Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Banned gun owner wins a new trial

  1. #11
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rick_iles View Post
    You need to read it again. All guns were sold to the brother-in-law except “one high powered rifle,” The shop owner also said that had the gun been sold, he would have forwarded the money from the sale to Degraw.....further establishing him as the owner....
    It will be interesting to see how the new case goes.

    The news article says that he gave all the firearms to the brother in law. Why/if Degraw was listed as the seller by the shop then it was not correct.
    Take the warning labels off. Darwin will solve the problem.

  2. # ADS
    Advertisement
    ADVERTISEMENT
     

  3. #12
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowwalker View Post
    It will be interesting to see how the new case goes.

    The news article says that he gave all the firearms to the brother in law. Why/if Degraw was listed as the seller by the shop then it was not correct.

    Read it again......slower !! It clearly says all guns except one....the rifle that was at Rodney!!!!!

  4. #13
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rick_iles View Post
    Read it again......slower !! It clearly says all guns except one....the rifle that was at Rodney!!!!!
    The article says all guns were sold to the brother in law in 2007. Then goes on to say that all the guns but one was sold to a second buyer. The unsold gun was then transported to a shop in Rodney.

    If all guns were sold to the brother in law who then arranged a sale to a second buyer, the brother in law should be the legal owner of the unsold gun.

    For the store in Rodney to list Degraw as the owner would be incorrect.
    Take the warning labels off. Darwin will solve the problem.

  5. #14
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowwalker View Post
    The article says all guns were sold to the brother in law in 2007. Then goes on to say that all the guns but one was sold to a second buyer. The unsold gun was then transported to a shop in Rodney.

    If all guns were sold to the brother in law who then arranged a sale to a second buyer, the brother in law should be the legal owner of the unsold gun.

    For the store in Rodney to list Degraw as the owner would be incorrect.
    Comprehension is not your strong suit !! I give up !

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •