What happens to a dis-armed populace.

"JOF" <jofrancis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bs8sn1h1hira6nvrnqvlg6uhudg03b3nsd@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:27:01 GMT, bob crownfield
> <crownfield@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>>> So there should be no right for people to express a concern about
>>>>> anything they see as being hazardous to their health and safety?
>>>> But John.
>>>>
>>>> John John John.
>>>>
>>>> You've stated, over and over and over and over:
>>>>
>>>> And over and over and over:
>>>>
>>>> Despite dog clubbings and hatched wielding and teeing off on rude
>>>> golfers,
>>>>
>>>> Despite career criminals killing several Mounties with an assault
>>>> rifle,
>>>>
>>>> There's absolutely -no reason- for you to be worried about your health
>>>> and
>>>> safety.
>>>>
>>>> None. Nada. Bupkus. Zilch.
>>>>
>>>> You simply can't have it both ways.
>>>
>>> Major spinnage there. Another question you just can't bring yourself
>>> to answer honestly?
>>
>>major whoooosh, and non response?
>
> The question was only about whether or not he defended the right to
> free speech. I can't twist that answer any way that it answers the
> question.

I wasn't answering your question.

It needs no answer in this forum.

I was questioning it's premises, which you really hate.


>
> JF
>
>
> You are who you pretend to be. -- Kurt Vonnegut

"Popeye" <Popeye@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
news:11ns1gsn5kosv5e@news.supernews.com...

> Maybe me, but probable Scott, and, obviously not taking into account
> mini-guns.

Which are legal with no license.

> No clue, or as to how many are "sniper nuts" or "long distance nuts",
but,
> I'm absolutely unaware of any misdeeds performed by these 2-5000 dollar
> weapons that you fear, that cost 5-25 dollars a round to shoot.

Not one.

Greg Mossman wrote:
> "Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:gIjff.71065$ty1.56395@bignews1.bellsouth.net. ..
>> "Greg Mossman" wrote
>>
>>>> Criminals always fuck up, and after that, it is the lawyers like Greg
>>>> that
>>>> put them back on the streets.
>>> There's that great respect you have for any other constitutional
>>> principles other than your beloved and impotent Second Amendment.
>> I checked pretty carefully and, try as I might, I've found no mention of a
>> freedom from conviction or freedom from just punishment.

even worse,
you never found any mention of anything
but full due process.

not true justice and impartiality, just due process.

>
> Nor did I. But if an alleged criminal was "put back on the streets", a jury
> of his peers failed to convict him and because we presume people innocent
> until proven guilty, he was set free. Or the state violated one of the
> constitutional protections against illegal search and seizure, or one of the
> rights that people have to a fair trial, and the judge set him free.

"bob crownfield" <crownfield@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:S7rff.1878$a62.1366@trnddc07...

> even worse,
> you never found any mention of anything
> but full due process.
>
> not true justice and impartiality, just due process.
>
> >
> > Nor did I. But if an alleged criminal was "put back on the streets", a
jury
> > of his peers failed to convict him and because we presume people
innocent
> > until proven guilty, he was set free. Or the state violated one of the
> > constitutional protections against illegal search and seizure, or one of
the
> > rights that people have to a fair trial, and the judge set him free.

Except of course, those convicted and incarcerated, for whom lawyers with no
morals argue to release the creep early, only to re-offend, and then to
minimize punishment, blame society, mom and dad, etc, all the while
collecting a fat paycheck.

Or because he could afford 6 million dollars worth of lawyer. Now, OJ cant
sue the state or county or the prosecutor for wrongfully arresting him, even
though he was aquitted. Then he went on to be judged against (found guilty
of their deaths) in a civil trial.

How many wrongful prosecution suits are brought against DA's that sentence
innocent men, proven innocent by DNA testing or other evidence, to death?

How many men have done hpw many years in prison to enable a lawyer to climb
the promotional ladder of the DA?

How many absolutely guilty men have been aquitted only to go right out and
do the same crime?

Why arent there any lawyers swinging for these heinous crimes?

Because it is a fucking racket.

If Popeye, Lee or I did what OJ did, we would have rode the needle long ago.

Because we cant afford the "justice" OJ could.

> > Or the state violated one of the
> > constitutional protections against illegal search and seizure, or one of
the
> > rights that people have to a fair trial, and the judge set him free.

Funny, you judge and condemn daily without hesitation. Everyone knows the
truth, and it isnt what comes from you. All you have a sales pitch, and a
stale one.

In America, you can have all the justcie you can afford.

"JOF" <jofrancis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:vp7nn114esgkdfo3mn56ptup8gik7948ba@4ax.com...

> So the next time some drunk in a bar confuses his tools and points his
> gun at you instead of his umbrella you won't be upset?

Next time "some drunk" in a bar points a gun at you or anyone you know, let
us know.

"Scott" <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:l8ednXeK0fm3lODeRVn-oA@wavecable.com...
> "JOF" <jofrancis@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ih1qn1po5pu828cj3bhp5g84439t8nckqd@4ax.com...
>
> > Why is it when I type the words "I don't want guns outlawed" it
> > doesn't seem to be visible on some computers?
>
> Because you then follow with shit like this:
>
> > Worse than annoying when it leads to irresponsible idiots carrying
> > guns due to peer pressure. It's potentially hazardous to everyone's
> > health and a pyrrhic victory for gun rights..
>
> Where do you get this peer pressure shit?
>
> And, irresponsible idiots are called "criminals".
>
> > Greater percentage of people carrying guns would be more responsible.
> > Ergo, safer streets all the way around.
>
> Legal gun owners arent the problem, no matter how many times you chant the
> mantra.
>
> > Hopefully it would weed out some of those who would carry only because
> > of peer pressure by making it just a little bit tougher for them to
> > get a permit and/or buy a gun. It shouldn't impede any responsible
> > individual from getting a permit. I would think responsible gun owners
> > would be happy to see tougher conditions for getting permits.
>
> The conditions are tough enough, but then how would you know that?
>
> Ever apply for a CCL?
>
> Ever purchase, own or carry a gun in America?
>
> Do you have any idea at all what the fuck you are bleating on about?

Nothing like the silence of a cornered far left liberal.

On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:01:09 -0800, "Scott"
<pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>"JOF" <jofrancis@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:vp7nn114esgkdfo3mn56ptup8gik7948ba@4ax.com.. .
>
>> So the next time some drunk in a bar confuses his tools and points his
>> gun at you instead of his umbrella you won't be upset?
>
>Next time "some drunk" in a bar points a gun at you or anyone you know, let
>us know.

Right after I change my skivvies.

JF

"JOF" <jofrancis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:m1kno1t3untc3njnh5h0cd1mugh0g13mjl@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:01:09 -0800, "Scott"
> <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"JOF" <jofrancis@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:vp7nn114esgkdfo3mn56ptup8gik7948ba@4ax.com.. .
> >
> >> So the next time some drunk in a bar confuses his tools and points his
> >> gun at you instead of his umbrella you won't be upset?
> >
> >Next time "some drunk" in a bar points a gun at you or anyone you know,
let
> >us know.
>
> Right after I change my skivvies.

Right.

So, youre entire diatribe is full of shit too.