Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

cheyanne

(733 posts)

3. True, technically the man must be proven guilty in court.

Reply to Robb (Original post)

Tue May 28, 2013, 01:53 PM

May 2013

However, the company could have withheld their business from the dealer pending resolution of the indictment.

Do you think that would be illegal?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

43 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Glock exec testified he would keep doing business with indicted dealers because... wait for it... [View all] Robb May 2013 OP

technically hes right, until conviction the guys innocent. loli phabay May 2013 #1

No, technically he is an mikeysnot May 2013 #2

Not as far as weapons are concerned, under federal law. Robb May 2013 #4

Well, that's one gunnie fail Cirque du So-What May 2013 #7

Except when it's ACORN or Planned Parenthood MattBaggins May 2013 #5

In the eyes of the law only Major Nikon May 2013 #13

And morality has no place here? I bet he goes to church with his grandkids on Sundays and the rhett o rick May 2013 #21

True, technically the man must be proven guilty in court. cheyanne May 2013 #3

That's not how the law is worded. AtheistCrusader May 2013 #16

That is correct. Fuddnik May 2013 #17

If only you had been buying several hundred guns, you apparently wouldn't have had that delay. nt Robb May 2013 #18

OK, let's be honest for a moment shall we? Savannahmann May 2013 #6

Under federal law, anyone under such indictment Robb May 2013 #9

Innocent till proven guilty . . . caseymoz May 2013 #41

as long as his companies profits aren't hurt, it's all cool. gotta keep the guns flowing! neverforget May 2013 #8

So you're saying everyone should stop doing business with everyone rl6214 May 2013 #10

Read the thread. Robb May 2013 #12

I always love the "so you are saying" posts where you say rhett o rick May 2013 #22

Glocksucker. Orrex May 2013 #11

I bet that got some here excited, if you know what I mean. nm rhett o rick May 2013 #23

Profit immensely? I doubt it. krispos42 May 2013 #14

obviously it's more than a few thousand BainsBane May 2013 #15

Yeah... bobclark86 May 2013 #19

Yes, it is true about most industries BainsBane May 2013 #20

Wonder how many... bobclark86 May 2013 #32

I don't take orders BainsBane May 2013 #40

It's not like krispos42's post caseymoz May 2013 #42

Of course they are krispos42 May 2013 #25

Other manufacturers are responsible for their products BainsBane May 2013 #26

So do I... krispos42 May 2013 #27

First, are all gun company clients really distributors? caseymoz May 2013 #43

This is idiotic. hack89 May 2013 #24

Gun industry: This is still America... AndyA May 2013 #28

Gun manufacturers are geniuses: they fool a bunch of gunner idiots into thinking it's about liberty alcibiades_mystery May 2013 #29

So he openly admits to dealing with criminals EC May 2013 #30

f*cking gun fetishists need to start spending time in jail bowens43 May 2013 #31

Post removed Post removed May 2013 #38

I think more corporate CEOs sulphurdunn May 2013 #33

Wasn't he sentenced to seven years in prison earlier this week for some other crime? n/t malaise May 2013 #34

Last year. He stole money from Glock. Robb May 2013 #35

Thanks yes that's it malaise May 2013 #36

Here's a link - well worth watching malaise May 2013 #37

“I don’t even know what a gun trafficker is.” SunSeeker May 2013 #39