(Photo Source: cairchicago.org)

A modern propagandist, acting under the guise of a news reporter, tried and failed to purchase and AR-15 rifle. The Professor highlights numerous cases of media bias and arrogance while trying to sell their pro-slavery propaganda.

This week’s Crossbreed Holsters SOTG Homeroom segment features a discussion about dressing the part.

Those who are serious about being an armed citizen need to take a few appropriate steps to alter their mode of dress, but it really is not all that difficult.

Topics Covered During This Episode:

• Liberal Chicago Sun Times reporter barred from buying AR15 due to violent, alcoholic past
• CBS reporter made straw purchase
• Vagination Report: David Gregory Arrest Affidavit. He broke Washington Law
• Concealed Carry Clothing

Brought to you by Silencer Shop!

Please visit www.SilencerShop.com and take a look at what they have in stock!

Get Your Student of the Gun Tattoo Here: www.lauerweaponry.com

From www.thegatewaypundit.com:

Neil Steinberg, writer for the Chicago Sun Times, saw how easy it was for other journalists to waltz into a gun shop and walk out with a child slaughtering, full auto, death machine, exactly like the one that the Navy Marine Rangers use (leftist talk there), so he decided to try it Des Plaines, Illinois. Only this didn’t quite go according to plan.

In addition to a mandatory 24 hour waiting period in Illinois, it turns out Mr. Steinberg has a troubled past of alcohol abuse and domestic violence, so he was denied the sale.

But before he got that far, he was first faced with the same hurdles that other potential gun buyers are faced with; contradictory and unclear gun laws. As he wrote:

I had trouble even figuring out whether bringing an assault rifle into Chicago is legal. The Internet was contradictory. The Chicago corporation counsel’s office punted me on to that black hole of silence, Bill McCaffrey. I found that Illinois has a 24-hour waiting period between buying and taking possession of a gun. Unearthing that fact alone made the exercise seem worthwhile. I was learning something.

After chatting with one of the salesman at Maxon Shooters Supply about the different AR’s and options, Steinberg is asked to show his FOID card, which is, apparently, some kind of Star Of David for gun buyers in Illinois. He decided on a Smith & Wesson M&P15 Sport, one of the lower end models that lacks a lot of the features and quality of a standard AR.

Steinberg tosses in the normal anti rhetoric with:

Driving to Maxon’s, the whole gun debate clarified in bold relief. There is the danger of the gun. itself. And there is the danger the gun protects you from. Another divide. Which danger you feel is greater decides which side of the divide you live on.

Being fact-based I know, you buy a gun, the person you are most likely to shoot, statistically, is yourself. And your family. More pre-schoolers are killed by guns than are police officers. Nor do I need the sense of security, false though it may be, that guns bring. I live in Northbrook, where criminal danger is remote. My boys laugh at us for locking the doors. I don’t plan on keeping this gun a second longer than I have to for this column.

The gun shop knew who he was.

When it came time to make the purchase, Rob, the clerk with the tattoos, handed me over to Mike, who gave his name shaking my hand, I gave mine. “The writer?” he said. If I wanted to lie as part of my job, I’d have gone into public relations. “Yes,” I said, explaining that I plan to buy the gun, shoot at their range, then give it to the police. He suggested I sell it back to them instead and I heartily agreed. Economical. If they would let me photograph myself with it there, the gun need never leave the store.

Steinberg filled out the background check paperwork, which, according the most hysterical anti gunners, doesn’t exist because you can buy these M47’s with no background check (leftist impression again).

A reporter in Philadelphia bought an assault rifle in seven minutes; 40 percent of gun transactions in the U.S. have no background checks. Here, I had paperwork. A federal form asking, was I an illegal alien? No. Was I a fugitive? Again no. Had I ever been convicted on charges of domestic abuse? No. Handed over my credit card: $842.50. Another $40 for the instructor to acquaint me with the gun the next day.

Then came startling news:

At 5:13 Sarah from Maxon called. They were canceling my sale and refunding my money. No gun for you. I called back. Why? “I don’t have to tell you,” she said. I knew that, but was curious. I wasn’t rejected by the government? No. So what is it? “I’m not at liberty,” she said.

Gun dealers do have the right to refuse sales to anyone, usually exercised for people who seem to be straw purchasers. I told her I assume they wouldn’t sell me a gun because I’m a reporter. She denied it. But hating the media is right behind hating the government as a pastime for many gun owners. They damn you for being ignorant then hide when you try to find out.

A few hours later, Maxon sent the newspaper a lengthy statement, the key part being: “it was uncovered that Mr. Steinberg has an admitted history of alcohol abuse, and a charge for domestic battery involving his wife.”

He goes on to cry about being singled out, thinking that the same policies don’t apply to everyone else, then blaming the EVIL, SHADY GUN INDUSTRY for everything:

Well, didn’t see that coming. Were that same standard applied to the American public, there would be a whole lot fewer guns sold. Beside, they knew I planned to immediately sell it back to them.

OK, Maxon has had its chance to offer their reason.

Now I’ll state what I believe the real reason is: Gun manufacturers and the stores that sell them make their money in the dark. Congress, which has so much trouble passing the most basic gun laws, passed a law making it illegal for the federal government to fund research into gun violence. Except for the week or two after massacres, the public covers its eyes. Would-be terrorists can buy guns. Insane people can buy guns. But reporters . . . that’s a different story. Gun makers avoid publicity because the truth is this: they sell tools of death to frightened people and make a fortune doing so. They shun attention because they know, if we saw clearly what is happening in our country, we’d demand change.

H/T to This Ain’t Hell, who suspects that the rag intentionally sent their violent reporter to do this job because they could turn around and scream “LOOK HOW IT EASY IT WAS FOR A KNOWN WIFE BEATER AND ALCOHOLIC TO GET A DEATH MACHINE!”

From www.thewrap.com:

David Gregory nearly traded in a sensible navy suit for an orange jumper, when the former “Meet the Press” host brandished an illegal high-capacity magazine on a 2012 episode, according to an affidavit revealed recently.
During a Dec. 2012 segment on his NBC News program in which he debated the National Rifle Association, Gregory made his point with a real prop. As a result, an affidavit for his arrest on misdemeanor weapons charges was filled out in Washington, D.C., though the anchor was never taken in.

The magazine was not loaded with ammunition, and NBC News was aware of the illegality before Gregory pulled the on-air stunt, the legal document — which was obtained by Judicial Watch and made the media rounds on Friday and Saturday — shows.

In December 2014, D.C. Superior Court Judge Robert Okun ordered the District of Columbia to release the affidavit following a 2013 Freedom of Information request filed by conservative blogger William Jacobson, according to a Yahoo News report.

Though much personal information is blacked out on the Superior Court in the District of Columbia Criminal Division’s Affidavit In Support of an Arrest Warrant, the details are there: An NBC News reporter originally received incorrect information suggesting that the ammo was illegal, but the high-capacity magazine would be OK for civilians to possess.

That was quickly cleared up via an email swap between NBC News and a Metropolitan Police Department employee, who informed the reporter via a producer that “possession of high-capacity magazines is a misdemeanor under Title #7 of the DC Code.”

The police employee then added: “We would suggest utilizing photographs for their presentation.”

However, during an interview with NRA President Wayne LaPierre, Gregory displayed the illegal magazine anyway, describing it as holding 30 rounds of ammunition. Later, the journalist held up another clip — one that could hold five to 10 rounds — for comparative purposes.

As a result, an affiant assigned to the investigation went to where they believed Gregory lived, but got no response from inside the home. Furthermore, NBC would not confirm that the “Meet the Press” episode in question was filmed at its regular location, thus not revealing if the magazine was in D.C. or not. Later, someone turned the clip into authorities in Virginia.

The affidavit concludes by recommending a warranty for the arrest of Gregory; however, it was stamped as “Declined” on Jan. 11, 2013.

A Jan. 11, 2013, letter from the Washington, D.C., attorney general’s office revealed Gregory was not prosecuted for weapons charges related to the episode for reasons including his lack of a criminal history.

“OAG has determined to exercise its prosecutorial discretion to decline to bring criminal charges against Mr. Gregory, who has no criminal record, or any other NBC employee based on the events associated with the December 23, 2012 broadcast. OAG has made this determination, despite the clarity of the violation of this important law, because under all of the circumstances here a prosecution would not promote public safety in the District of Columbia nor serve the best interests of the people of the District to whom this office owes its trust.

“Influencing our judgment in this case, among other things, is our recognition that the intent of the temporary possession and short display of the magazine was to promote the First Amendment purpose of informing an ongoing public debate about firearms policy in the United States.”

Nathan went on to admonish the network and warn its lawyers to ensure their clients would not repeat the action or commit any other violation that would result in charges.

“NBC should be made aware that OAG’s decision not to press charges in this matter was a very close decision and not one to which it came lightly or easily. Accordingly, NBC and its employees should take meticulous care in the future to ensure that it is in full compliance with D.C. law whether its actions involve firearms or any other potential violation. Repetition by NBC or any employee of any similar or other firearms violation will be prosecuted to the full extent supported by the facts and the law.”

Read the full text of the attorney general’s letter, addressed to Lee Levine of Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz, LLP, in Washington, D.C.:

Re: Meet The Press

Dear Mr. Levine:
As you know, the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) has referred to this office (OAG) the results of its investigation of the broadcast by your client, the National Broadcasting Company (NBC), of the news program “Meet the Press” on Sunday December 23, 2012. On that broadcast, during the course of an interview of a guest regarding firearms policy in the United States, the program host, David Gregory, exhibited on camera a large capacity ammunition feeding device (“magazine”) in violation of D.C. law. I have also received and reviewed your letter to me of January 9, 2013, explaining the circumstances under which Mr. Gregory came into possession of the magazine, the purported confusion from the allegedly conflicting advice from federal and local law enforcement sources, and assurances by your client of future compliance with our laws.

The device in the host’s possession on that broadcast was a magazine capable of holding up to 30 rounds of ammunition. The host also possessed and displayed another ammunition magazine capable of holding five to ten rounds of ammunition. Neither magazine contained any ammunition nor was either connected to any firearm. The broadcast took place from NBC studios located at 4001 Nebraska Avenue, N.W. in Washington, D.C.

It is unlawful under D.C. Code Section 7-2506.01(b) for any person while in the District of Columbia to “possess, sell, or transfer any large capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm” or loaded. Under the Subsection, the term “large capacity ammunition feeding device” means a “magazine, belt, drum, feed strip or similar device that has the capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition.” Under D.C. Code Section 7-2507.06, any person convicted of a violation of this Subsection may be imprisoned for not more than one year, fined not more than $1,000, or both.

The larger of the two ammunition feeding devices in question here meets the definition under the statute. OAG has responsibility for prosecuting such offenses and takes that responsibility very seriously. We have a history of aggressively prosecuting violations of this statute where the circumstances warrant. There is no doubt of the gravity of the illegal conduct in this matter, especially in a city and a nation that have been plagued by carnage from gun violence. Of course, the recent tragic, heart-breaking events, particularly at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, which appear to have led to the program in question, also underscore our belief in the vigorous enforcement of such laws.

Having carefully reviewed all of the facts and circumstances of this matter, as it does in every case involving firearms-related offenses or any other potential violation of D.C. law within our criminal jurisdiction, OAG has determined to exercise its prosecutorial discretion to decline to bring criminal charges against Mr. Gregory, who has no criminal record, or any other NBC employee based on the events associated with the December 23,2012 broadcast. OAG has made this determination, despite the clarity ofthe violation of this important law, because under all of the circumstances here a prosecution would not promote public safety in the District of Columbia nor serve the best interests of the people of the District to whom this office owes its trust.

Influencing our judgment in this case, among other things, is our recognition that the intent of the temporary possession and short display of the magazine was to promote the First Amendment purpose of informing an ongoing public debate about firearms policy in the United States, especially while this subject was foremost in the minds of the public following the previously mentioned events in Connecticut and the President’s speech to the nation about them. There were, however, other legal means available to demonstrate the point and to pursue this line of questioning with the guest that were suggested to NBC and that could have and should have been pursued.

OAG also appreciates that the magazine was immediately returned to the source that NBC understood to be its lawful owner outside of the District and that the magazine in question, with NBC’s assistance, has been surrendered to MPD. OAG also recognizes the cooperation NBC has provided in the investigation of this matter.

On the other hand, no specific intent is required for this violation, and ignorance of the law or even confusion about it is no defense. We therefore did not rely in making our judgment on the feeble and unsatisfactory efforts that NBC made to determine whether or not it was lawful to possess, display and broadcast this large capacity magazine as a means of fostering the public policy debate. Although there appears to have been some misinformation provided initially, NBC was clearly and timely advised by an MPD employee that its plans to exhibit on the broadcast a high capacity-magazine would violate D.C. law, and there was no contrary advice from any federal official. While you argue that some NBC employees subjectively felt uncertain as to whether its planned actions were lawful or not, we do not believe such uncertainty was justified and we note that NBC has now acknowledged that its interpretation of the information it received was incorrect.

NBC should be made aware that OAG’s decision not to press charges in this matter was a very close decision and not one to which it came lightly or easily. Accordingly, NBC and its employees should take meticulous care in the future to ensure that it is in full compliance with D.C. law whether its actions involve firearms or any other potential violation. Repetition by NBC or any employee of any similar or other firearms violation will be prosecuted to the full extent supported by the facts and the law.

I am confident that you will convey our deep concern and warning to your client.

Sincerely,
Irvin B. Nathan
Attorney General for the District of Columbia

NBC News did not immediately respond to TheWrap‘s request for comment on the matter. We also attempted to seek comment from Gregory via his publisher, Simon and Schuster, but that request also yielded nothing at the time of this writing.

Gregory has not posted on social media since the affidavit was revealed.