James Yeager's response to my email.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

COLT 45

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
312
Reaction score
0
Location
TULSA
I'm not sure if you are aware of this but making threats of violence is against the law. No one has right to do it. I understand that you want to defend the Second Ammendment, you just happen to be doing it from a position of ignorance at this time.

It wasn't a specific threat against anyone. If what he said was against the law they would've charged him.
 

ignerntbend

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
15,797
Reaction score
3,270
Location
Oklahoma
"Shall not be be infringed" means just that. I'm not looking to the government to weed out anyone. I do not need them to keep me safe and make me feel all warm and fuzzy.
Would you have infringed upon the rights of any, if not all, of the LOOONY bastards who have committed mass shootings in the last year or so? Take it case by case. Isn't it the governments fault that these obviously unstable individuals were allowed access to firearms?
 

Dukester

Sharpshooter
Joined
Aug 18, 2012
Messages
1,505
Reaction score
1
Location
Sapulpa
Yeah, I'm sure that's what he meant.

It doesn't matter what he meant. What matters is what he said. I don't think Yeager has any intention of actually shooting anyone, but he said he would. I think he's full of crap, but I can't blame law enforcement for reacting. I actually think you and I would agree on most thing 2A related but right now you're backing a jackass that is the author of his own misery.
 

Sanjuro82

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
1,622
Reaction score
0
Location
Midwest City
It doesn't matter what he meant. What matters is what he said. I don't think Yeager has any intention of actually shooting anyone, but he said he would. I think he's full of crap, but I can't blame law enforcement for reacting. I actually think you and I would agree on most thing 2A related but right now you're backing a jackass that is the author of his own misery.

You are misinformed. The key is you have to threaten an individual or group/organization/entity and it has to be determined as a true threat. The Supreme Court has already ruled on this many times. Watts v. United States comes to mind as the most well know case in this area. The Supreme court ruled that mere political hyperbole must be distinguished from true threats. What Yeager said was just that political hyperbole. Also local law enforcement was not involved here. It was the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security that suspended his CCW.
 

Dukester

Sharpshooter
Joined
Aug 18, 2012
Messages
1,505
Reaction score
1
Location
Sapulpa
You are misinformed. The key is you have to threaten an individual or group/organization/entity and it has to be determined as a true threat. The Supreme Court has already ruled on this many times. Watts v. United States comes to mind as the most well know case in this area. The Supreme court ruled that mere political hyperbole must be distinguished from true threats. What Yeager said was just that political hyperbole. Also local law enforcement was not involved here. It was the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security that suspended his CCW.
To expect the authorities to not act on something like this is simply foolish.
 

ignerntbend

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
15,797
Reaction score
3,270
Location
Oklahoma
You are misinformed. The key is you have to threaten an individual or group/organization/entity and it has to be determined as a true threat. The Supreme Court has already ruled on this many times. Watts v. United States comes to mind as the most well know case in this area. The Supreme court ruled that mere political hyperbole must be distinguished from true threats. What Yeager said was just that political hyperbole. Also local law enforcement was not involved here. It was the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security that suspended his CCW.
So basically, his rant was meant to be nuanced? It was all subtle and what not.
He was actually making a coy statement meant to engender thought and shi+.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom