Re: Yet another Democrat, wants to remain ignorant

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 17:36:03 GMT, John R. Carroll <jcarroll@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dave Hinz wrote:

>> Passing a bad law in the hopes of a SCOTUS reversal is a poor
>> strategy.

> I'd agree with you in many, even most, circumstances but not here because of
> the active and well financed nature of the gun lobby.

The reason the "gun lobby" is active and well financed, John, is because
people like me actively finance it. It's not some nebulous entity, it's
people who give a shit about the issues enough to give time and money to
the effort.

>> Time will tell. Taking away the second would make the fourth pretty
>> useless though, wouldn't it.
>
> Privacy is under attack by the executive branch today Dave. Not the second.

Yes, I _UNDERSTAND_ that, John. Would you feel better about what you
see to be Bush's plan, if Clinton and friends had already succeeded in
disarming us?

>> Some day you need to go look up what "infringed" means, John. Even if
>> she was only talking about (gasp!) ugly guns, her intent is
>> unmistakable. As you undoubtedly know, those guns are functionally
>> identical to millions of other, not-on-that-list guns.

> Yes Dave, but in our earlier conversations you managed to impress the value
> of being precise and the disingenuous nature of being overly broad. LOL

LOL yourself. "Turn them all in" is pretty damn clear to me. Further,
you missed my point about "infringed". Even if she did mean just those
17 models (which I don't believe given the context, and I've read the
interview several times), it's on obvious step to the next which is "Oh,
look, this one is functionally identical but doesn't have a (flash hider
/ bayonet mount / whatever) and of course the intent of the law was to
ban that, too. Oh, and look, Grandpa's 100 year old Browning fires
every time you pull the trigger, so that's functionally identical too,
and... and pretty soon, you're infringed into oblivion. Don't pretend
that wouldn't be the obvious tactic.

>> You don't make a stray dog go away by only giving it a little steak.

> I mentioned that regarding privacy rights and you shined it Dave. The camel
> and tent flap analogy is the same thing.

And you keep missing my point that without the second, the fourth is
worthless. They're both important, and both under threat. If both
sides take away what they want, we're very screwed.

>>> First, I've pretty much dropped any party affiliation but I'm still
>>> registered as a Republican. My office is in Jane Harmon's district
>>> but live in one represented by the clones of B-1 Bob. My youngest
>>> brother lives in what used to be Duke Cunningham's district as a
>>> matter of fact and I have a longstanding business relationship with
>>> one of the candidates for that seat, Allan Uke. I've contributed the
>>> maximum to his campaign. Seems fair as he gave me all of the
>>> bussiness I could handle and then some when I was starting out years
>>> back.
>>
>> Evasion noted.
>
> I corrected what was your own false statement Dave. You said something about
> "my party" if you will recall.

OK, whatever. The party of whose actions you don't seem to have a
problem with then. Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, you know,
that whole thing.

>> Riiiiight. History doesn't matter, especially when it's
>> inconveniently
>> at odds with the point you're trying to make. Facts don't exist in a
>> vacuum, John, especially when we're talking current people in the same
>> jobs.

> I don't see that we are at all. The jobs may be the same but they have been
> significantly marginalized.

I see Clinton, Clinton, Kennedy, Boxer, Schumer, and friends to be
current threats to my rights. They don't stop being a threat just
because they're ineffective at the moment.

> I think we just dissagree on these things Dave. I doubt that I could
> influence you and you likely won't influence me. I can live with that.

Fair enough.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT - Those *#&#%$^& Drivers With Cellphones
    ... reported the theft of your gun as the law requires. ... Blaming me for their crime? ... You don't have to accept it Dave and the state won't care at all. ... And what stops them from changing the test whenever they want, John? ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: OT - Those *#&#%$^& Drivers With Cellphones
    ... Whatever Dave. ... Such a bill, passed into law, wouldn't survive the concerted preplanned ... criminals and lock the farkers up. ... The numbers will change any time the voters decide they need to. ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: Bushs Resignation Speech, ping McDave. (Dont worry, Dave, its not all accusations)
    ... Well, thank you for this honesty, Dave, but unless you're talking ... about yourself and your fellow party members, let me restate - for the ... would have real consequences. ... the party of election theft - to hand you not only ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: "Good man" has written a seditious message
    ... Even if he stays in Malaysia he is still guilty under the UK High ... And we've both been brought up in countries that have had laws that state 'gambling debts are not enforceable'. ... Since the day we've been born until this very minute, we've both lived in countries that have had this law in effect. ... Hell no. Cos Dave makes a mockery of the statement 'I am the first to admit when I've made a mistake'. ...
    (soc.culture.malaysia)
  • Re: OT - Those *#&#%$^& Drivers With Cellphones
    ... Dave, ... With a law. ... gun as the law requires. ... Our idiot governor wants criminals to be safe, though, so the killers ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)