltimore to claim my chunk of bloomturds money and can confirm  the self announced “armorer” handling/clearing/catagorizing the turn ins to the person writing the vouchers was clearly not a “gun gun”

I think he had a 15/30 also. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jm1827 said:

And most importantly, what will they plea this down to?

He left casings scattered on the driveway, so the only charge will be littering.   This assumes he has an extensive criminal record.  

If by chance he’s a pillar of the community and this was his first offense, the state will try to put him away for 15 years. 

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, 10X said:

He left casings scattered on the driveway, so the only charge will be littering.   This assumes he has an extensive criminal record.  

If by chance he’s a pillar of the community and this was his first offense, the state will try to put him away for 15 years. 

Sad true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, pjd832 said:

I never said he was an upstanding law-abiding citizen I don’t know the guy all I did was to read the linked article and did the math 12 fired three in a magazine equals 15 why would someone only put 15 rounds into a 30 round magazine and why 15 and not 13 or 17 just saying. 

We know that the media will always get it wrong, but at the end of the day, if it was a 30 or a 15/30, they're BOTH illegal, high capacity mags now, so the number of rounds is moot.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Sniper said:

We know that the media will always get it wrong, but at the end of the day, if it was a 30 or a 15/30, they're BOTH illegal, high capacity mags now, so the number of rounds is moot.

 

The point I was making was ....As said multiple times on this board, that probability was high of an average nj gun owner that bought a compliant firearm/magazine prior to this bs law going into effect, only shoots occasionally and isn’t an avid forum/gun club/friends with those that stay on top of the political bs getting popped for a magazine they bought legally last month and are now a felon was high.

While this guy is not the posterboy for average joe gun owner, has way more issues than just the mag, but it is quite possible that despite his looks he could be an actual fpid holding legal gun owner that had no idea of the change, and just made some really bad decisions in the heat of the moment that will change his life for ever. 

Or he’s a thug pos that deserves everything he’s about to get...lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, pjd832 said:

Up until last month how many of you had 15/30 mags?.

Being a bit new to the AR15 world, I was never in a position to buy the 30 round ones. 15 was the limit at the time, so when I began shopping for mags I only got the ones that were clearly not 30s. I bought 10 and 15 round mags that you could tell were those sizes specifically, so it was easy to tell, both for my own quick and easy reference AND to minimize hassles from others on the matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, njJoniGuy said:

I vote for Number 2

While that may very well be true, how can everyone be so blinded by hate for his appearance that they are missing the real point I was making. This guy could very well have legally bought a rifle with A 15/30 mag included which was legal at the time, very popular and the majority here owned them prior...why? because it “looks cool” or “the rifle doesn’t “look right” with a 15 round (10 now) length magazine. I’m sure there are plenty on this forum that have modified or purchased 10/30 magazines now.

Then because he doesn’t spend 6 hours a day on a forum going back and forth with gun owning liberals about politics or which is the best military clone rifle to buy/build, he didn’t know about the bs legislation and got caught in the Murphy mag law.

How many gun owners in nj?....how many members on this forum?……how many gun owners are sitting unknowingly on felony possession charges they will find out the hard way about? 

How many of those “perfect all American, minivan driving, soccer dads”  who  aren’t on forums etc. that are busy with their real lives, work, families, kids, etc, go to the nj.gov site, or read through 2C looking for new additionseveryday?  I’d be willing to wager not a lot to none. 

And perhaps they previously lived in a state where it was legal to defend yourself, or your family outside the home, including protecting property, so they use that firearm with a 15 round mag outside of NJ’s bs “criminals are the victims, and the victim is the criminal” laws, and end up with the same magazine charge. Will everoyone on here label him a criminal too?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/3/2019 at 10:34 PM, father-of-three said:

I am pretty sure that there are very few states  if any (Pennsylvania also not included!) where one can lawfully discharge a firearm at a fleeing /retreating bad guy.

I am curious if the rifle really met the definition of a so called "assault rifle" given the numerous charges against him.

Texas. At night. If someone's stolen your property. With noted caveats of course

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-9-42.html

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, sota said:

Texas. At night. If someone's stolen your property. With noted caveats of course

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-9-42.html

 

Ah ha! But this wasn’t theft. It was a “ dispute”. Fleeing individual does not present a threat to your life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could have been a buglary, home invasion, etc but in the article was listed as “dispute” clearly looks like he was roughed up. Now even IF any of that were the case in NJ we all know he was wrong in his actions. 

However the point is he may be a victim of the Murphy mag law through their quietly (to the majority of non forum/gun club etc gun owners) passing the law. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, pjd832 said:

It could have been a buglary, home invasion, etc but in the article was listed as “dispute” clearly looks like he was roughed up. Now even IF any of that were the case in NJ we all know he was wrong in his actions. 

However the point is he may be a victim of the Murphy mag law through their quietly (to the majority of non forum/gun club etc gun owners) passing the law. 

Shooting them to make them stop or flea ; good.

Shooting whilst fleeing; not good.

Even if you have “ stand your ground laws”.

But to your point, his possible ignorance of the new unconstitutional mag burden is the least of his worries.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pjd832 said:

I understand and stated that previously......simply pointing out theres one that probably had no clue about the mag reduction. 

He seems to have no clue that shooting houses and cars are also illegal. The mag situation is the least of his worries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight, this guy had a rifle that he didn't lawfully own, and popped off some .223 after some guys who had been beating him up (pretty badly by the look of it). So it's improperly practiced self-defense after the fact with improperly procured firearms... I guess he deserves a slap on the wrist at least, but as said, if he had no record and was an upstanding citizen (I'll pretend to give him the benefit of doubt here), he'll be imprisoned for years. Of course if he was a banger, he'll just get probation and time served.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, runcibleman said:

So let me get this straight, this guy had a rifle that he didn't lawfully own, and popped off some .223 after some guys who had been beating him up (pretty badly by the look of it). So it's improperly practiced self-defense after the fact with improperly procured firearms... I guess he deserves a slap on the wrist at least, but as said, if he had no record and was an upstanding citizen (I'll pretend to give him the benefit of doubt here), he'll be imprisoned for years. Of course if he was a banger, he'll just get probation and time served.

Where in that article did it say he did t lawfully own the rifle?.....it’s funny how judgemental you guys are and bury someone from an article and a picture....shooting at fleeing vehicle ...absolute stupidity!  

But from a picture he’s a gangbanger/illegal weapon possession/cartel drug dealer.....lol I work with guys that look “scary” but hold ts/sci clearances, cant always judge books by the covers...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, pjd832 said:

Where in that article did it say he did t lawfully own the rifle?.....it’s funny how judgemental you guys are and bury someone from an article and a picture....shooting at fleeing vehicle ...absolute stupidity!  

But from a picture he’s a gangbanger/illegal weapon possession/cartel drug dealer.....lol I work with guys that look “scary” but hold ts/sci clearances, cant always judge books by the covers...

You're right, he doesn't look at all scary. But he does look like the sort (and race has nothing to do with it, so please don't bring that red herring into it) who has made bad decisions on a semi-regular basis before. Odds are he isn't an upstanding citizen. I could be absolutely wrong, but I am confident that I am right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, runcibleman said:

You're right, he doesn't look at all scary. But he does look like the sort (and race has nothing to do with it, so please don't bring that red herring into it) who has made bad decisions on a semi-regular basis before. Odds are he isn't an upstanding citizen. I could be absolutely wrong, but I am confident that I am right.

I never mentioned race ......I was referring to full sleeves, beards, etc .... ones that don’t look like upstanding citizens. I never said he was an upstanding guy or in the right for his actions...... simply  HE MAY NOT HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THE NEW MAG LAW.....not that he should be let of on anything that he is guilty of. 

And if you spend enough time in gun shops in some areas outside of nj where you don’t have all the fpid/permit bs that discourages a lot of people from even bothering .....you will see people that look like him or worse, that based solely on appearance I’ve thought to myself there’s no way that person isn’t prohibited, yet they fill out the 4473 pass and walk out the door with their new purchase. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, pjd832 said:

I was referring to full sleeves, beards, etc .... ones that don’t look like upstanding citizens.

And that's usually because they're not. In New York City, that usually means that they are either people of loose morals and overly insecure personalities with compulsive spending habits (aka. hipster losers), in the countryside that means that they are insecure people who don't really care down to hold down a job where you have to deal with people. Having full sleeves is never going to make anyone look trustworthy or respectable, because it's not. It was always a sign of deviancy and of disliking common social mores and societal conventions, and just because a great many sad lower upper middle class kids and 40-something soccer moms have full sleeves now doesn't mean that they are free of that stigma, they are just too marking themselves as the sad losers that they are. Sure, you can still be a perfectly nice person and all that, but you'll always send people the first impression of "I'm a sack of shit who hates society". And to quote the Joker: "We live in a society."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, runcibleman said:

And that's usually because they're not. In New York City, that usually means that they are either people of loose morals and overly insecure personalities with compulsive spending habits (aka. hipster losers), in the countryside that means that they are insecure people who don't really care down to hold down a job where you have to deal with people. Having full sleeves is never going to make anyone look trustworthy or respectable, because it's not. It was always a sign of deviancy and of disliking common social mores and societal conventions, and just because a great many sad lower upper middle class kids and 40-something soccer moms have full sleeves now doesn't mean that they are free of that stigma, they are just too marking themselves as the sad losers that they are. Sure, you can still be a perfectly nice person and all that, but you'll always send people the first impression of "I'm a sack of shit who hates society". And to quote the Joker: "We live in a society."

Lol ...wow...:facepalm: not going to even bother to respond to that. lol

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/3/2019 at 5:52 PM, Sniper said:

Ha Ha

Here's their first report on Facebook, note what they called the "magazine" in it. It looks like they were caught, then went back and corrected it. The corrected version was the one I posted above.

LkDNDtp.jpg

So if he has a violent criminal past does he get life in prison for all those charges or does he get probation? Or perhaps the standard capacity clipozine that turns an ordinary sporting rifle into the equivalent of a nuclear cluster bomb negate the bail reform program which aims to keep as many criminals on the street as possible. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2019 at 8:46 AM, bzer1 said:

So if he has a violent criminal past does he get life in prison for all those charges or does he get probation? Or perhaps the standard capacity clipozine that turns an ordinary sporting rifle into the equivalent of a nuclear cluster bomb negate the bail reform program which aims to keep as many criminals on the street as possible. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Correct, if he’s a scumbag and all the charges are valid he will be out in 6 months or less, if it’s clown po-dunk police incorrectly charging(aside from the discharging outside/at a fleeing vehicle/persons)he will do 5 yrs min lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pjd832 said:

Correct, if he’s scumbag and all the charges are valid he will be out in 6 months or less, if it’s clown po-dunk police incorrectly charging(aside from the discharging outside/at a fleeing vehicle/persons)he will do 5 yrs min lol

And don’t forget that if he’s a scumbag we’ll be paying for his lawyer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"This is a ghost gun," de Leon begins, holding an unloaded rifle in his hands. "This right here has the ability with a .30-caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second. Thirty magazine clip in half a second."

^^The bar to which all other gun gaffes are held. :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...