Press release:

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced [Friday] that it has obtained the affidavit in support of the arrest of NBC’s David Gregory in association with a gun law violation committed in December 2012 on Meet the Press.  Gregory exhibited a high-capacity ammunition magazine during an interview with the National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre concerning firearms policy in the United States. In January 2013, Legal Insurrection submitted a FOIA request to the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) seeking access records related to the Gregory incident . . .

In May 2013, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit on behalf of William A. Jacobson, who runs the Legal Insurrection blog, in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia seeking access to records concerning the decision by the District of Columbia not to prosecute Gregory (Jacobson v. District of Columbia Office of the Attorney General, et al. (No. 13-0003283)).

The District government was forced by a local District court to turn over the supporting affidavit and had withheld the document for over two years before finally turning over the document yesterday evening to Judicial Watch lawyers. The District was planning to appeal the lower court ruling but settled the matter by turning over the document only after Judicial Watch promised not to seek attorney fees and costs.

“The Affidavit in Support of An Arrest Warrant” confirms that D.C. Detective Wayne Gerrish believed there was probable cause that Mr. Gregory had committed a crime and requested an arrest warrant for Gregory.  Despite the detailed request, Andrew Fois, D.C. Deputy Attorney General for Public Safety, declined to the issue the warrant.

The document shows the District police repeatedly informed NBC News that using the high-capacity magazine would be illegal.  For example, the affidavit reports:

At approximately 4:05 P.M. [December 21, 2012], NBC News Editor [Name Withheld] emailed the Metropolitan Police Department’s [Information Withheld] and stated the following:  “Meet the Press is interviewing a person on the show this Sunday in studio – Producers for the show would like have a clip (standard or high power), without the ammunition in studio to use on the show.  There will be no gun, no bullets, just clips. Is this legal?”

The District Metropolitan Police Department twice responded this and other NBC News inquiries with the following statement:

No, possession of high capacity magazines is a misdemeanor under Title #7 of the DC code.  We would suggest utilizing photographs for their presentation.

Despite these warnings, Gregory displayed the high magazine clip on air during the December 23, 2012 episode of Meet the Press.  The police document shows that the Detective Gerrish attempted to interview Mr. Gregory but was told by Mr. Gregory to contact NBC attorneys.  NBC lawyers then told the detective that “no interviews” of Mr. Gregory would be “allowed at this time.”

The detective concluded his affidavit with a request for the “issuance of an arrest warrant for Gregory, David Michael.”

Andrew Fois wrote “declined” on the arrest warrant request.  Fois denied the request on January 11, 2013.

On the same day, D.C. Attorney General Irvin B. Nathan sent a letter to NBC saying that his office would not prosecute Gregory, “despite the clarity of the violation of this important law.”  The Attorney General added, “There is no doubt of the gravity of the illegal conduct in this matter. . . .”

“In 2012, the police arrested at least 105 people for charges that included possession of a magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds. The [District’s Office of Attorney General] charged 15 of those people in cases that included a ‘high-capacity feeding device or extended clip.’” according to the Washington Times.

“This affidavit for an arrest warrant of David Gregory shows that NBC News thinks it is above the law.  Imagine what NBC News would make of a corporation whose employees violated the law despite being warned by the police!

If David Gregory were not a major media personality and not then employed by NBC, he would have almost certainly been arrested and prosecuted for possessing the illegal high magazine clip,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  “It is no wonder the District government covered up its special favor for NBC News and David Gregory for two years.  Liberals in the District seem to think that they should be immune from the absurd and constitutionally-suspect gun laws they like and want enforced.”

“The Affidavit demonstrates the facts as to NBC News’ open defiance of the law. This was no innocent error.  The point of all this was not that we wanted David Gregory prosecuted. We didn’t. There is no reason for mere possession of an unloaded high-capacity magazine, not to be used in the commission of some other crime and far away from actual ammunition, to be a crime.

But it is in D.C.,” said William Jacobson of legalinsurrection.com.  “This is a nice victory for transparency and accountability for both the big media and the government.  We thank Judicial Watch attorneys Jim Peterson and Ramona Cotca, who did a great job helping our independent group of journalists beat City Hall.”

That needs to change, but it probably will not, until people like David Gregory and other high profile citizens start having it enforced as to them.

 

Recommended For You

182 Responses to Question of the Day: Should D.C. Police Have Arrested Meet the Press Host David Gregory?

  1. Yes.

    He violated the statute. Others have been arrested for violating the same statute, and lesser statutes (such as possessing empty brass inside the District). Under due process and equal protection, he should have been arrested.

    What is there to debate?

    • Yes, he should have been arrested and in a wonderful twist of fate, he should have his day in court and have the NRA legal team defend his 2A rights.
      But to not indict David Gregory just shows the hypocrisy of the elites, and that pisses me the Hell off!

        • As a group, we need to completely stop referring to these sorts of magazines as “high capacity.” A holdover from my CA days, where the pro-2A crowd was quite careful to only call them “standard capacity” magazines, as that IS what they are. Do not let the anti-2A folks dictate the language. Modern Sporting Rifles and nearly all modern pistols were designed for and come from the factory (and have for many decades) with 15+++ round magazines. These are standard capacity, as they’re the norm and what the firearm was designed for. 10-round or less mags are REDUCED CAPACITY magazines. They are the outlier and the exception, not the other way around.

          /end rant

          (and I’m not replying specifically to any of y’all above me. Just wanted to put this at the top of the comments thread haha)

        • Sorry, I can’t quite agree with this beating up on the word “high.” It’s not pejorative. It doesn’t mean “excessive.” Your buddies in CA were jumping on the wrong problem.

          Although it’s certainly true that (I’ll use a Beretta 92 for instance) 15 rounds is the standard, design capacity, it could or could not also be a “high” number depending.

          In fact, “standard” can sometimes be a judgement word too. If you label the fifteen rounder as standard, you might just cede the ground to the bad guys when someone produces an “extended” magazine. (A Glock 33 rounder is definitely non-standard, and in point of fact so is an AR-15 30 rounder–if I am not mistaken the guns were originally issued with 20 rounders.) Extended magazines are distinctly non-standard and if you insist on making a fetish over the word “standard” someone might argue that it’s okay to ban ones that exceed the standard.

          Better to simply argue on principle; that it doesn’t fricking morally matter what capacity a magazine has. Arguing over what is or is not standard is beside the point.

        • @Geoff PR, I don’t disagree.

          This isn’t an instance of that. It’s a perfectly logical usage of the word “high” and we are doing silly-looking linguistic backflips just because they use it. “We can’t use that word, THEY use that word!”

        • Jeremy S,

          You are absolutely correct on your assessment and I too am disappointed there hasn’t been more vigorous push-back on the antis efforts to redefine standard engineered capacity magazines as somehow other than the norm, and the more limited capacity state law limited capacity mags as an arbitrarily created legislative restriction on the norm.

        • One does not preclude the other. Argue on principle, but avoid using language that is easier to twist in an emotional diatribe against your cause. The art of rhetoric is in appealing to both emotion and reason, don’t forgo one for the other, or you will lose the debate.

        • Steve, I have to disagree. When the anti side says “high capacity” they DO mean it pejoratively and they do mean that it’s excessive and unnecessary and they definitely try to brand it as abnormal and “extremist,” etc etc. Only a crazy person would want high capacity magazines. The only point of a high capacity magazine is to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible. etc. I suppose that’s why the police carry them, eh? …and by “them” I mean, of course, standard capacity mags 😉

        • Although I truly feel I have won the internet on many occasions, this is the only official recognition of that feat. I would like to first thank Danger Mouse (love your music) for recognizing my achievement. I would also like to thank TTAG for providing this venue to display my wit. I would like to thank all the internet trolls on YouTube that have helped me hone my craft. Unlike YouTube, Bearing arms, Townhall.com (which banned me) and FaceBook, etc., where I have displayed rational, humorous, or intellectual superiority in relation to other commentors, the TTAG community challenge me to bring my “A game” while at the same time humbly recognize when one among us has “nailed it”.
          I proudly accept this award and look forward to passing the crown to another colleague who displays an equal or greater grasp of the all too rare common sense.
          Again, thank you.

        • Translation of Michael in GA’s internets acceptance speech: “You like me! You really like me!”

        • @ Michael in GA:

          “I would also like to thank TTAG for providing this venue to display my wit.”

          Err…

          What wit?

          (Running like Hell)

          🙂

    • Could the law be declared unconstitutional on due to their discriminatory selective enforcement especially since the law violates equal protection as enforced.

      • @Borg-no there is no case there as it would be up to a liberal judge or conservative judge, which are one in the same, except one says the ruling is in the compelling interest of the public safety and the other rules for governmental interests.

        It would be the same as when foreigners sue American business owners and claim discrimination based on nation of origin, but of course an American can’t counter sue based on the same claim. The second amendment happens to be ingrained in our culture, yet we can’t sue businesses that provide no security while disarming us and are able to discriminate against us solely based on us exercising our cultural customs, one of which is being responsible for your own safety and using a firearm to ensure security.

        Ballot Box-no longer works when representatives are bought and uninformed, emotionally driven, savage elitists can try and dictate free American’s God given rights, without any fear of men standing up for their beliefs and saying No, stated rather forcefully.
        Soap Box-controlled propaganda
        Jury Box-honestly, unless you are rich it is better to be carried by 6 than judged by 12, especially twelve liberals.
        Cartridge Box-keeping dry and ready for change that we can believe in, like becoming a Constitutional Republic again.

      • Two words: Jury Nullification.

        The jury basically says that the prosecution proved that a statute was violated BUT the statute should be null and void because it violates the rights of the individual and should no longer be a law.

    • One set of rules for the ruling class, and another set of rules for the rest of us.

      While I do not advocate violence, when the problem becomes this pervasive and naked there’s really only one surefire way to solve the problem. It is not a good solution. It’s a terrible thing to have to resort to and should it ever come to that a lot of people are going to die–innocent and otherwise. I don’t think this country can recover from something like that, so I doubt it’ll happen in my lifetime. I think we’ll have to slide a whole lot farther down the rabbit hole first. I mean most people in this country still operate under the illusion that they’re free people.

        • Michael-That is the attitude that has gotten us into this position. Muslim terrorist acts called work place violence and denying American veterans their purple hearts out of political reasons, government representatives lying to us and thinking an apology makes them honest again, billions overseas to arm terrorists. No regard for the laws of a nation of laws. Wake Up.
          It may not be bad for you and congratulations for doing well, but some folks are done with continuing to be a party to the destruction of our Homeland. Nor are we going to bow on our knees and willingly give away our country to third world foreign invaders. People in D.C., the white guilt liberals, hyphenated Americans, and the moneymen, are the disease and elections are not going to be the shot that is required to be the cure.

        • You sound so desperate. Don’t start killing anyone just yet. On the whole, the Tea Party is the new kid on the block. Let their numbers grow in Washington and lets take the White House in less than 2 years and give democracy a chance. It is this kind of thinking that got us were we are and that is a good thing. If you want to live in a country under constant violent rebellion then go join up with ISIS. The grown folks here in the greatest country in the history of Earth will handle things
          Am I mad as hell and tired of taking it? Hell yes! But I am not calling for violent rebellion at this point. How will you start the fight? Who are you going to fire the first shot at? Who will fight along side of you?
          The war within will not start with crazies like you murdering Government agents. You will be like Will Ferrell running naked down the street alone yelling “We’re going streaking!”
          http://youtu.be/20g3QIUnOgY
          No sir, the war will begin when Government agents start arresting other Government agents and declare Martial Law. They will fire the first shots and it will be at their own who they see as insurgent. They will arrest members of Congress and wealthy Conservatives. See, to an evil empire, you and I are not significant. We are only strong as a unit and they know we are not united. They have to go for the opposing power. Our power is in our vote, our voice. You as an individual with a few weapons are meaningless.
          It’s not that bad.

        • Desperate no, just pissed off like you said you are that so many are uncomfortable at the expense of a few. Please don’t compare me to muslim pig rapists like isis members, especially when I view killing innocent people as a sin and couldn’t kill an innocent no matter what, unlike the middleage-trapped savages who believe killing innocents is the gateway to paradise.

          First off I wasn’t condescending to you unless you fit into one of the problems in this great nation that only works when we are united, which is no longer the case but I hope that changes nonviolently but my head is not in the sand to what is going on around either.. The problem is in the people who do not follow the laws and are held accountable to different standards than the general public, which is injustice. You are the only one talking about killing federal agents, as I have the belief that a FEDcoat is a citizen who is just a little fuzzy on what honoring an oath to uphold Constitution law is, but I haven’t lost faith in them..I just hope they ask themselves everyday are they pretending to be the good guys by tolerating so much corruption and being told it is done in the name of justice. Eventually logical men question blind loyalty or they end up following terrible orders and reap the consequences.

          A war in America will only start when the Armed services, with the backing of a majority of Liberty loving people say that enough is enough with the political establishment, and the America we knew would change maybe for the better maybe not. That is the only way any amount of insurrection could gain the moral high ground to justify what happens in war, and not by lone mental midgets thinking change can come from executing innocent government workers. Killing innocent people is immoral and short sighted, which says more about yourself so try removing the plank from your eye.

    • Yes! Gregory wants to play with the big boys, big boy rules apply.

      He deserves no pass or sympathy just because he’s on the anti-gun side of the equation. Throw his sorry ass in jail and let that be a lesson to the rest of the holier than thou anti-gun media bigoted moralists!

    • Fortunately, in this country we have what’s called burden of proof. The fact of the matter, an arrest may have been possible, but a conviction or trial would never have happened. NEVER EVER!
      Here’s why: NO PROOF. The video alone cannot substantiate it was an ACTUAL FUNCTIONING magazine.
      Unless police we able to seize that magazine from him, RIGHT THEN, confirm it was an actual magazine, they have no case. The prosecutors made the correct legal decision. They didn’t have EVIDENCE. No matter what questions NBC asked of the police, there NOTHING to prove what was displayed on TV was in fact an actual magazine of prohibited capacity. Even if the police were able to find that magazine at NBC after the fact, it would be difficult to prove it was the actual one possessed in the video thus establishing constructive possession.

      • This ^^^^^^^^^^ is that same thing that I was thinking. What if someone on the TV show removed the spring & follower from the larger magazine before it was used on camera? Would it still count as an illegal item? Would the basic “shell” of a larger mag count as an illegal item for anyone else?

        Much as I HATE to give this guy a “pass” on this, it might have been impossible to prove that this was an actual functional magazine in court.

    • Willful or not doesn’t matter; he should have been arrested, had the mag confiscated, went to court, then jail upon conviction and lost his 2A rights and the right to vote forever…just like everybody else.

    • @ Paul G
      And what is the proof? Can you say from the picture or watching the video that what he held in his hand was an actual functioning magazine of prohibited capacity and not a stage prop? Can that be proved beyond reasonable doubt? No it can’t, not even close. No evidence, no proof, no case.

      As Model 31 above me noted, the magazine should have been confiscated right then. That would have made the case, not after the fact after it’s gone and all that’s left is a video.

  2. Yes. They should have arrested him.
    I would not have asked permission. I would have just cuffed and stuffed him. Just to show how recockulous the law is.

    On a side note. “Producers for the show would like have a clip (standard or high power),”

    What’s a high power clip?

    • That offense would not be arrestable without a warrant unless the officer was present and witnessed the crime.

        • That, and there’s documented video-recorded evidence of the crime – linked right here in this blog post. The studio at which the news segment was recorded is inside the District. There is no dispute from any involved party that the studio is inside the District, or that Gregory possessed the prohibited item inside the District.

        • This is VA code. DC is similar IIRC.

          “B. Such officers may arrest without a warrant any person who commits any crime in the presence of the officer and any person whom he has reasonable grounds or probable cause to suspect of having committed a felony not in his presence.”

          There are exceptions, but none that are met by this example that I know of.

        • That’s pretty commonly the case–misdemeanants can only be arrested without a warrant if they commit the offense in the arresting officer’s presence. That’s why the DC cops were asking for a warrant in the first place. Occasionally the courts have been pretty creative in defining “presence”; I suppose you could argue that, through the magic of TV, Gregory committed the offense in the “presence” of any officer who happened to be watching him on the toob, but I fear that’s a bit too much of a stretch.

        • I believe in MD an officer may be ‘present’ for the purposes of an arrest if he or she views the crime via a live link- this usually has to do with a security camera but I suppose it might also include NBC. Not sure if DC includes the same interpretation. But no cop is going to want to risk the blowback from a move like that without dotting every i and crossing every t.

      • The “crime” was broadcast on nationwide TV. even with MSNBC’s abysmal ratings, thousands of police officers are witnesses.

        • Witnessed on TV or not it still fails to meet the legal standard of “in the officers presence”

        • All an officer needed to do was ask him if he was in possession of an illegal magazine. He can be arrested if he says yes and he can be arrested for lying to a police officer if he said no. Shameful no officers have stepped up to equally enforce this law.

        • @Model31– Doesn’t work that way, I’m afraid. Like it or not, Hinshelworld is correct vis-à-vis arresting Gregory.

        • @Another Robert:
          Not arguing…I’ve seen it done. I’ve pulled surveillance video for local PD several times. Don’t even have a clear face picture, just a suspect and a buddy in a jacket viewed from the back. They tell the suspect “This is you and your buddy?” and the suspect owns up and gets arrested. If suspects hesitate, they follow up with “you’re in a lot more trouble if you lie to me.” Maybe police are lying to them with the follow up. Pretty sure lying to a cop is breaking the law. Pretty sure a cop lying to a citizen is….fine.
          Anybody can be arrested whether they break a law or not. In this case, its doubtful the DA would prosecute or take it to a GJ. The GJ could indict based on the video and cops testimony that David lied to the officer -if any ever bothered to ask him. Maybe PD/DA didn’t want a high profile challenge to the mag law.
          No doubt David’s defense attorney would move to suppress the NBC video viewed by thousands already. Pretty sure if Glenn Beck had a bag of weed on the table during his show or made violent threats against liberal politicians, the video alone would serve as enough evidence to get charges brought along with at least an arrest.

    • Tom,
      On a different, and somewhat related note, I read an article about you the last couple of days about a gun buy back program in your area. It was a hoot. Perchance, can you provide a link? I can’t seem to find it anymore.

  3. I agree with what the guy said inte article. No one should be arrested for possessing a magazine like that. But since people are being screwed over in DC, then he should have been arrested and prosecuted. I’m not sure why the AG can just decline to give a warrant but he should also be charged with some kind of corruption charge.

    • Prosecution of Irvin and his underlings , is in order here. Intentional UNEQUAL application
      of the law violates the very ESSENCE of his job in both spirit and intent. Spare me the
      ” its for the greater good ” cop out – clap trap. I will donate to Legal Insurrection and Judicial Watch for their help here. Citizens arrest and both Civil / Criminal complaints on behalf of the unserved people of DC , will turn the tide . Is there a time limit to charge Gregory and or
      the prosecutor ?

    • Lord, lord, we’re missing the fun here. So, he’s arrested, prosecuted, found guilty and jailed. Next step is what we’re missing. He and his network have to pony up the bucks to attack the law and eventually have it declared unconstitutional in order to get his sorry ass out of the big house. I would never recover, but I’d die happy.

  4. Well, I guess the correct answer (IMO) would be “no”, because nobody should be arrested for mere possession of an ammunition magazine. But if you’re determined to do so, I certainly see no valid reason to grant an exception to David Gregory.

  5. Yes, we live in a republic and no one is above the law. He should have been arrested live on tv. Then they wouldn’t need a warrant.

    No, this a stupid statute and SHOULD a have been repealed a decade ago, or never written to begin with.

  6. One of the quickest and most effective ways to repeal odious laws is to prosecute the prominent and well-connected for violating them.

    • Amen to that. I say throw Gregory into jail, or federal “pound me in the a$$” prison. After Gregory becomes Bubba’s girlfriend for a few weeks, have the NRA lawyers defend him. Then lose the ridiculous law. Liberal progressive elites have no fear of the law if they can circumvent it. They should be trapped deeply in their own statist laws whenever possible.

  7. What’s the statute of limitation for that crime in DC?

    Can a new administration in two years time have him arrested and charged?

      • Hmmm, so it’s over two years for Mr. Gregory. Wonder if that timing had anything to do with why the AG finally released the info requested in the affidavit. Can’t go after him now.

  8. No – because NOBODY should be arrested or charged under that crappy law. That said, the law needs to be applied equally – so if they arrest & prosecute others; then he should be too.

  9. Preferably mid-interview with a scream of “Freezepolicehandsintheair!(cue taser)stopresisting!(cue dogpile). On the way out, someone can thank him for the 1080p confession.

  10. Of course he should have been. Anyone of us non elites would have been.

    However since he wasn’t and the warrant was declined the pro 2a should launch a lawsuit, since clealy DC legal had recognized the fact that it is not a crime.

    To paraphrase the gogol bordelo song, “in the old times, it was not a crime”

  11. “If David Gregory were not a major media personality and not then employed by NBC, he would have almost certainly been arrested and prosecuted…

    While I totally agree that he should have been arrested and prosecuted for the flagrant violation of this law — a law that he himself supports and wants expanded and enforced! — despite repeated assurances by MPD that it was illegal, I don’t know how Judicial Watch can really assert the above when the information they found shows 105 people were arrested for it and only 15 were actually prosecuted. DG dang sure should have been arrested, though, and considering he violated the law on purpose, with full knowledge, on television, it’s offensive that they didn’t prosecute.

    • The whole episode comes under the guise of selective prosecution, a heavy-duty police state tactic. Set up your laws so that everyone commits a capital crime at least once a week because everything is illegal, then prosecute everyone you don’t like, doesn’t pay up, refuses to put out, is campaigning for an office you want, just any damn thing. Your buds can safely ignore all laws, they don’t apply to you! Really despicable, and exactly what has been going on for years now.

  12. This 10 round nonsense needs to be stopped. I Believe that just like New Jersy ,N.Y. and Ct. pushing and pushing soon we will be all using single shot guns.

  13. Yes. I think that would be only way to drive home the point of how stupid this law is to the antis, and then only a few of them.

    And I think the mindset is that they can do it because they are enlightened and anointed and therefore it’s not a crime when they do it.

    But considering the nature of this law, I’m more than willing to pay the political expedience game. If his immunity can be spun, then spin it.

    Not that well see him arrested over it.

    In short: Fuck David Gregory unless he’s useful to or side, or had joined it.

    The question to the police shows the hypocrisy a well. Many in the media wanted this law, they wanted you or I to be imprisoned for mere possession, but want it to be ok for them to poses if it helps them illustrate and push their ideals. Even being told it would be a crime they seem to have decided “oh, I’m sure we’ll be fine,” and what pisses me off is that they were right.

    That they assumed they would not face repercussions also shows, I think, a mindset by some on the left that anti gun laws aren’t just anti gun, but should be anti conservative as well. If you’re a prominent liberal, helping spread the word, then you skate. If you’re a conservative exercising basic human rights then of you go. If you’re a liberal, but not an elite? Then your imprisonment is for the greater good.

    In other news, water is wet.

  14. Nah. Nobody should be prosecuted for violating that stupid law. It’s better this way, with both Gregory exposed as a bloviating buffoon and the DC justice system’s officials exposed for the lying hypocrites they are.

  15. Of course such a law should never have existed in the first place, but it compounds the error to shield the elite who support such laws from the negative consequences thereof. He absolutely should have been arrested, it might have given him and his media colleagues a much-needed reality check about what happens when you try to micro-manage society using the blunt instrument of criminal law.

  16. Yes, they need to enforce all of these laws to the exact letter and writing of the law. The more people who start having their lives ruined by this nonsense the more likely people are to wake the F up and turn some of this nonsense back.

    This would be a very public display of just how asinine these laws are, so yes throw the book at him, when people realize they are voting for politicians who want to make you a felon for merely owning a piece of metal or plastic with springs inside of it, the more likely they are to vote this stuff down in the future.

  17. Stupid laws are still the law. It’s a terrible practice to selectively apply “the law,” especially when exceptions are made for the rich and famous. David Gregory should have been arrested and prosecuted so that the judicial system could have sorted out that BS law properly.

      • How many Federal firearms laws did the Republicans repeal during the six years they had total control? Don’t trust either party, especially the Republicans.

        • Holy moly, day after day, week after week, we read, “Democrat legislators propose [insert idiotic 2A-infrigement here]; we see “Legislators form bi-partisan group to promote gun safety”, and find that “bi-partisan” means 200 Democrats and 1 (one) Republican (I am not making this up). And still we get folks here saying “there’s no difference between the parties on gun control”, and now we’ve even got one saying Republicans are worse. No wonder the fight to protect the 2nd is so constant.

        • @Another Robert

          Although Rs tend to be better than Ds on this issue, sometimes it’s not much a priority to them (they can be stampeded during a post-mass-shooting media-whipped-up frenzy). And then there are some Rs who are more Fuddly (please note, people, Fudd, as in Elmer, is not spelled in all caps, you are confusing it with FUD for fear, uncertainty and doubt); they think the 2A is about hunting weapons. GWB said he’d sign an extension of that assault weapon ban if it had hit his desk. Fortunately the better sort of R stopped it.

          In Colorado we had Republican legislators running committees block the adoption of concealed carry year after year. Term limits finally got rid of those people, or they’d probably still be there until they died because they were establishment.

          It’s important to look at the record of any candidate, not just whether their last initial is R or D.

        • Had Jr. signed the continuation of the AWB he would have followed his Daddy as a one termer and we would be referring to President Gore.
          Remember how close that race was?

        • @ Steve: Yes, I do recognize that there is a bit more variation at the state level. I’m generally referring to the parties at the national level. Anyone who thinks the R’s are no better, let alone worse, than the Ds on guns is just not paying attention–willfully or otherwise. And even at the state level, Rs who go all-in for gun control are reviled as RINOs and traitors in at least some quarters of their party; D’s who go all-in for gun-control are pretty much following the party line. Have you ever heard anyone, anywhere, refer to a politician as a “DINO” because he or she voted FOR a gun-control measure?

        • @Roberrt If you’ll re-read what I wrote, nowhere did I say there was no difference between the parties, in fact I specifically in my very first sentence that there was some difference. I was attempting to make the point that you can’t rely on party labels. I also wasn’t using a state example and ignoring the federal level, I gave examples at both levels of government. The phenomenon of unreliable Rs exists at all levels of government.

          @Michael. GHWB (Bush 41, Bush Sr.) was considered by many to have betrayed gun owners to have betrayed them, and that it hurt him during his re-election bid against Clinton. His son evidently didn’t learn from this or didn’t care. He’d have signed it, and having President Kerry (not President Gore; this would have been in ’04, not ’00) would be no consolation whatsoever for us as we deal with magazine and weapon type restrictions everywhere instead of just a few bad states (including, to some extent, Colorado).

        • I stand corrected on the Democratic contender but you agree that he would have been ousted for that move and rightfully so. I like to think my party, the Republicans, hold our representatives to account.
          Also I believe I was right to say that Republican majorities in the House and Senate were responsible for allowing the Sunset Clause to end Bill Clinton’s (Democrat) AWB.
          So Don’t tell me that the two parties are even comparable on the issue of gun rights.
          To say career politicians on both sides are beholden to big corporations and special interests groups will get no argument from me. I am hopeful, as a Republican, that things are getting better with the Tea Party looking strong going into 2016. Hate to be a Democrat these days.

        • @Steve–I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to come across as making an argument against what you said, I actually agree in concept. I was just trying to distinguish my own response as mostly applying to national-level rather than state-level politics. I do, however, maintain that , on the national level, even a pro-2A sounding Democrat is still not necessarily to be trusted, as the party leadership can pressure him or her to vote anti-2A anyway (and often does).And I guess my final question still holds in that regard: has anyone ever accused a Dem of being a DINO for voting FOR gun control? R’s who do so are routinely labeled as such (RINOs) and are rewarded with primary challenges and loss of support.

        • “That little bitty itty bitty assault weapons ban was allowed to expire under the Sunset Clause but I guess that was not a big deal to you.”

          That clause was put into the bill when it was passed. Bush the Lesser and his minions had nothing to do with it going away. Do you really thing that had the sunset provision not been in the law they would have done any thing to repeal it?

        • @Chris,

          And there you have it. I don’t believe for an instant the law would have been repealed had it not sunsetted.

          The difference between Ds and Rs oftentimes turns out to be that the Ds will push for anti gun legislation while the Rs won’t (though sometimes they’ll follow the stampede). That’s significant, but far from ideal. It’s unfortunately much rarer for the Rs to actively do something positive.

          In this instance–looking for positives–it turns out the Rs are better at the state level than at the Federal level.

  18. NOT only should he be arrested, he should be penalized the max. allowed under the regulation. the fact that they checked, the police said dont do it, then they did it anyway shows a complete disregard for the law (no matter how F*ed up said law may be). People like him are prime candidates for the “Lets make an example” train of thought

  19. OF COURSE, Dave Gregory should’ve been arrested, like how every hoplophobe of his ilk would/should want, and/or would have/should have wanted.

    But then afterwards, the NRA/SAF’s legal muscle & Alan Gura of CATO should offer pro bono defense, just to make the case and have the legal standing to SUE the DC govt terrorists’ UNconstitutional diktat on Gregory’s behalf, to have the local ‘ordinances/codes/laws’ overturned.

    A PR win-win! xD

    • And add insult to injury by calling the repeal the Gregory Law. That would piss him off quite a bit I would assume!

  20. Here:
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/documents-cops-wanted-to-hit-meet-the-press-then-host-david-gregory-with-gun-charge/article/2559132

    Washington Examiner reports the Washington D.C. Police wanted to arrest Gregory because they had warned NBC News NOT to possess and display the illegal magazine, but the District Attorney decided not to prosecute as a matter of “discretion”. USA Today just repeated the story.

    David Gregory was fired from “Meet the Press” with a $4 million pay-off according to several reports.

    So, the real question is why the W.D.C. District Attorney decided it wasn’t worth prosecuting.

  21. This muckraker may not have been prosecuted by DC city pols with their noses up his parts, but the American people have charged, tried and found him guilty. His punishment was abysmal ratings and an unceremonious kick in the rear out the door.

    His dismissal from NBC was disrespectful and humiliating. His career as he knew it is effectively over and will likely never again reach the same level. In other words, it was exactly what he deserved.

  22. Yes. If the arrested the one man for a single shotgun shell, this reporter should also be arrested. This double standard feeds the distrust of government policy.

    • If I recall correctly, it was a single SPENT shotgun shell, which legally should not meet the definition of “ammunition” even where idiotic laws restrict possession. When the legal system can claim possession of an inert piece of brass and plastic is some sort of threat to public safety, we need to seriously examine the path our society is on.

      • Absolutely. Other people have been arrested and prosecuted in D.C. for a single piece of empty brass or ammo-themed jewelry, claiming to have violated the no possession of ammunition without a license law. Since I often shoot near then open hatch of my SUV, it’s common for a stray piece of empty brass to end up inside the car somewhere. I’ve even had fired brass land inside my jacket and twice in one of my boots. It’s ridiculous that an empty piece of metal should be illegal. Empty brass (or a shotgun shell) is NOT ammunition!

      • Actually it was not a spent shell–but the DA and the judge were too afraid to have it “tested” to see if there was anything inside the closed casing, so that charge was dismissed. The defendant also had a spent rifle casing for a rifle that was not registered in D.C. (a hunting trophy, with the rifle legally stored in Virginia). The third item seized was a black powder pistol–because the police did not know that such items are actually legal in the district.

  23. Of course they did not arrest him. The other 105 defendants did not have the legal firepower to take it all the way to the supreme court. Gregory would probably have been convicted, and the court would have laughed in D.C.’s face and overturned the law. Possession of a magazine for the purpose of showing on tv and reporting? This would have been one even the liberals could have joined in on. Forget about the 2nd amendment, we also have a 1st amendment issue.

    • I have always thought that the City got a call from NBC’s legal department telling them “nice gun law you got there and it would be a terrible thing if something happened to it.”

  24. Yes. One rule for “us”, another rule for “them” is not a justice system. Particularly when this is (I believe) the same DA’s office that felt justified in pressing charges over an empty shotgun shell, and ransacking a reporter’s house over a potato gun.

    • “Yes. One rule for ‘us’, another rule for ‘them’ is not a justice system.”

      +1,000,000,000 !!!!!!

  25. “If David Gregory were not a major media personality and not then employed by NBC, he would have almost certainly been arrested and prosecuted for possessing the illegal high magazine clip,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

    I give Mr. Fitton high marks for coming close. The real truth of the matter is that the Washington D.C. District Attorney declined to issue a warrant for Mr. Gregory because Mr. Gregory was acting in the interests of the ruling class.

    I want that to be perfectly clear to everyone. We are no longer a nation of laws … nor do we have a government of the people, for the people, and by the people. Rather, our government exists to protect the interests of the ruling class, nothing more and nothing less.

  26. No, and they shouldn’t arrest anyone else for possession of a magazine, either. It’s a non-crime. Nobody should be “above the law”, though.

    • Seems like possibly a good defense, actually, if anyone is charged with possession of a “high capacity” magazine in DC. Selective enforcement/prosecution based on class.

      • “Selective prosecution” is a hard defense to carry off, but I would like to see it tried in one of these cases. Especially since the DC prosecutor was stupid enough to list his [supposedly objective] reasons for declining to prosecute. Any defendant who meets those same conditions (co-operation, otherwise clean criminal record, no other evident criminal intent) should be able to argue that they should likewise not be prosecuted.

    • In thinking about it, the prosecutor couldn’t prove it wasn’t a 10rd .458 SOCOM magazine anyway, at least without getting their hands on it.

  27. for the legal beagles out there………does this lack of enforcement of statute constitute nullification? I’m asking because I just don’t know.

    • In this case, it just represents “prosecutorial discretion”. “Nullification” usually describes the actions of a jury that sees that a defendant has indeed violated a particular law, but declines to convict anyway. Or, in a larger context, the actions of a smaller political unit, such as a state, refusing to accept and enforce a law promulgated by a larger political unit, such as the Federal government, that nominally includes the smaller political unit.

      • A crime was committed , by the prosecutors own understanding and recognition. The people of DC must have a way to hold him accountable . From discussion elsewhere ,
        42 USC section 1983 ; states persons ” deprived of their rights ” can file. Selective enforcement against ” little people ” makes all in that jurisdiction a victim . Also , can NBC
        studios be seized as part of said crime. ( Not that I want this) , but a high profile , LOUD –
        pushback is needed . Even if the case lost , it would increase visibility.

    • No, a district attorney/attorney general is vested with absolute discretion in deciding which cases to pursue, and that is a national standard. Further, a district attorney/attorney general is also vested with absolute immunity for those decisions.

      • A “national standard”? How so? I understand that it is pretty much the case all over, but I think that’s one of those areas where the states have the prerogative. And no, it’s no “absolute discretion”. Find a prosecutor who will say, “in my discretion, I prosecute all black DWI suspects for DWI, but I drop the charge on white defendants down to speeding” and see how far his “absolute discretion” will carry him.

  28. Nope. I hate that he wasn’t arrested because we live by double standards. However I don’t want anyone arrested because of an unconstitutional law.

  29. Personally, I think the AG declined to prosecute because it did not want to have defend a silly law–it is obvious that NBC thought it was a silly law because there were no bullets and no gun and therefore no threat of harm–in a very high profile case. Better not to prosecute and preserve the law rather than run the risk of having it be declared unconstitutional under Heller.

    • +1. The corrupt lawmakers make out both ways- declined to take on the deep pocket NBC attorneys, knowing he will lose.

      For the little guy who cant afford the time off from work, and attorney fees to fight a chicken$hit charge like this, this law provides the prosecutor with a means of tacking on charges that he knows will be bargained away in exchange for a plea bargain- enhancing his stats on wins, and giving political visibility for “tough on guns” both.

    • Exactly.
      But the AG didn’t hesitate to charge a conservative writer for illegal possession on “unregistered ammunition” for having a single spent shotgun shell.

  30. Welcome to the 21st century, where a box with a spring in it can get people prosecuted. We are surely heading to the right direction.

  31. This proves that the politically connected do not have to live by the same rules as the rest of us. I hope the next guy who is arrested for the same thing’s attorney uses this hypocrisy to show the court why this law should be nullified.

    • Proof of the same thinking- the revised regulations drafted for concealed carry permits in DC include a prohibition from “carrying within 1000 feet of a dignitary”. No definition, but I am quite sure the White House Press Corps and various talking heads in the StateRunMedia already consider themselves part of that group.

  32. I would have arrested him on live TV and paraded him around in chains to illustrate the futility and comedy of magazine capacity restrictions and also to serve as a warning to other members of the Democratic party and mainstream media that they are not above the law.

    • Yeah, arrest him with your gun drawn, and work into the conversation that it holds a 17 round magazine or whatever. Different rules for me!

  33. “Bailiff, whack his peepee!” Seriously, Mr. Gregory might have gotten off because his offense constituted a theatrical performance and was protected by the First Amendment.

  34. Without the magazine there is no case. No way to prove, just by the film, that the longer magazine he held up would actually hold the illegal number of rounds. No evidence, no case.

    • He had made his intentions clear, the cops should have been present and arrested him, confiscating the magaclip for the safety, and then prosecuted loudly.

      • But the cops were not present and they did not confiscate the magazine. Under your standard they would arrest a person for holding up a bag of powdered sugar on TV and saying it was cocaine. No evidence, no case.
        Even if they had arrested him, NBC’s lawyers would have been in front of a judge before he even made it to processing.

  35. If you can’t define the difference between a magazine and a clip to the point of calling it a “magazine clip” you are automatically disqualified from saying anything authoritative about the subject. Might as well be writing about a “cow horse” as a knowledgeable rancher.

    • And if you think that deflating a football makes it lighter then you need to STFU too.
      When I become King of the World the first thing…no the second thing I am going to do is revoke accreditation to all journalism schools in the country.

  36. Just remember that NBC thinks its superior to MSNBC, but all things are relative.

    NBC is still part of the StateRunMedia Elite Who Know Whats Best for the Little People.
    Ends justify the means, and all that.

    And keep in mind how the broadcast news business works- this decision wasnt made in a vacuum by David Gregory, the ditsy talking head. The final call is made by the producer of the show, and undoubtedly with prior consultation by NBC management AND counsel, who would have had to weigh in on the decision, having been notified by the DC police the answer was no…

    So they threw Gregory under the bus, with a big going away present- but the real responsibility is elsewhere.

  37. No matter what you think about whether he should have been arrested, this case is a pretty solid example of Do Not Talk to the Police.

    Next time I get pulled over, I think I’ll hand over a note with my lawyer’s card stapled to it, reading “No interviews of Mr. El will be allowed at this time.”

  38. Remember the larger issue here is the DC Councils’ and Mayors blatant disrespect for the law, both in their words, like the Mayor, and others who flat refused to consider SCOTUS decisions on 2A rights, and in their actions- most recently in the Councils open defiance of Judge Scullin’s order in Palmer, and in foot-dragging for an appeal, on CCW permits for the law abiding.

    A couple of minor updates to that case, here, if you are interested- you will need to create a user name at Maryland Shooters, to open the pdf in this post, which is a good update of where it stands. Attorney Alan Gura is doing a great job, again, it appears.

    http://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=3609418&postcount=2592

    IANAL, and I’ll wait for any with more legal experience to opine, but its another example of how litigation takes time, with wise strategic patient moves, and experienced tactics, backed by deep pockets. Both SAF and NRA and some states groups have provided the funds on the precedent setting cases, thanks to 2A rights donors.

    Dean Weingarten has done a great job of explaining this case in laymans terms, on TTAG and elsewhere:
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3237555/posts

    Keep Calm and Carry On.

    • I wish there could be a million man march in DC with people holding standard capacity magazines – all with a videographer recording each one. Flood the system with either arrests for this stupid law, or no arrests knowing how stupid this law is.

  39. David Gregory should have been arrested. He should have been treated a severe as Joe Q Public caught in D.C. with a spent piece of brass or a magazine. I bet the D.C. Attorney General wouldn’t have failed to prosecute if it was W. LaPierre! BTW, why the hell does D.C. have an attorney general? They are a city, not a state. That shows that megalomania and narcissism runs rampant in D.C. I have a suspicion that the Chief ran interference for old David as well.

  40. Gregory knowingly and willfully broke a stupid law that he probably agrees with. Damn right he should have been arrested – so should those moronic D’s that wave around so-called “assault weapons” (with their fingers firmly on the trigger) in Capitol buildings.

    • Wish we could get to the bottom of this. Somebody smuggled the evil clipathing into DC in the first place, somebody stored it until air time, somebody carried it to DG, someone carried it away, shit, we should have filled the damn jail up. And I’d guess the cameramen would be accomplices. I can’t even imagine the danger to the children.

      • And we could have found that out except the DC police were not allowed to investigate further (i.e. by arresting Gregory, the small fish, and giving him a carrot and stick to bring them to the bigger fish)

  41. Part of me says no because it’s an unconstitutional law, not that the constitution applies in DC anyway. But then again I’m all for control freak puppets and the talking heads leading the drum line to tread upon our civil rights being held to the same standard as anyone else. Unequal weights and measures is the ether in which tyranny swims.

  42. One set of rules for me, and another for three.

    Absolutely he should have been arrested. I’ll even bet my bottom dollar that he would have gladly accepted the help of the NRA or the SAF (or both) or any number of pro-rights organizations in his legal defense.

    What a fucking hypocrite.

  43. The reason the AG stomped on arresting him is simple. Money. The network had the resources to fight the charges to the point of having the mag limit found unconstitutional .
    Just my $0.02.

  44. David Gregory is a grunt. NBC is the army behind the grunt . The General is Irving Nathan (prosecutor)
    BoG the general down with lawsuits. Bog them down , then install a Pro-Rights A.G.
    Do it now…. before you have to stand in front of a column of tanks !

  45. Wouldn’t it be interesting if instead of racking a shotgun or something like that we would see someone (or someones) publicly possess the same high-cap magazines and then get charged?

    …and then sue the pants off the city.

  46. Under the premise that justice is blind…then absolutely he should have been arrested. An arrest doesn’t mean guilty. He would have had his chance to plead his case befoere a jury of his peers….just like the rest of us. Why not? Are journalists exempt from the law? What if he brought an AR-15 on the set? Where is the line drawn? Dare I say that if RF did that for an interview for TTAG, we’d be taking up a collection for his legal defense fund.

    The fundemental foundation of our legal system is that all men are treated equally in the eyes of the law…once that begins to erode, the house will eventually collapse. How can citizens believe they will be treated fairly, if blatant favortisim is doled out to the selected “most favored few”. Apparently in DC, all men are equal, but some are more equal than others.

  47. I think the answer is yes, much as it pains me to say it.
    If someone wants to hold others accountable to a law, they themselves should be first up for prosecution when they violate it. To do otherwise is to create a double standard.

  48. Yes.

    Don’t get me wrong, the law should never have been passed. But since it was, given that Gregory and his manager knew for a fact that they were going to be breaking the law, they both should have been arrested under that law.

    They should have been treated like any other citizen proven to have broken that law. There are over a hundred DC citizens being persecuted under that law – and Gregory should have been part of that number.

  49. I didn’t wade through the 175 comments (at least not yet), but thought it appropriate to remind everyone here that Gregory’s wife, Beth Wilkinson, is a high powered DC attorney, and esp. that David Gregory and wife knew D.C. Attorney General. There is a picture there of his wife and the DC AG arm in arm. Anyone wonder why Gregory wasn’t charged? Look no further than this.

  50. What Wayne LaPierre should have done the moment Gregory brandished the magazine was whip out his cell phone, call 911, and say, live and on the air, “I want to report a crime in progress at the NBC Studios in Washington DC”….and gone one on detail what he saw.

    While waiting for the cops to arrive while Gregory sputtered away in disbelief, LaPierre should then have said: “The law is ridiculous and unconstitutional….but as long as it is on the books, I and other NRA members, obey it and so should you.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *