MadMonkey wrote:Sheesh, less than 1k rounds per gun? Guy is WAY underprepared.
![I Agree :iagree:](./images/smilies/iagree.gif)
MadMonkey wrote:Sheesh, less than 1k rounds per gun? Guy is WAY underprepared.
Yyep!!! That was pretty much it. So the point remains, a guy busted for a heinous crime, such as child porn, will gain extra attention when he has a stockpile of weapons and ammunition. Just as a drug dealer with possession of same cache would gain extra attention. This story in no way reflects upon us legitimate gun owners.Lambda Force wrote:For the record, here was the original blog post before it was edited.MadMonkey wrote:Ah, I didn't read the story originally (internet is slow here and I was going off what I read in the thread). Sorry.A child pornography raid by Harris County sheriff’s deputies Wednesday afternoon escalated to include a massive cache of weapons and literature that drew the attention of federal anti-terrorism agents.
In addition to porn, authorities discovered 65 weapons and 50,000 rounds of ammunition in the home in the 16800 block of Gaelic Lane, KHOU-TV reports on its website. James Lee Kong, 26, faces five counts of child porn.Sheriff’s investigators said Kong had recently traveled to Afghanistan, Cambodia and Thailand.FBI sources tell KHOU that the suspect literature appeared to have no connection to terrorism.
LOL.... I don't know about that. In a zombie apocalypse, carrying all that ammo in your "bug out bag" might be a problem. If your plan is to stay in your home and attempt to stage a defense from there, one bottle filled with gasoline and your done for.Lambda Force wrote:MadMonkey wrote:Sheesh, less than 1k rounds per gun? Guy is WAY under prepared.
Lambda Force wrote:It said they found porn but it didn't say they find child porn or other illegal porn.
It said they found guns but it didn't say they find machineguns or other illegal guns.
It said they found "suspect literature" but it didn't say any of the literature was illegal.
Some of us think it's relevant whether he actually had child porn or a copy of Playboy. Some of you maybe don't. Some people may even think there's a difference between pictures of little children and pictures a teenager took of herself and posted online without a copy of her birth certificate showing her age. Or a photo taken two days from now if one of the women getting beads is 17 but looks 20.
According to what I read, under the current laws, if she looks 18 and says she's 18, that's not a defense if it's still a week before her 18th birtday. Kind of like a gun where the barrel is 1/8 inch too short because your tape measure is inaccurate.
If she's not responsible for her own body then she's nowhere near responsible enough to operate a motor vehicle that could kill other people.speedsix wrote:...if it were YOUR 17-year-old daughter who'd been used by a 25+year-old man, left pregnant, diseased, or broken-hearted...might you feel differently???
bayouhazard wrote:Blah blah blah yourself.
bayouhazard wrote:You know. If my daughter had a fake ID and regularly went out to bars and picked up strange men and one of those men knocked her up. Well. Maybe I would be pointing fingers too.
I probably wouldn't want to blame my little girl and it would be uncomfortable to ask myself what about the way she was raised contributed to her behavior. It must be someone else to blame. I sure wouldn't want people asking why I wasn't supervising my child and keeping them out of bars and strange beds.
I know! I'll blame the men she lied to. They should have known she was lying. And the bartender should have known the ID was fake. And the men were unreasonable to assume a woman drinking in a bar was 21...at least..and...and...
03Lightningrocks wrote:bayouhazard wrote:Blah blah blah yourself.
Yeah... I liked that. This topic brings out too many extreme emotions... I think I am going to step off. The child predator topic enrages me.bayouhazard wrote:03Lightningrocks wrote:bayouhazard wrote:Blah blah blah yourself.
speedsix wrote: ...like it or not...the responsibility to know the age of the girl rests LEGALLY on the male...doesn't matter if she's a nice girl or like the one you described...so we need to quit making excuses why the "man" got locked up...or change the law...I have no sympathy for them...I managed to be responsible enough to leave the children(under 18) alone...so can the rest of 'em...