Quote:
Originally Posted by pistolero1860
Just for the education of us all, would you mind listing all of the"multiple" firearms laws that Mr. Stanley broke?
- Not unsafe storage of a restricted weapon - that was unsubstantiated.
- Unsafe storage of an unrestricted firearm was substantiated.
But what other firearms laws were broken?
What other firearms laws has he been charged under?
Also, stating that Mr. Stanley actually profited from the donations received sounds like you have a distinct prejudice against a man receiving a fair trial without being financially destroyed.
|
Unsubstantiated? They decided not to pursue charges for one reason or another, I saw one brief comment in an article saying due to lack of evidence.
I am perhaps jumping to a conclusion that he improperly stored restricted firearms but things point to that being the case. I also doubt the Tokarev was stored properly out in his shed.
One of the other laws he admitted to breaking(but was never charged for) is improperly using that Tokarev, a restricted firearm, to chase off coyotes. What is the chances of him storing it properly if he uses it improperly and doesn't store any of his other firearms properly?
Breaking the law, being charged for breaking the law and being found guilty of breaking the law are 3 very different things. Stanley clearly broke multiple laws and had a severe disregard for the proper storage of firearms(look at the photos, firearms laying around the house with ammo beside them etc).
I have no issue with Stanley receiving the support he did, instances like what happened at his farm need to stop and he was in a tough place. If there truly was a mysterious 1 in millions chance hang fire that caused this whole issue I feel very sorry for the guy.
I am just saying considering everything that happened he did very well. It is not very often that you can admit to accidentally killing a man and breaking multiple firearm related laws and walk away with only one minimal firearms related charge and a bunch of financial support.