BULLS**T!

[Gerkraz]

You guys are ridiculous.

"zOMG! They are falsely using airsoft to build a case against this kid and now airsoft will suffer too!! /wrists"

Let's get something straight here: the district attorney's office wants to show that this kid is unstable and a risk. They are NOT saying "this kid had airsoft guns therefore he's a threat." They ARE saying "this kid's appetite for violence can be seen through his fascination with guns (airsoft or non), nazis, blowing stuff up, etc." What they are trying to do is show that they likely stopped another Columbine from occurring, which is great news; it means the police are doing their job.

At no point in his press conference did the DA's office say "airsoft guns are a threat to the public" or "airsoft guns are just like real guns" or "we are going to litigate in order to make sure airsoft guns are taken off the streets" or even "this kid has airsoft guns, he's therefore a threat and we're locking him up because of them."

You seem to be complaining about the fact that he said "9mm assault rifle"? How is that important?! The guy is not a firearms expert, nor is he versed in firearms at all by the look of the video. He does, however, have to litigate a case where firearms play a central role, so it's expected that he might make a mistake. So long as the mistake is not made in court, who cares? You guys have NO idea what this guy's qualifications are, but if he got the job he has, he's likely better at it than you! (excluding LawDog).

Bottom line: this guy is an unstable kid who likely would have used the guns he had in order to commit a crime. This, in itself, is criminal. The kid had lots of airsoft guns and whether or not they are illegal has no bearing on the fact that this guy was properly arrested. If he had the legal right to own these guns then he will not be charged for owning them, pure and simple. They will, however, serve to corroborate his appetite for violence to the jury.

Is that bad press for airsoft? Maybe, but don't go blaming the DA's office for properly doing its job.

[Sergeantmajor]

kids today are no worts and no better then the kids of yesterday, their just different, how do you think the parents of the kids thought when the contraception came out and some of them started using them?

[Gerkraz]

There is a difference between using contraception, acting out against parents and committing a crime.

I hope you're not trying to equate an unstable kid and a kid who goes out and has premarital sex by calling them both "kids acting out against their parents".

[Styrak]

Hunh? Are you trying to say premarital sex is a crime? Or that commiting a crime isn't acting out against parents? Or something else? I'm confused.

[Mapcinq]

Originally Posted by Styrak

Hunh? Are you trying to say premarital sex is a crime? Or that commiting a crime isn't acting out against parents? Or something else? I'm confused.

x 2, it seems like you kind of just linked a whole bunch of seperate thoughts together into one mishmash of a statement.

[Gerkraz]

I was commenting on what Sergeantmajor had said.

he said: "kids today are no worts and no better then the kids of yesterday" citing contraception as an example of "acting out against your parents".

My comment was that his post was illogical since his example is nothing like the matter at hand; there is a huge difference between acting out against your parents and committing a crime. Premarital sex as an act of acting out against your parents is not criminal, but collecting guns (fake and real) for the purpose of committing a crime IS criminal.

[Mapcinq]

Oh shit, I though Styrak was talking about his post, not yours. Now im even more confused. I probably shouldnt be trying to work and go on forums at the same time.

[Sergeantmajor]

thats not what i meant. you guys say that kids today are bad and evil, there no more or no less evil then the kids before them, its just a point of view.

kids are kids, there good kids, bad kids and retarded kids.