Witaschek guilty of possessing muzzleloader bullets in DC

[Cedar Park Dad]

Judge was correct. Those are bullets. If bullets are illegal then those would be illegal.
if however CARTRIDGES are whats illegal, then those are not cartridges and are not illegal.

Sounds like he had a bad lawyer.

[VMI77]

So, pieces of metal, if "incorrectly shaped," are illegal in DC. So then, is a bullet mold and a bar of lead illegal? In the capitol of what used to be the United States of America, you can go to prison for having pieces of metal shaped in a particular way. And there are actually people who presumably are not entirely insane, but clearly evil, who will use their education and resources solely to ruin the lives of law abiding productive citizens, and judges insane enough to endorse their evil behavior. What a sewer parts of this country have become.

[VMI77]

Judge was correct. Those are bullets. If bullets are illegal then those would be illegal.
if however CARTRIDGES are whats illegal, then those are not cartridges and are not illegal.

Sounds like he had a bad lawyer.

No he was just a corrupt or stupid judge. He himself asked how the bullets could be illegal when the firearm that shoots them is legal. Obviously the law was not clear since it took four prosecuting attorneys and a judge four hours to decide the issue. And that means the judge rendered an insane verdict to save face for the prosecution not to do justice.

[txcharvel]

This is our nation's capital...makes me sick

[misterlarry]

The Judge and Prosecution (persecution) Team should be the ones who are in jail.

[Cedar Park Dad]

So, pieces of metal, if "incorrectly shaped," are illegal in DC. So then, is a bullet mold and a bar of lead illegal? In the capitol of what used to be the United States of America, you can go to prison for having pieces of metal shaped in a particular way. And there are actually people who presumably are not entirely insane, but clearly evil, who will use their education and resources solely to ruin the lives of law abiding productive citizens, and judges insane enough to endorse their evil behavior. What a sewer parts of this country have become.

Without looking up the actual law, I'm betting its cartridges that are illegal, not bullets, and the judge is wrong (hence the bad lawyer comment).

[Cedar Park Dad]

Judge was correct. Those are bullets. If bullets are illegal then those would be illegal.
if however CARTRIDGES are whats illegal, then those are not cartridges and are not illegal.

Sounds like he had a bad lawyer.

No he was just a corrupt or stupid judge. He himself asked how the bullets could be illegal when the firearm that shoots them is legal. Obviously the law was not clear since it took four prosecuting attorneys and a judge four hours to decide the issue. And that means the judge rendered an insane verdict to save face for the prosecution not to do justice.

Or it means the law is badly written that permits musketry but is overbroad enough to include actual bullets (which may have been its real intent).
Don't assume evil intent when ignorance will do (again the fault of the lawyer).

[mojo84]

It all started because of a single shotgun shell. Then they ended up with this boagus conviction as they were determined to convict him of something. This is another reason I have trouble always trusting the legal system.

[The Annoyed Man]

Judge was correct. Those are bullets. If bullets are illegal then those would be illegal.
if however CARTRIDGES are whats illegal, then those are not cartridges and are not illegal.

Sounds like he had a bad lawyer.

No he was just a corrupt or stupid judge. He himself asked how the bullets could be illegal when the firearm that shoots them is legal. Obviously the law was not clear since it took four prosecuting attorneys and a judge four hours to decide the issue. And that means the judge rendered an insane verdict to save face for the prosecution not to do justice.

Or it means the law is badly written that permits musketry but is overbroad enough to include actual bullets (which may have been its real intent).
Don't assume evil intent when ignorance will do (again the fault of the lawyer).

As if their overt attempts to subvert the 2nd Amendment based on some incorrect assumptions were not somehow evil? If they were not first evil, they would not have pursued him in the first place. It's not just the matter of an argument over definitions. If they were not first evil, they would not be seeking to imprison a man and add his name to a registry of "gun offenders" for possession of some simple lead balls.

I understand the argument that the "loyal opposition" is usually not evil, just poorly informed; but when you seek to put a man in prison and brand him for life because of your ignorance, then you are no longer poorly informed, you are evil. Prison, and a criminal record, are not merely a difference of opinion; they are a consequence which permanently affects the life of the person less ignorant.......and nobody else.

They are evil, and I would be happy if DC were burned to the ground as a consequence of the evil of malicious prosecutors.

[anygunanywhere]

Judge was correct. Those are bullets. If bullets are illegal then those would be illegal.
if however CARTRIDGES are whats illegal, then those are not cartridges and are not illegal.

Sounds like he had a bad lawyer.

No he was just a corrupt or stupid judge. He himself asked how the bullets could be illegal when the firearm that shoots them is legal. Obviously the law was not clear since it took four prosecuting attorneys and a judge four hours to decide the issue. And that means the judge rendered an insane verdict to save face for the prosecution not to do justice.

Or it means the law is badly written that permits musketry but is overbroad enough to include actual bullets (which may have been its real intent).
Don't assume evil intent when ignorance will do (again the fault of the lawyer).

As if their overt attempts to subvert the 2nd Amendment based on some incorrect assumptions were not somehow evil? If they were not first evil, they would not have pursued him in the first place. It's not just the matter of an argument over definitions. If they were not first evil, they would not be seeking to imprison a man and add his name to a registry of "gun offenders" for possession of some simple lead balls.

I understand the argument that the "loyal opposition" is usually not evil, just poorly informed; but when you seek to put a man in prison and brand him for life because of your ignorance, then you are no longer poorly informed, you are evil. Prison, and a criminal record, are not merely a difference of opinion; they are a consequence which permanently affects the life of the person less ignorant.......and nobody else.

They are evil, and I would be happy if DC were burned to the ground as a consequence of the evil of malicious prosecutors.

I have heard there is a special place in hades for these types of evil individuals.

Anygunanywhere

[Cedar Park Dad]

It all started because of a single shotgun shell. Then they ended up with this boagus conviction as they were determined to convict him of something. This is another reason I have trouble always trusting the legal system.

isn't this the case with the ex wife calling him in? Don't tick of da wimminz!

[Cedar Park Dad]

Judge was correct. Those are bullets. If bullets are illegal then those would be illegal.
if however CARTRIDGES are whats illegal, then those are not cartridges and are not illegal.

Sounds like he had a bad lawyer.

No he was just a corrupt or stupid judge. He himself asked how the bullets could be illegal when the firearm that shoots them is legal. Obviously the law was not clear since it took four prosecuting attorneys and a judge four hours to decide the issue. And that means the judge rendered an insane verdict to save face for the prosecution not to do justice.

Or it means the law is badly written that permits musketry but is overbroad enough to include actual bullets (which may have been its real intent).
Don't assume evil intent when ignorance will do (again the fault of the lawyer).

As if their overt attempts to subvert the 2nd Amendment based on some incorrect assumptions were not somehow evil? If they were not first evil, they would not have pursued him in the first place. It's not just the matter of an argument over definitions. If they were not first evil, they would not be seeking to imprison a man and add his name to a registry of "gun offenders" for possession of some simple lead balls.

I understand the argument that the "loyal opposition" is usually not evil, just poorly informed; but when you seek to put a man in prison and brand him for life because of your ignorance, then you are no longer poorly informed, you are evil. Prison, and a criminal record, are not merely a difference of opinion; they are a consequence which permanently affects the life of the person less ignorant.......and nobody else.

They are evil, and I would be happy if DC were burned to the ground as a consequence of the evil of malicious prosecutors.

No thats the job of the attorney to provide that education. You don't expect a judge to be knowledgeable of all things. Thats not how it works.
Further, he can only apply the law as written (or thats what he's supposed to do...) so if the law is written poorly he has to follow it.

Now they've moved to Virginia. Does the defendant still work in DC? If not, just don't go back...

[VMI77]

Judge was correct. Those are bullets. If bullets are illegal then those would be illegal.
if however CARTRIDGES are whats illegal, then those are not cartridges and are not illegal.

Sounds like he had a bad lawyer.

No he was just a corrupt or stupid judge. He himself asked how the bullets could be illegal when the firearm that shoots them is legal. Obviously the law was not clear since it took four prosecuting attorneys and a judge four hours to decide the issue. And that means the judge rendered an insane verdict to save face for the prosecution not to do justice.

Or it means the law is badly written that permits musketry but is overbroad enough to include actual bullets (which may have been its real intent).
Don't assume evil intent when ignorance will do (again the fault of the lawyer).

When anything comes out of Mordor on the Potomac I always assume the intent is evil and if I were a betting man that assumption would be a pretty safe bet. The law itself though is evil on it's face no matter how it is written. Furthermore, when you understand that actual criminals with actual loaded guns on the street are caught and released, usually with probation and no jail time, then you understand that the enforcement of the law is also evil and intended to be evil. Every law that makes a felon out of someone for having a bullet or a live rifle, shotgun, or pistol round, or an empty magazine of whatever capacity, is evil and was passed with evil intent. You give these government criminals way too much credit when you write them off as merely stupid.