A Judge Banned This Cop Rioter From Owning Guns. He Secretly Bought 34, FBI Says.

[babylonsister]

I wonder who bankrolled him and why. That's a lot of fire power.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/virginia-cop-thomas-robertson-accused-of-buying-34-guns-after-capitol-riot-arrest?ref=home


A Judge Banned This Cop Rioter From Owning Guns. He Secretly Bought 34, FBI Says.
SHADY VENMO PAYMENTS
Thomas Robertson disguised some of the gun purchases as payments for “wedding photos,” according to an FBI search warrant affidavit filed Friday.
Justin Rohrlich
Updated Jul. 02, 2021 8:33PM ET / Published Jul. 02, 2021 3:37PM ET


A former cop accused of taking part in the Capitol riot was granted a pre-trial release in the weeks after his arrest, on the condition that he not own any guns.

But in the months since, he has secretly bought at least 34 firearms and thousands of rounds of ammunition—including armor-penetrating rounds—and tried to disguise some of the payments as being for “wedding photos,” according to an FBI search warrant affidavit filed Friday.

Now prosecutors are asking a judge to revoke Thomas Robertson’s bail, and arrest him for violating his pretrial release conditions for the second time in six months.

snip//

It continues: “Defendant Robertson’s extensive and flagrant violations of the terms of his release order, including numerous violations of the federal firearms laws, strongly support revocation of his pretrial release in this case. This conduct, coupled with his calls for future violence, shows that no condition or combination of conditions can adequately protect the public from the defendant, and warrants immediate action by the court through the issuance of an arrest warrant.”

Robertson is due back in court on Aug. 3.

[JanMichael]

1. Why do these gun humpers need more than 1 or 2?

I get a shotgun a 30-06 and maybe one handgun but why 30 or 40 or 50 or 60 or 70?

[Scottie Mom]

2. August reinstatement of tRump?

Makes me wonder what the hell the Q-asses are planning.

[MagickMuffin]

5. Perhaps to sell to felons who aren't suppose to have guns either

I'm shooting a wedding, I pinky swear.

[Initech]

7. Yeah if you need like 30 or more guns, you've got a problem.

And you should probably be put on an FBI terrorist watch list or two.

[Dial H For Hero]

20. I could easily come up with applications that would necessitate a dozen different firearms,

if one were active in a number of shooting sports. I’ll grant that at the point one (such as myself) owns dozens of guns, one is simply collecting and/or investing.

[The Magistrate]

23. Or Preparing To Equip An Insurrectionist Band, Sir

Really, pretending there is any legitimate reason at the root of this purchase, and posturing as a traitor's defense lawyer, is risible, and a waste of everyone's time, including yours.


"I should like to take you seriously, but doing so would be an affront to your intelligence."

[Dial H For Hero]

25. I wasn't defending him in any way. Someone asked why "gun humpers"

needed more than 1 or 2 firearms. This question was (quite obviously) about gun owners in general, who on average own half a dozen guns.

[The Magistrate]

27. Of Course You Were, Sir

Why craw-fish like that?

It gains you nothing, you will not convince anyone.

In this conversation, defense of the traitor is the only reason for defending 'gun humpers'. This is not an abstract discussion.

That 'average' is made up of a few people owning firearms in immense quantity, and a good many with a gun or two.

Those who do own working firearms in great quantity are by definition unsuited to possessing anything more lethal than a popsicle stick. A sickness of the mind, or criminal or seditionist intent, is a prerequisite for amassing a private arsenal.

[Dial H For Hero]

28. Gun collectors are by definition sick, criminal, or seditionists?

I've had over a hundred firearms at points, although I've been thinning the collection; I currently own no more than 30 or so.

Let's see...I'm not a criminal, unless you count two traffic tickets over the course of 40 years. I'm certainly not a seditionist.

Hm...that just leaves "a sickness of the mind". Tell me, doc...how exactly am I insane? Inquiring minds want to know!

As for the numbers, I'll certainly grant that "super-owners", such as myself, skew the average up. Many people do indeed own just one or two guns, although owning four to six is hardly unusual. Then again, these sorts of numbers aren't exclusive to firearms. Marketing experts have suggested that the most devoted 20% consumers will typically account for 80% of a product’s sales.

[The Magistrate]

29. Until You Recognize A Problem, Sir

There can be no help for it.

[Dial H For Hero]

31. Please defend your assertion, then. Explain how anyone who collects firearms is mentally ill,

a criminal, or a seditionist by definition.

[PTWB]

30. Some folks let emotion get in the way of logic.

Saying there’s no reason for someone to own more than one or two firearms is like saying there’s no reason for someone to own more than one or two screwdrivers.

Just buy a #2 Phillips and maybe one flathead if you’re feeling spunky. You’ll never use anything else!

Folks who make comments like that just have no idea what they’re talking about. Even ignoring people who collect to collect, I can think of a couple of dozen distinct uses that require different firearms right off the top of my head and I’m sure there are many, many more than that.

[The Magistrate]

32. It Is a Common Mistake, Sir

To impute ignorance of the things to people who are clear-eyed about the matter and take a view that is both dead opposite to yours, and correct.

I grew up with firearms, everything from percussion pocket pistols to a broom-handle Mauser was around the house, though of course these weren't fired, but bought and sold.

We went to the range every week. I pulled a marksmanship badge in the Scouts.

No one ever pulls the trigger and hears the noise and feels the kick without feeling lord of death and life.

No one.

Merely as a piece of advice: there is no surer way to reveal your own emotional attachments than to attempt dismissal of an opponent as being over-emotional.

[PTWB]

34. Fancy strawman.

Now back to the topic at hand, how do you support your initial assertion?

[The Magistrate]

36. You Are Not Very Good At This, Sir

"Throw back the little ones, and pan-fry the big ones."

[PTWB]

37. That's what I thought.

LOL

[Kingofalldems]

40. This is an interesting thread.

There's a Rush Limbaugh smear of Democrats directed at you.

Gunners.

And cheers to you sir.

[Hoyt]

39. Believe it or not, someone alerted on your post claiming your were "flaming. . . . . . "

Agree completely that anyone owning multiple firearms -- nowadays -- is unsuited to own them.

[The Magistrate]

42. Thank You, Sir

I rely on the kindness of strangers....

[Hortensis]

26. To protect their nation and their own from US.

They keep saying it. A lot of people who've saled right off the cliff are preparing to fight their neighbors for their lives and their nation.

Of course, for a lot of antagonistic populist types almost everything has always made them want to be able to attack, and a lot of those are in their happy-expectation times now. Step down the threat of violence, and Mr. Robertson could be one of the LW "Much Better Than Democrats" populists -- before they went over to Trump:

“The picture of Senators cowering on the floor with genuine fear on their faces is the most American thing I have seen in my life,” prosecutors said Robertson wrote on Facebook days after the riot, adding, “. . . The only voice these people will now listen to is VIOLENCE.”

[rockfordfile]

3. Not only a traitor but it seems he was up to no good.

Mass murder? the guy in Las Vegas bought loads of guns before the pos murdered Americans.

[stillcool]

4. This is the guy who was a cop until Jan. 22nd

Rocky Mount, Va. (January 23, 2021) – Rocky Mount police officers Thomas Robertson and Jacob Fracker have been suspended without pay as of Friday, January 22. This action is part of our ongoing cooperation with the federal investigation into the presence of both men at the Washington, D.C. Capitol building on January 6. We are fully aware of the serious nature of the information contained in the federal arrest warrants and are continuing to assist with federal agents as they investigate this matter.

The Town of Rocky Mount and Rocky Mount Police Department are adhering to a strict and thorough review process and is prepared to conclude our investigation into this matter early next week and will release an update at that time.
https://www.rockymountva.org/news/all

[RockRaven]

6. Superseding indictment adding every single relevant gun charge, please!

Keep piling them on.

[ItsjustMe]

8. I suspect he has a very

Small Penis.

[3Hotdogs]

14. Nah,

actually he's a big dick.

[Maeve]

22. The two are not mutually exclusive

[WarGamer]

9. I'm curious about the law

He was prohibited from OWNING firearms it says...

So he paid for 34 guns and had them shipped to an FFL.

When you pick a gun up from an FFL, you go through a background check so that the FFL can legally TRANSFER the guns to you.

With the guns sitting at an FFL, did the guy "own" the guns??

Legal issue...

[The Magistrate]

11. Items Were Found At His Home, Sir

From the article:

On June 29, the FBI raided Robertson’s home for a second time. This time, they found “an arsenal of 34 firearms... a loaded M4 rifle, ammunition, and a partially assembled pipe bomb,” the affidavit states. In the outbuilding where Robertson allegedly stored his ammunition, agents found a box labeled with the words “Booby Trap.” Inside the box, agents found “a metal pipe with two ends caps, with a fuse inserted into a hole that had been drilled into the device; epoxy had been used around the sides of the fuse to secure it.” It did not contain explosive powder, but agents say they found a cache of it nearby. They also found a loaded M4 on his bed.

[WarGamer]

12. This is what I was referring to...

What they didn’t find at Robertson’s home, however, were the newly purchased guns—or Robertson. When they tracked him down that same day, Robertson told agents that he had bought the weapons online, but that they had been shipped to licensed dealers and he hadn’t picked them up yet.

“The owner of Tactical Operations, a Federal Firearms License broker in Roanoke that serves as an intermediary for online gun purchases, told agents in an interview that Robertson had 34 firearms waiting for him at the store,” according to a motion filed Wednesday by prosecutors seeking to revoke Robertson’s bail.




I mean I know it's TDB but the reporting is confusing... right? Were the 34 guns at the FFL or at his home? The story says BOTH things.

[The Magistrate]

15. The Numbers Are Interesting, Sir

And it is worth noting the ellipse in the article. It is in a key place, and without hunting up the affidavit there's no way of telling what was left out. Perhaps receipts were found, there must have been some paperwork over the transaction with the dealer. Ownership may be sufficient to break the terms, actually having them to hand may not be required.

But the loaded M-4 on the bed is enough to break the terms of release and warrant returning him to cells.

[keithbvadu2]

10. This from a conservative 'tourist'.

"The picture of Senators cowering on the floor with genuine fear on their faces is the most American thing I have seen in my life. Once....for real....you people ACTUALLY realized who you work for.”

[Mr.Bill]

13. That's how these guys are.

Trust me, Ive known a few of them. If you threatened them with the death penalty they would continue to obtain guns. I don't know what goes on in their heads to make them like this. Some of them never even shoot the guns. They just have to have them. The 2nd amendment is not why they need or want these guns, it's just a tool to rationalize that no one can stop them from having them.

And this isn't even a product of the current political atmosphere for many of them. I knew people like this 50-60 years ago.

[Mopar151]

17. It's a little corner of Bad Crazy

An addiction, compulsion, fetish, personality disorder, with alarming comorbidities. Always been around, but lots more these days, and Damm proud of it!

[Rhiannon12866]

16. Stephen Colbert talked about this guy last night

He said that someone needs to tell him that it's possible to reload, that he doesn't need to have another gun when the one he's using is empty...

[ShazzieB]

18. The article said he'd already been given a SECOND chance!

I sure hope this jerk ass terrorist gets locked up for keeps this time, at least until he's tried, convicted, and serves any sentence he receives. He does NOT deserve any more do-overs. He had his chance, TWICE, and he freaking blew it both times!

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

19. I suspect he and his fascist friends are planning to take hostages as a means to

end democracy and overthrow the government.

They can't use their weapons to attack the government directly, so the only way these cowards can use their weapons in an attempt to overthrow the government is to take large numbers innocent people hostage and make demands.

It is of paramount importance that federal law enforcement keep as many of these fascist terrorist nutjobs under surveillance as possible, in order to stop them from exercising the only avenue for them to use their weapons to overthrow democracy and the government.

Here in the rural red west, these Trumplerite traitors are widespread, and armed to the teeth. Logic dictates that they have found ways to avoid electronic surveillance, and are using other means to conspire for the power, glory, and reinstatement of their fascist jackass messiah.

[Dial H For Hero]

21. As an aside, buying 34 guns doesn't require being bankrolled.

Just half the price of a new car.

[MineralMan]

33. Again, you appear to be defending this guy,

who is one of the insurrectionists at the Capitol on January 6. Clearly, he is not simply a firearms collector. He is amassing weapons for a purpose, and he signaled his purpose on January 6.

I wonder about your reason for defending this particular individual multiple times. In fact, I cannot think of a reason to defend him.

This thread is about an individual who has a bad intent and who was arrested on illegal gun purchases. He is prohibited from acquiring firearms.

As for your claim that you are only arguing against the idea that one or two firearms are sufficient for anyone, I dismiss that, since the story in the original post is about one insurrectionist who is buying firearms in violation of a court order.

We can read what you write and understand it. Truly, we can.

[Dial H For Hero]

38. Good grief, I'm not defending him. I'll spell it out if that helps:

The guy is a prohibited person who has no right to own a single firearm, let alone 34. He needs to have the book thrown at him.

As for this thread, I've been responding to blanket assertions that no one should have dozens of guns. Hell, one poster has called me mentally ill because I collect guns.

[MineralMan]

43. I ignored your earlier posts, which were replying to a person

who asked the question about why anyone needed more than one or two firearms.

However, the the post of yours I replied to was a reply to the original post that started this thread. That post was about the person who illegally bought firearms after being ordered by a judge not to.

I am very familiar with arguments of 2nd Amendment defenders. You appear to be following their pattern, by generalizing a specific instance of illegal firearms ownership by arguing with people who comment generally about firearms ownership. It's a common pattern that appears in every thread regarding firearms. Very transparent.

Unlike many who participate in these threads, I am a firearms owner. A perfectly legal one. I own a few, for hunting and home defense, but just a few. I need no more than that and, frankly, have not used the ones I own for years now.

You will not see me making nomenclature errors when discussing firearms. I know firearms. What you will see is me stepping in from time to time when someone is browbeating another DUer who may not have a thorough knowledge of firearms and may well not own any at all.

Again, I can read. I also understand the strategies used by 2nd Amendment proponents.

[Dial H For Hero]

45. The post of which you speak didn't defend him in any way. The OP was wondering who bankrolled his

purchase of 34 firearms. I simply pointed out that such a purchase didn't require being bankrolled. Hell, I could do it by simply maxing out a couple of credit cards.

This hardly qualifies as "browbeating" someone for a nomenclature error. I strive not to do so, and encourage you to point it out if I ever do. Similarly, if someone posts of a picture of a large gun collection and comments "Why isn't the owner of these guns in jail?", replying politely "Because owning them breaks no laws" is not browbeating, it's simply informative.

As for being a 2nd Amendment proponent....guilty.

[MineralMan]

46. Well, here's the thing:

If you make multiple replies in a GD thread that has something to do with firearms, you will elicit an emotional response from many DUers. There is the RKBA group for extended discussions of firearms ownership and similar topics. I see that it is your favorite group. I do not post there.

Such extended discussions in GD will always meet with strong resistance, and stimulate you to further arguments. There is no point whatever to that. You will do as you please, of course. What I'm saying is "simply informative." At this point, I will not engage with you further in this thread.

[Dial H For Hero]

47. I'm not fond of groupthink. It's rare I'll chime in on a thread just to say, "Me too!".

Arguing against strong resistance helps me refine my arguments.

[The Magistrate]

48. It's The Usual Sort Of 'Not all (fill in the blank) Ism, Sir

Someone criticizes a wretch like Franklin Graham, you're sure to find some people going 'Hey, I'm Christian too, stop attacking me!' And of course, no one was attacking them, but that reaction lends Graham and his ilk credibility when they claim criticizing them is mere bigotry against Christianity. People would do better to make clear the difference between their conception of religion and Graham's, and denounce the latter in fine style. In such a circumstance 'no true Scotsman' can be, and ought to be, overlooked in the interests of comity.

While people whose religion is a portion of their left and progressive views have some sound arguments to make, and real differences with Graham's sort to point to, this does not seem the case with those who engage in 'not all guys with a couple dozen guns!'. They really don't have much in the way of difference from people of rightist ilk.

They offer the same justifications as a right-winger braced in mixed company does, from 'hey, I'm a collector' down through 'I need different guns for different uses' to 'It's the 2nd Amendment', with trimmings of 'you're just being over-emotional', 'you don't know anything about guns', and 'you're just afraid of guns'. The nearest thing to a difference is they would probably point the things in the right direction if it came to that, though even that has an implied 'so be nice to us' undertone.

Firing a gun is a big kick. I've seen the 'wow!' face on people who've done it for the first time. I understand the kick, both how strong it is, and what it's rooted in. That is knowledge you can kill with a twitch of a finger, like some ancient emperor who can have a courtier beheaded merely by waving his hand. That kind of imagined omnipotence runs deep in people, if for no other reason than that people actually have had it, and what exists can be aspired to. It animates super-hero comics, it's the gut of pulp fictions of all sorts. Outside the purely sexual it is about as widespread and popular as things get in our culture.

Guns help such visions escape imagination into concrete act. What makes it different is the speed and ease. To kill with an edged weapon or a club you've got to really mean it, your whole body is involved, mind too. So indulging the kick a gun gives its shooter needs to be carefully managed, and probably isn't for everyone, in the same way psychedelics in wide use had some casualties as well as ecstasies --- they're not for everyone. Just as it's a commonplace that the people who want most to be politicians in office, or police, are the very last people you'd want actually holding power, so it may be with the people who most want to have their guns, scads and scads of them. It is not an unreasonable proposition.

If someone is going to indulge in this kick, doing so safely requires acknowledging the thrill forthrightly, not just its existence but its deep root. Then everyone knows where matters stand. And that they are dealing with a gentleman.

[SYFROYH]

24. I hope there are 34 additional charges that keep this guy in prison for a long time.

It seems odd to me that the Judge granted bail given his statement advocating violence.

[The Magistrate]

35. Revocation Of Bail Is All That Can Occur, Sir

He is not yet a felon, and violating a condition of release on bond is not a crime, merely grounds for being held in custody till trial.

[SYFROYH]

49. Ah. I think there was something in the Gun Control that defined someone under indictment as a ...

...prohibited person.


The law is a funny thing.

[The Magistrate]

50. I Wasn't Sure Myself When You Asked, Sir

So I went and looked it up.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/identify-prohibited-persons

It's an odd straddle. He can't move them, or receive them, and he's not to be sold to, but it doesn't seem to say he can't have them, or purchase them.

Here's the whole text, the indictment restrictions are down at the bottom, bolded.

Identify Prohibited Persons

The Gun Control Act (GCA), codified at 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), makes it unlawful for certain categories of persons to ship, transport, receive, or possess firearms or ammunition, to include any person:

convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

who is a fugitive from justice;

who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act, codified at 21 U.S.C. § 802);
who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;

who is an illegal alien;

who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
who has renounced his or her United States citizenship;

who is subject to a court order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of the intimate partner; or
who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

The GCA at 18 U.S.C. § 922(n) also makes it unlawful for any person under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year to ship, transport, or receive firearms or ammunition.

Further, the GCA at 18 U.S.C. § 922(d) makes it unlawful to sell or otherwise dispose of firearms or ammunition to any person who is prohibited from shipping, transporting, receiving, or possessing firearms or ammunition.

[Kingofalldems]

41. Wow, the gunners are defending this guy.

[Dial H For Hero]

44. How so? I haven't seen a single post in this thread which defends him.

Oh, there are certainly posts (mine included) which have rebutted the general assertion that anyone who owns more than one or two guns is mentally ill at best and a traitor at worst, but that's hardly the same thing, wouldn't you agree?