I do agree, however it was the parent of my comment that chose to make a point about them having a permit, bringing up the "hair splitting" point of legal possession. Apparently hair splitting is allowed up until the point someone's interest is piqued about the very topic they brought up. I do find it gross when I can't even ponder about the same damn thing the parent brings up but somehow I'm the bad guy for trying to understand it further.

Based on the history of interactions I’ve had with you, you didn’t have your interest piqued, you were looking for a reason that it could be blamed on the victim for information that the shooter had no way of knowing prior to pulling the trigger.

Don’t “apparently” this crowd when you are obviously JAQing off.

So you made a bad assumption.

I'm pretty sure you're the same guy I told I'm for completely open borders, but somehow you got it in your head I'm trying to make excuses for ICE. I'm also of the opinion that the second amendment also applies to illegal immigrants, though the courts generally don't agree with this. But you decided I said some things you consider "right wing" earlier so I must agree with whatever Trump's Gestapo is doing.

The truth is, I couldn't even wrap my head around why they were even arresting the guy, because I couldn't understand why they were going after someone with a permit, which usually requires legal status. My interest relates to the fact that if the federal courts in his jurisdiction didn't agree out of status had 2A rights, and he had a valid permit and legally owned a gun, it should establish he shouldn't be of interest to ICE.

> So you made a bad assumption.

Nope.

You're asking about the immigration status of a guy we all watched get executed.

JAQ off harder.

You find it unusual to ask about the immigration status of people arrested by those who's entire job is to only arrest people who are out of status?

Him being in-status is damning to ICE, not the victim.

He didn’t get arrested, he got executed.

JAQ off harder.