I noticed this weekend that a number of comments on both Xavier’s and Peter’s blogs regarding the THR situation center on the perception of a bitter, clueless few that the THR situation we’ve been writing about is somehow about banning sour grapes.  It isn’t. 

It’s about theft – pure and simple.  It’s about a betrayal of trust.  And it’s about a criminal act.  Somehow people are missing this.

Peter has an update that pretty much puts the irrelevant to rest.  I encourage you to go over there and read it.


That central issue is this: the domain name and ownership of THR have been stolen. The rightful owner has now instituted civil legal action to retrieve his property. All of us should support that action, because if someone can steal another’s property with impunity, it affects all of us, as it makes a mockery of the rule of law.

There’s also a criminal law aspect to this, of course. Since the domain name was “hijacked” by a person in one state, while being transferred from the former owner in a second state to the new owner in a third state, it unquestionably becomes a matter of interstate commerce. This is reinforced by THR’s “For Sale” sub-forums, where much interstate buying and selling takes place. That makes this a matter for federal law. As one formerly employed in (and now medically retired from) a law enforcement position with the US Department of Justice, I’ve made a few phone calls to former colleagues, who’ve expressed considerable interest in what’s going on. I daresay we may see some action on that front in due course, over and above any civil litigation.

It’s critically important that the right be upheld in this situation. If that doesn’t happen, or if some form of “settlement” is reached whereby the guilty party receives any type of compensation for returning what has been stolen, it will make a mockery of justice and the rule of law. All of us should surely be in agreement that any such thing would be intolerable.

It’s amazing how so many gun rights advocates are willing to allow simple theft to slide merely because they happen to like to play with the item that was stolen or because they happen to like the thief!  Stunning hypocrisy, people!  Just stunning!  Recognize this for what it is:  a crime.  The previous owner of the domain name is on record as having stated to whom he intended to transfer the domain name.  So why is it so many Second Amendment advocates like to tout the rule of law, while arbitrarily ignoring that law when it doesn’t suit them?

Advertisement