MSNBC’S David Gregory Being Investigated For 30 Round Magazine In D.C. On Air


This made my day:

NBC contacted (the Metropolitan Police Department) inquiring if they could utilize a high capacity magazine for their segment. NBC was informed that possession of a high capacity magazine is not permissible and their request was denied. 

Full story – Fox News

LOL priceless… but he went and did it anyway.  What would be even more hilarious now would be if he doesn’t just get away with writing a $1000 check, and actually has to go to jail for a bit.

I cried “double standard” at first, even though I speculated that it may have been a prop or airsoft.  I’m curious to see where this goes now, because I’m thinking he still could just get a slap on the wrist.

If you missed the initial story and video you can check it out – HERE

Thoughts?  Do you want to see D-Greg out of that suit, into a jumpsuit and given three hots and a cot?

Hat tip: jpcmt, Roshal


42 responses to “MSNBC’S David Gregory Being Investigated For 30 Round Magazine In D.C. On Air”

  1. Orange suit, three hots and a cot. If any of us did it, that’s what we’d get for it. Now, mind you, if he gets off with just a wrist slap that’s going to piss off a LOT of people. And we’re on the edge of a party already.

  2. Unanimous Avatar

    Jail! Ass rape meow

    1. Maybe when some 3-tim felon tapes a centerfold to his back and uses him for a grinder, he’ll find himself wishing for an AR-15 and a 30 round STANDARD CAPACITY magazine.

  3. It looks like he may have gotten conflicting advice:

    Also, if we in the “gun community” are to be consistant, maybe we should be defending him on 2nd Amendment grounds.

    1. I agree with this sentiment. If you are pro-gun, you should push for more freedom, not for the better enforcement of current restrictions.

      1. if he joins the nra or similar fine, otherwise to the chair

    2. Nope. It’s not inconsistent to say we want this guy to face the consequences he’d like to impose on all of us. This guy is an idiot, who’s pushing policies that make no rational sense and using his bully pulpit to demonize and sermonize on what others should or shouldn’t need. Because we ‘won’ thatnks to Miller, according to progressives. If he wants to see exactly how much we won, he can see what life is like for a gun owner in DC thanks to the policies he supports, when he doesn’t have the shield of wealth, celebrity, and the ‘media get out of jail free’ card.

      Fuck this guy.

  4. Absolutely should be defending him. Although his point and stance is anti-gun, we really should be going against what at makes him be in the position he is in now. As much as any gun owners wants equal protection in this, maybe we should protect him with the caveat that he needs to be on our side. Any convert is a convert nonetheless.

  5. If you want to “convert” Gregory, which is more likely to do it? Letting him off with a slap on the wrist because he’s a minor celebrity? Or putting him in an orange jumpsuit for breaking a silly law when he meant no one any physical harm? Which of those scenarios is more likely to cause him to question the law?

    I think the best way to make someone question a law is to subject them to it. Besides, I don’t like double-standards, and I’m not in the habit of defending people who are trying their best to take away my rights.

  6. I am not saying let him off. He should go through the process as anyone else should. We should be defending him, though in actually trying to defeat the ban. If he goes to jail, then so be it. But this is another case that needs to go before the SCOTUS as unconstitutional. He’s a mouthpiece in a position your or I could never be in. He is a celebrity of sorts caught in a system of global disarmament. But he is such that has the connections and audacity to get national attention. There is an ulterior motive that could be pulled from the leftist playbook.

  7. *Should* he have the right to have that magazine? Certainly! *Did* he have it? Not in D.C., not right now… If one of us were caught with 30 round (not *bullet* as some of the “reporters” have said, lol) magazine, we’d be in the klink. And, the likes of D.G. here would no doubt be searching our “public” records for some skeletons they could use to villify us… Jail time it should be! And while they probably did get conflicting advice, I don’t believe that “but Mom said it was OK” is a viable legal defense, right?

    As an aside, given that is was illegal for him to have the magazine, I’ll bet long odds that won’t see any mainstream stories talking about how (incredibly) difficult it was for him ignore/bypass that law? Any takers?

  8. All of these talking heads will use every advantage they’ve got. Including using the resources to show how victimized by the system he is. And that will only go to prove our point. Take Brian Williams. Nobody gave two shakes about TBI and returning wounded warriors until he got knocked. Now its everyday coffee talk.

  9. If the gun controllers want to make laws that controll guns and gun assessories, and they break the law(s) they imposse. Then they break that law.


    Fool, he is, yes.

    Nous Defions

  10. It’s a law gun owners have to work around and sometimes risk; why should someone who mocks everything us gun owners believe in and get away with it – he must abide by the same laws as everyone else and if he wants to be ignorant to the mundane law that we must follow then he DESERVES persecution. He’s waving it around asking why gun owners need it when infact that IS illegal? What a moron.

  11. Hell no we shouldn’t be defending him. Especially since the little douche was towing the line of anti-gun arguments while pretending to be above the law because of his credentials. All the decision makers who got that magazine on the air should be treated like any other regular Joe caught with one.

    Defending him does not equate to supporting a removal of the ‘hi-cap ban.’

  12. Cuban Pete Avatar

    I dare FoxNews to follow suit and see if Dc reacts. If they go after Fox, then they have to go after NBC.

    Call DCPD’s bluff!!!!

  13. James M&P Avatar

    Let me get this straight. The police told him it was against the law and he did it anyway. Doesn’t that prove the point that gun control doesn’t work!? The law didn’t stop David Gregory from looking like an idiot so why would it stop a criminal?

    1. Not to mention how easy it was for gim to get a iligal item …

  14. But Gents, we must a bit of decorum with this. Yes he broke the law in all account and should be held responsible for his actions. But it needs to be understood that a conviction could have unintended consequences. We all know the anti-gunners use statistics to their favor. This will just be another number added to the list that they will claim supports the need for an AWB. There won’t be any special clause that denotes he was not a criminal in a criminal situation. They will simplay “we caught X amount of people violating the law,” or “X amount of banana clips were taken off criminals (see he is one if convicted and since he knowingly violated the current law, then he technically is)”. Fact is it will only support their numbers and argument points. As much as I can’t stand the crap they spew, and especially this guy, it is our duty to defend anyone from prosecution of unconstitutional rights infringement. If we use the argument point that it is wrong to have a ban, then we support any prosecution under such ban, then we are supporting the ban by de facto. This guy just happens to be the snake charmer getting bit by the snake; an anti-gunner trying to prove the need to have a ban gets bit trying to show support for the ban. The guy is an idiot by all accounts. But it does support the premise of our argument that the intent to acquire and possess such is easy and will be done at the will of those seeking it, leaving the law-abiding and good people without such device because we choose not to break the law even when we disagree with it. I am not against this guy getting the full brunt of the very thing he supports. But it is on us to defend ANYONE and EVERYONE from such a tyrannical law. It is on us to announce the common sense this type of law violates. If he gets convicted, it is just. But his conviction has a double edge. His appeals should be justly supported for the overturn of the ban. In the meantime, we should be going after the ban instead of going after the man. Besides, the ban in DC only serves one purpose, to have immediate recourse in a march of war against the Beltway. The secondary purpose is to keep the Beltway Bunch safe mutiny while they grab lunch and coffee.

  15. Book ’em Danno.

  16. farmerjoe Avatar

    Am I the only on who caught the story about Michael Moore’s bodyguard getting arrested at JFK,2933,144921,00.html#ixzz2FnQC65J3

  17. That was back in 05. The real story is the idiot bodyguard wanted to carry it on his person on the plane, he was briefly detained and forced to check it in. The fact the retard has an armed close protection officer is what is classic. Doesn’t he realize the gun control he supports will make it impossible for a bodyguard to protect him? Us security folks do not get special exemption from gun control like law enforcement do. This whole topic affects my bottom line and the security of my own men. This is the part I hate of gun control debate, nobody ever talks about the impact on the private security industry.

  18. Johnny Come Lately Avatar
    Johnny Come Lately

    “Prop” magazines are almost always *real* magazines owned and rented out by people with special permission. I’ve worked with several “prop” guns and magazines in L.A. and believe me, I know a real mag when I see one. If they claim it’s a prop they need to back it up with information on the prop house that they rented it from. If they can’t (or won’t) they’re full of shit and willfully in violation of the law.

  19. Even if the ATF say’s ok, the Local police has jurisdiction and has to obey the laws they enforce. He should be made an example of, showing they do Enforce the gun laws no matter who you are. if they do not then it’s Two faced. The Mag “Prop” argument is BS, Unless you can show it’s being Demilitarized, non functional and cataloged as a prop item, so Seriously doubt they did that.

  20. Bebopwing Avatar

    Screw double standards, his first amendment freedom of the press doesn’t give him any special privilege, he’s just a normal dude like everyone else. He’s breaking a stupid law, but he stupidly did it on national TV, and should be subject to the punishment like everybody else.

  21. He should feel the impact of the stupidity of its illegality, and then maybe, JUST MAYBE, he’d understand the absolutely asinine position he seems to support.

  22. Make an example of him to warn the other hypocrites that they’re not untouchable. They (should) have to comply with the law the same as us nobody’s do.

    Feinstein and Schumer need to have their bodyguards disarmed. The president’s daughters school also needs to have all its weapons removed. Let them all rely on calling 911 like they stupidly propose we should do.

  23. What if someone was walking around the nations capital holding up a 30 round mag? What would happen to them?

    1. lol, thirty agents would fast rope from the helicopters, snipers on the roof tops would kill every dog in sight, and for good measure…some random person’s house and/or building would be set on fire by the thirty agents.

  24. I say, we should let this modern day aristocrat suffer the penalties of a law that he supports. He should experience the life of the innocent peasant that he and his liberal ilk ridicule. And if he gets off free? Then I expect another major protest or cultural shitstorm will happen. Either way, responsible gun owners win, and things will be entertaining.

  25. Crunkleross Avatar

    As much as I despise all that DG stands for I can’t support prosecuting him for violating what I believe to be an unconstitutional law.

    1. Keep in mind that Gregory supports this law that is now threatening his livelyhood! I learned not to touch a hot stove after touching a hot stove, perhaps Mr. Gregory could learn the same here.

  26. Gentlemen, that is exactly what this is about. It is about the higher moral ground. We need to be protesting the law and not protesting the man, regardless of the man’s idea. Prosecuting him, as much as he deserves it, only puts a win in the anti-gunners column. We can protest such ignorance of how easy it is to be law-abiding one second and violator the next. This is not about some elitist’s just dessert. This law should not be supported or condoned in any way by any one. It is hard for me to be the dissenting voice on this because I have as much disdain for his kind as the rest. But the “of with his head” rhetoric is self-defeating to our cause. We shouldn’t want anyone to prosecut under such a dismantling of God-given, constitutionally-recognized rights. Yes, we should point the finger and say I told you so. And maybe he should earn some jumpsuit time, but we should be arguing the heinousness of this law instead of the idiot’s view getting the goose portion. Gentlement, I implore you to see that the result of this commie’s conviction is equal to supporting the ban as the ban is specifically designed to convict such – the mere possession of STANDARD capacity magazines is punishible. This is the exact effect anti-gunners are aiming for and now, we as pro-liberty and pro-right advocates, are calling for the same result as those who oppose us? The left do not have a problem with eating their young and they believe no one but the lawmakers are immune. This guy supports that up to this point, maybe he can change his tune, maybe if WE THE PEOPLE step in and stop this madness, he and others like him can see our passion for liberty and justice for ALL. If we are truly sheepdogs, III%-ers, then we should be vigiliante to protecting everyone’s freedoms, not selectively for a matter of taste your own feces retaliation.

    1. If you’re wanting someone to defend, there are plenty of people more deserving. Unless you spend equal time and effort defending everyone charged with the same crime, then you are implicitly agreeing with the concept that celebrities are not to be held to the same standard as everyone else.

      And since you brought up the term “sheepdog,” since when do sheepdogs step in to save wolves?

  27. As we should be stepping in to save all from this type of legislation. I’m not a DC resident, so I don’t have any pushor pull mechanisms there. But the NRA could take on the case, or any other organization could. Why should this particular case be handled, because it already has exposure and the guy could be used as a mouthpiece for the cause. A consumate professional and armed professional always has the mindset of protecting others. In a battlefield strategy, it may become necessary to save a wounded enemy because of the intelligence potential. Thus, it is not uncommon to sew up the bad guy and bring him home. In this case as well, the cost benefit analysis is worth a rescue attempt in that this idiot one day spewing garbage about banning could be the spewing its necessary demise the next. And like the battlefield, it may be necessary to use the enemy as an agent to infiltrate the enemy encampment. Maybe civilian terms would be appropriate, flip the bitch into a snitch. If guided through correctly, the whole perception of our movement could be seen differently if we spin it to show we are willing to protect all, even those that oppose. Yes, there are a thousand reasons why a “sheepdog” would rescue the “wolf”. Anyone that has ever spent a day in the life of an intelligence agency will back me up. And the intelligence community will tell you a flipped asset is better than a direct attack any day of the week.

  28. We all agree that the left use emotionalism in their rhetoric and ideas. Showing our compassion and passion for all walks would prove their slander wrong. They believe we are a bunch of caveman creatins hanging onto our bibles and guns. Frankly, we haven’t given them any reason to not think so. They are not listening to our intellectual points and facts. So we can at least give them an opportunity to see our passion for liberty and our compassion for the American way of life. Yes, this walking windbag violated a law, a law in which we all detest. And yes, he used our tool to discredit us. And yes, he supports everything we are against, for now he does. Convert him to our cause. And let the credence of who he used to be ring in his testimony to who he is now. Frankly, a conviction will not ruin his life. He doesn’t have to worry about losing his gun rights, he won’t be a felon, so he doesn’t have toworry about losing his voting rights. He will probably get his job back at the scoundral state media factory. But, will he be an mouthpiece for how bad the jails are or will he be a mouthpiece for how the gun owners and freedom lovers stepped in and saved him from himself? That is something we have an influence in on either side. We could continue to damn him and he will continue to damn us, or we could keep him from the inevitable and he would be our indentured servent.

  29. Dude, you’re fooling yourself if you think that defending someone who considers themself above the law will do anything but solidify that concept in their mind. I hope you don’t actually believe the “let’s flip him and make him a mole” nonsense. If you really think that, I doubt any arguments I have will make a dent in that fantasy, so I’ll quit trying. I don’t question that your heart’s in the right place, but your logic just doesn’t connect with reality.

  30. And I feel the same about you. You obviously don’t understand the seriousness of every conviction under a violation of a gun law. Every number they acquire is a number they think supports their cause. If need some reasoning go to Feinstein’s official page and look at the studies and stat she uses to support her cause. Its too easy to get wrapped in vengence. I am not idealistic about this concept, I am just trying to get people to understand warfare is more than direct action established acrage battlefields. My proposal to all is understanding the Art of War. And your thought that I don’t get it shows more that you are short sighted wanting immediate gratification. There is a conventional war for our liberties and we must use unconventional warfare to win.

  31. Well, I guess he IS going to host Sunday after all, to boot, he will be interviewing dear leader.

    I would love to see them put the bracelets on both of them. Gregory for the magazine, Obama for being a Kenyan impostor.

  32. Epic!

    Bottom line = If you have money and fame, you can get away with pretty much anything.

    If you’re broke as a joke, stand by to do time. See George Zimmerman…that poor

  33. Farmerjoe Avatar

    Equal Justice Under The Law