Jump to content

Lattimore done gone and got himself arrested!


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Jlowe22 said:

Seems like he had the gun on him, because everyone else in the car was charged for having their own weapons.  Two because of some disability(which I didn't even know that law existed...maybe certain disabilities I could see, but seems strange at first glance), and the driver was improperly handling his own firearm or something, I assume maybe had it loaded and in a dangerous spot.  

Bottom line, seems like they were all being idiots, and it does sound like Marshon did have the stolen gun in his possession.

Combine this with the fact they didn't even have working tailights, and I mean at best, you got a car load of idiots.

Edit: Ah, I see what they mean.  Possessing weapon under disability is referring to being a convicted felon, drug rehab, or mental patient, etc.  Sounds like excellent company.

So seems like there is more than just guilt by assossiation.

Also just a FYI, but veterans with PTSD also fall under the disabilities that prevent gun ownership.  It's one reason, among many, that some veterans will refuse to get treatment for mental health issues as it'll prevent them from being gun owners.  So not saying the individuals with Lattimore were the same, but just generalizing everyone that fall into that category isn't something you should do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to point out that some of the comments have started to lean in a way that is not acceptable.  You all know I'm not one to really bust down on what you guys talk about, but you must still make sure to keep discussions based on what has been reported or knowledge from individuals in the know.  Making prejudiced or stereotypical comments will not be tolerated.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Raves said:

So seems like there is more than just guilt by assossiation.

Also just a FYI, but veterans with PTSD also fall under the disabilities that prevent gun ownership.  It's one reason, among many, that some veterans will refuse to get treatment for mental health issues as it'll prevent them from being gun owners.  So not saying the individuals with Lattimore were the same, but just generalizing everyone that fall into that category isn't something you should do.

I wont speculate on why they couldnt have firearms, but the fact they were charged with what they were charged for and only Marshon got charged with possessing stolen property makes it sound to me like there were multiple weapons and Marshon's was either stolen, or he took the rap for it.  I mean, if there was only one weapon, and it was stolen, why would only Marshon get charged with stolen property?

In any case, im tired of speculating on this, it is what it is, hopefully he'll learn from it and move on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jlowe22 said:

I wont speculate on why they couldnt have firearms, but the fact they were charged with what they were charged for and only Marshon got charged with possessing stolen property makes it sound to me like there were multiple weapons and Marshon's was either stolen, or he took the rap for it.  I mean, if there was only one weapon, and it was stolen, why would only Marshon get charged with stolen property?

In any case, im tired of speculating on this, it is what it is, hopefully he'll learn from it and move on.

I'm only really mentioning because of the obviously sarcastic comment of "Sounds like excellent company." as there are many reasons someone could be considered carrying with a disability or whatever it's listed as.  Several people have decided to start making references to individuals character/beliefs that are not known and we should refrain to keeping discussion to being based on what is known is all.

As you mentioned the others weren't charged with possession of a stolen property, only Lattimore.  That is obviously a big red flag in this case and puts him in an even worse spot both in the legal system and in relation to his ability to play football going forward, not to mention his potential contract negotiations.  I just want to make sure we are trying to stay on track talking about what is known about the situation and character of those involved not accusations without merit.

So only known facts and potential ramifications of the charges, nothing about individuals character or potential motive for actions without proof.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Raves said:

I just want to point out that some of the comments have started to lean in a way that is not acceptable.  You all know I'm not one to really bust down on what you guys talk about, but you must still make sure to keep discussions based on what has been reported or knowledge from individuals in the know.  Making prejudiced or stereotypical comments will not be tolerated.

It wasn't prejudiced or stereotypical. He was arrest by the gang investigation unit. But hey, censorship is alive and well...

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Dome said:

If that really was the end of your sentence that would be fine and I wouldn't have said much to it, but that wasn't all you had to say. 

It was the end of the sentence, not the end of my thoughts. Is there a problem with that? It's a way of making a point. I suppose you'd wish my thoughts to stop with just one sentence, eh?

So far you've essentially said I'm jumping to conclusions. Well, so far, he was indeed busted for having a loaded gun on him (1 for 1). It was on the registry of guns reported as stolen (2 for 2). They were busted by a gang investigation unit, so I assume there's a possibility that there's some affiliation here, but I'll call myself on that one, I was speculating. So if I'm jumping to conclusions in saying things that were indeed reported as accurate, then you're jumping to conclusions in contradiction.

Bottom line, I don't like "professionals" doing bone headed, stupid and selfish things that can jeopardize others, and negatively affect their team. There's no excuse for it. He's not hurting for money, so he could easily purchase a legit gun through an appropriate dealer, and apply to carry said weapon legally. But he didn't, and that's just unacceptable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Mid Iowa said:

It was the end of the sentence, not the end of my thoughts. Is there a problem with that? It's a way of making a point. I suppose you'd wish my thoughts to stop with just one sentence, eh?

Well no, I wouldn’t. But if you’re trying to make a point, make the whole point.

Quote

So far you've essentially said I'm jumping to conclusions. Well, so far, he was indeed busted for having a loaded gun on him (1 for 1). It was on the registry of guns reported as stolen (2 for 2). They were busted by a gang investigation unit, so I assume there's a possibility that there's some affiliation here, but I'll call myself on that one, I was speculating.

Thank you for calling yourself on that, that’s all I was after.

Quote

So if I'm jumping to conclusions in saying things that were indeed reported as accurate, then you're jumping to conclusions in contradiction.

That’s not how jumping to conclusions work. I’m not assuming anything, while you were assuming he was out “banging” which was the issue I took with what you said.

A jury isn’t “jumping to the conclusion” of innocence when hearing a case before giving a verdict. They’re not jumping to anything, much like I don’t. 

Quote

Bottom line, I don't like "professionals" doing bone headed, stupid and selfish things that can jeopardize others, and negatively affect their team. There's no excuse for it. He's not hurting for money, so he could easily purchase a legit gun through an appropriate dealer, and apply to carry said weapon legally. But he didn't, and that's just unacceptable.

I don’t disagree with this. If you had said all this first, rather than chalk it up to “banging” there wouldn’t have been an issue. 

Now that you’ve fully formed your thoughts on the matter I don’t think we’re far off, but your initial reaction was, well, reactionary.

Edited by Dome
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Mid Iowa said:

It wasn't prejudiced or stereotypical.

If you found out that Ryan Ramczyk was arrested with a stolen gun in his possession, you wouldn’t have said “he just wants to bang”

and please don’t act like you would have 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously people can't listen so I'll lock this up until there is new information to be added.  Just send me a message if I haven't unlocked it yet and we can hopefully discuss things again.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Raves locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...