I hate these kind of headlines.

[Ranjr]

Media plays to an audience.

Got it.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

 Sorry for not understanding the finer points but....

 The person was a 'Felon' at the time of them being found with fire arms?

 Said (Possible) Felon hence was not allowed to have/possess fire arms?

Thus making it a 'Bad thing' that they had fire arms in their possesksion.

Yup
Yup
And
Yup.

Putting away felons trying to possess firearms is a good thing.

Trying to form public opinion with clever disinformation really isn' t.

Okay, cool.

So, we have some one who's character is questionable.

Their social behaviour at the time would seem to be reprehensible......

And they would seem to have been found in the act (Task?) of adulterating firearms such as to make tracing potential crimes with them far more difficult?

As in having nothing more than the balistics of bullet to barrel in regards (Relation?) of said firearms. Since all of the other, usual information has been.... 'Obscured'.

[onlinebiker]

They are not altering existing firearms building " ghost guns".

They are building guns without serial numbers - which for private use - has ALWAYS been legal in the US.


I know many here simply won' t - flat out refuse- to believe that.

Try google. Ask " is it legal to build a firearm without serial numbers". (The unbelievers will say it' s all a lie)

The answer may surprise you.

[The Architect Of Fate]

I know many here simply won' t - flat out refuse- to believe that.

No OLB all this applies to you and your weird irrational rage about this articles title

[onlinebiker]

STFU Hellen.


Nobody fucking cares.

[The Architect Of Fate]

STFU Hellen.


Nobody fucking cares.

No Debbie you STFU 

Actually, people clearly do care as demonstrated by the responses or the Kudo's  

[The Grand Nudger]

So...it was trafficking, as expected? IDK, if proud boys are trafficking weapons, that's a development we might want to be aware of. They're committed to the fall of american democracy, after all. I'm not really sure why you're whining OLB - the us is a great place to be a part of a domestic terrorism organization. We refuse to call them domestic terrorists and treat them like we treat terrorists. In that context, "proud boy with ghost guns" should probably read "member of domestic terrorist organization engaged in gun trafficking".

Would you feel better about that more accurate headline?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

OK....
Why the headline bugs me.

It is heavily biased and editorialized with intent to mislead.

Do you like accurate, to the point reporting? If so - the headline should read "Felon arrested for possession of firearms".

That, I have no problem with. It's good reporting - it's a good arrest. The guy is a felon - and he's not supposed to have firearms.

All is well....

But ---

First off - what does his being a member of the Proud Boys have to do with anything? It has ZERO to do with his arrest. It has ZERO to do with his having firearms.

But - everybody knows they are TERRORISTS... Right???? Well -- not in the US. In Canada, they are. But - we haven't made being stupid illegal. Or distasteful. Don't believe me? Go google and see if they are listed by the US government as terrorists.

Then -- why is "Ghost guns" mentioned? He will be charged for FIREARM possession. Not Ghost guns. Why?? Because -- regardless of what this kind of reporting has done to your brain - CONVINCING you that "Ghost guns are illegal" --- they most certainly are not illegal.

Don't believe me? Go google "Are ghost guns legal"? I'll wait while you look.

....

That's what bothers me. It's obvious as hell that the headline was made to inflame, and mislead.


It's what FOX does.

How would you feel about a headline like this one - 

'Neo-nazi Sentenced For Sex Trafficking of Six Year Old Girls'?

Do we really need to know he's a neo-Nazi? Does it really matter if the people he was trafficking were six years old, or that they were girls?  Sex trafficking is illegal anyway, so surely the man's politics and the age/sex of his victims are all irrelevant to the story. 

Boru

[zwanzig]

They are not altering existing firearms building " ghost guns".

They are building guns without serial numbers - which for private use - has ALWAYS been legal in the US.


I know many here simply won' t - flat out refuse- to believe that.

Try google. Ask " is it legal to build a firearm without serial numbers". (The unbelievers will say it' s all a lie)

The answer may surprise you.

This is ridiculous. You are a disingenuous liar.

1. The article linked is not from Fox, it's the independent? I also read the exact same on yahoo news. So, "this is what Fox does" is not relevant unless you can prove the inflammatory intent of the headline. Which all the details expressed show up in the article so, you can't.

2. The illegal part isn't "you can't do that for personal use". What a slimy tactic to switch that around as if we can just talk in generalities now and actually reading the article ISN'T important. The illegal part of the ghost guns in this case was the guy being a felon and unable to do anything with guns legally and personally. Read the headline again, please. It doesn't say ghost guns themselves are illegal to possess but points to the felon for unlawfully possessing them.

3. The Proud Boy mention IS relevant because the guy used to be a member and the judge in the case thinks he still is. It's a part of the investigation and a detail of the case. It didn't come out of nowhere to just get pushed in the title to make them seem scary; they already are and his association with them was a big point in the article.

You are projecting your own shit on this instead of reading what it actually says.

[onlinebiker]

They are not altering existing firearms building " ghost guns".

They are building guns without serial numbers - which for private use - has ALWAYS been legal in the US.


I know many here simply won' t - flat out refuse- to believe that.

Try google. Ask " is it legal to build a firearm without serial numbers". (The unbelievers will say it' s all a lie)

The answer may surprise you.

This is ridiculous. You are a disingenuous liar.

1. The article linked is not from Fox, it's the independent? I also read the exact same on yahoo news. So, "this is what Fox does" is not relevant unless you can prove the inflammatory intent of the headline. Which all the details expressed show up in the article so, you can't.

2. The illegal part isn't "you can't do that for personal use". What a slimy tactic to switch that around as if we can just talk in generalities now and actually reading the article ISN'T important. The illegal part of the ghost guns in this case was the guy being a felon and unable to do anything with guns legally and personally. Read the headline again, please. It doesn't say ghost guns themselves are illegal to possess but points to the felon for unlawfully possessing them.

3. The Proud Boy mention IS relevant because the guy used to be a member and the judge in the case thinks he still is. It's a part of the investigation and a detail of the case. It didn't come out of nowhere to just get pushed in the title to make them seem scary; they already are and his association with them was a big point in the article.

You are projecting your own shit on this instead of reading what it actually says.

Hey dimbulb..

1. Did I SAY it wss from Fox?

No

i said it is what FOX does.

These guys are doing the same thing that so many here howl about FOX doing.

2. What difference does it make that they are " ghost guns"? It is not relevant. He can't own ANY guns. Pointing out they are " ghost guns" is just inflammatory.

3. What difference does his belonging to ANY group have to do with it? None. Again - just making the story scary to wimps....


Call me a liar again motherfucker.......

---

When your life is so privileged, you kind of have to find pointless things about which to complain.

who the fuck are YOU talking about?