FOX is insisting that an individual purchased the pistol upper receiver, drum magazines, and body armor for the shooter, and that in doing so he made illegal modifications to the Andersen receiver, in that adding the upper somehow turned it into an AR15.
There seems to be confusion as to what constitutes illegality, and/or a lack of ability to convey whatever transgressions occured on the part of the shooter's associate that would be legally actionable.
We, who have a good grasp of terminology and legality, are going to be subject to an onerous wave of opinion presented as fact. And as these half-truths pile up, they are going to cement themselves into the public's misunderstanding, and become fodder for politicians looking for extralegal means to castrate 2A.
There seems to be confusion as to what constitutes illegality, and/or a lack of ability to convey whatever transgressions occured on the part of the shooter's associate that would be legally actionable.
We, who have a good grasp of terminology and legality, are going to be subject to an onerous wave of opinion presented as fact. And as these half-truths pile up, they are going to cement themselves into the public's misunderstanding, and become fodder for politicians looking for extralegal means to castrate 2A.