Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sarah Brady skirted gun laws in buying son's rifle
Az Central ^ | March 22, 2002

Posted on 03/22/2002 9:13:10 AM PST by John Jorsett

Edited on 05/07/2004 5:20:51 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 next last
To: John Jorsett
There would be no greater satisfaction in life if Sarah Brady was arrested for violation of any gun law.

Of course it will be noted she was just testing her namesake law for compliance. :-)

21 posted on 03/22/2002 9:28:59 AM PST by JoeSixPack1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
It seems ol' Sarah doesn't think making a straw purchase is a bad thing when she does it herself. Typical selective reasoning there. Do as I say, not as I do.
22 posted on 03/22/2002 9:29:22 AM PST by Hoosier Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett

TIME FOR ENFORCE THE CURRENT LAWS...DELAWARE........


23 posted on 03/22/2002 9:30:46 AM PST by Dan from Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
So, she wants to ban ownership of Firearms by individual Citizens, while exempting her own son, Prince Scott from having to comply with that same Law! Clearly Sarah Brady is fighting for "Justus!"
24 posted on 03/22/2002 9:31:18 AM PST by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howie
You raise a good point. At what point do your guns magically transform from "strawman purchase" status to heirloom/gift status? One day, one year? What if you've had the gun for a year and never shot it, but give it to your brother, is that a strawman purchase? How about if you get a new pistol, shoot it for a few days, and decide it's just the wrong gun for you and you give it to your sister?
25 posted on 03/22/2002 9:32:55 AM PST by Wm Bach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
"I can't describe how I felt when I picked up that rifle, loaded it into my little car and drove home," she writes. "It seemed so incredibly strange: Sarah Brady, of all people, packing heat."

Anybody check to see if this is really true

Sounds like Brady is trying to show she is just against handguns and not against hunters .
She is not a hypocrit . She is trying to drive a wedge between hunters and other gun owners

This story doesn't pass the smell test

Hunters buy their own guns
26 posted on 03/22/2002 9:33:00 AM PST by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
I sympathize with Sarah Brady. Her husband's head injury was severe enough to turn him into a Democrat.
27 posted on 03/22/2002 9:33:01 AM PST by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
What will her lefty friends hate more? The gun or celebrating Christmas?
28 posted on 03/22/2002 9:33:29 AM PST by ko_kyi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
Clearly Sarah Brady is fighting for "Justus!"

That, my friend, is priceless!

29 posted on 03/22/2002 9:33:40 AM PST by Hoosier Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: cactmh
ie you all follow the law I had placed on the books; as for me and mine we are better than you so we don't have to follow the same laws. Sarah, you are just like all other demonrat liberals, Exactly!!!
30 posted on 03/22/2002 9:34:12 AM PST by LaGrone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett

31 posted on 03/22/2002 9:34:34 AM PST by real saxophonist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LaGrone
Nothing surprises me anymore...even when FReepers turn on FReepers...
32 posted on 03/22/2002 9:36:49 AM PST by cactmh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: cactmh
turn on each other in the non sexual way that is! :)
33 posted on 03/22/2002 9:37:22 AM PST by cactmh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Wm Bach
I'm gonna find out if Fox's Bill Oreilly has as much balls as he wants us to believe, I'm gonna email him about this.
34 posted on 03/22/2002 9:37:25 AM PST by Howie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: cactmh
It's actually not hypocritical if you think about it. These people have daily powers of observability and controllability over people, social engineering jobs which, like all social engineering seeking control of people, invariably yields to crime or motivation to commit crimes by going beyond their jurisdiction and controlling other people's jurisdictions, including both banning guns from their houses as well as breaking gun laws themselves.
35 posted on 03/22/2002 9:39:15 AM PST by lavaroise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hoosier Patriot
Another thread of this points out that the 4473 Gun Owner Registration and Enrollment form ( http://www.atf.treas.gov/forms/pdfs/f4473pt1.pdf ) does note on page 3 that as Actual Buyer of a "present" you are not violating FedLaw.....but......the STATE law is violated here....

So nice to see Sarah caught in the web of her own making(state vs fed vs confusion)....a criminal record would be quite suitable but attempted treason should be the real charge....

36 posted on 03/22/2002 9:41:22 AM PST by Johnny Crab
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: lavaroise
To them it ISN't hypocritical because in their minds they are above us little people....IN my mind they are hypocrites because they are no better than we are and deserve no special rights...
37 posted on 03/22/2002 9:42:07 AM PST by cactmh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: cactmh
Only the elite need to protect themselves dontchaknow? We're just susposed to identify with our attackers in the hopes that they will see us as humans with problems too. GAG-RETCH, that was hard to type.

EBUCK

38 posted on 03/22/2002 9:45:24 AM PST by EBUCK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Nice to see a number of different news outlets are carrying this. It was given different headlines and only in his own paper was the writer given a byline it appears. There is no way you could have known it...different source and title. This can't get enough play to be redundant IMHO, thanks for posting it.
39 posted on 03/22/2002 9:47:48 AM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Johnny Crab
Would be nice to see her charged with this minor crime and be banned from purchasing firearms in the future. I'd like to hear her start b!tch!ng about her 2nd amm. rights being violated after such a chain of events.

EBUCK

40 posted on 03/22/2002 9:49:45 AM PST by EBUCK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson