It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
RIVERSIDE, Calif. – The man who bought two rifles that terrorists used to kill 14 people in a 2015 California terrorist attack should be sentenced to 25 years in federal prison, the government urged Monday.
The U.S. attorney's office filed a 177-page sentencing recommendation in federal court for Enrique Marquez Jr. It said that while he hadn't taken part in the attack, he did place weapons "in the hands of a killer, motivated by violent extremist ideology."
The Riverside man also bought Farook an explosive powder that was used in a bomb that Farook left at the killing scene, authorities said.
The government said that several years before the attack, Marquez and Farook had plotted two terrorist attacks on Riverside City College and a local highway, California State Route 91.
However, Marquez abandoned the idea of the attacks and distanced himself from Farook in 2012 after three other Southern California men were arrested on suspicion of planning to go to Afghanistan to kill U.S. troops. Eventually, the three and a fourth man were sentenced to federal prison for conspiracy.
Marquez wasn't involved in the 2015 attack by Farook and his wife. However, he pleaded guilty on Feb. 16, 2017 to conspiring with Farook to provide material support to terrorists and with making false statements regarding the rifles he had purchased in his own name using Farook's money.
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Krakatoa
It looks to be a righteous penalty.
Here's the problem, though, and as sure as there's a slippery slope, it will..To wit, anyone selling to a terrorist will likely become subject to Federal or State indictment and open the door to civil suit to any selling of weapons to anyone who misuses those weapons.
Let's take a case where the conspiracy aspect is less clear than this one or even 'borderline', the anti-gun advocates, including Judges who lean in that direction, will likely use this as a precedence to expand it beyond this fairly obvious case. Especially on a State level where that state is anti-gun by policy.
I don't know whether the charges are on a conspiracy basis, or terrorist bent, but if it's not, this will snowball. Bank on it.