Started By
Message

re: Appears Malik Nabers gun charges are going to be dropped

Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:32 pm to
Posted by Elleshoe
Wade’s World
Member since Jun 2004
143616 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:32 pm to
quote:

And that changes what I said how?


You have gotten to be really fricking stupid on this board
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
71121 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:36 pm to
quote:

You have gotten to be really fricking stupid on this board


I guess I’m just regressing to your level.
Posted by semjase
New Smyrna Beach FL
Member since May 2014
11156 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:37 pm to
quote:

Team Sweep
LSU Team Clean Sweep.

Beat you to the post, as I posted this yesterday.
Posted by KC Tiger
Member since Sep 2006
4623 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:43 pm to
quote:

BTW. They can and do revoke peoples drivers license making it illegal for them to drive a car so your comparison is wrong on multiple levels.


quote:

But do they seize the fricking car?


Happens every single day.
Posted by Mathias5k
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Nov 2018
1867 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:44 pm to
BK DOING WORK
Posted by semjase
New Smyrna Beach FL
Member since May 2014
11156 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:44 pm to
quote:

I'm also sad for the police who are understaffed and trying to enforce the law but are not getting any support from the District Attorney.
Or the totally awesome ( ) Mayor of the Crescent City. (Latoya the Destroya)
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
71121 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:45 pm to
quote:

Happens every single day.


Okay. I guess I stand corrected on that. I still disagree with taking his gun away.
Posted by Elleshoe
Wade’s World
Member since Jun 2004
143616 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:51 pm to
quote:

I still disagree with taking his gun away.


He didn’t have to. He could have gone through the criminal process. Maybe he’d be found not guilty and get it back
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
71121 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:56 pm to
quote:

He didn’t have to. He could have gone through the criminal process. Maybe he’d be found not guilty and get it back


He was leveraged into a position that his only option was to give it up. That’s effectively taking it away by force.

I’ve already said he put himself the spot to be dealt with by NOLA criminal justice, that’s on him.
Posted by wildtigercat93
Member since Jul 2011
112503 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:57 pm to
Wait until this guy finds out about civil forfeiture
Posted by therick711
South
Member since Jan 2008
25348 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:59 pm to
I always marvel at how a thread like this which essentially gives information that Nabers isn't in legal jeopardy anymore becomes four pages of one guy lamenting the system and his plea and 7 more trying to persuade him away from his borderline opinion that no one should care about in the first place.
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
71121 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:01 pm to
quote:

I always marvel at how a thread like this which essentially gives information that Nabers isn't in legal jeopardy anymore becomes four pages of one guy lamenting the system and his plea and 7 more trying to persuade him away from his borderline opinion that no one should care about in the first place.


Sheds some light on why people really visit this board.
Posted by therick711
South
Member since Jan 2008
25348 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:02 pm to
You've spent this thread making a wrong point about vehicle seizures and otherwise saying the same thing over and over. I think we all get it. Let's try and move on.

Do we think the existence of this issue will cost him field time next season?
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
71121 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:03 pm to
It shouldn’t
Posted by therick711
South
Member since Jan 2008
25348 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:05 pm to
On one hand I agree, on the other some penalty from BK might actually dissuade other bad behavior.
Posted by tlsu15
Capital of Texas
Member since Aug 2011
10075 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:12 pm to
Just buy him a new fricking gun if you’re so concerned about this
This post was edited on 2/22/23 at 3:30 pm
Posted by MC5601
Tyler, Texas
Member since Jan 2010
3912 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:19 pm to
quote:

Surrending the gun isn't the punishment set out by the penal statute. It's a deal he made with the state to avoid the charges for carrying concealed illegally.


and maybe more importantly, underage. You must be 21 to own or possess a handgun
Posted by GeauxJeaux78
Member since May 2020
782 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:24 pm to
Great outcome for Nabers.

And even better "compromise".

Small price to pay (buying another gun that is)...legally of course.
This post was edited on 2/22/23 at 2:25 pm
Posted by Festus
With Skillet
Member since Nov 2009
85067 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:25 pm to
quote:

He was leveraged into a position that his only option was to give it up.

No it wasn't. He had an option to fight it in court. Why are you saying that was no option?

He smartly chose to not fight it, and in return voluntarily agreed to give up his gun. But to say that was his only option is completely false. You have to know that. Why keep pushing that false story?
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
71121 posts
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:48 pm to
Maybe I should have said only reasonable option.
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 7Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram