Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#13
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 09:19:39 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote: On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:34:44 -0700, jps penned the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: | |No such chance. | |The easy availability of hand guns made killing Steve McNair easy. | |Gun purchased one or two days prior without a waiting period through a |private sale. | |Nice work NRA. What rabid anti-gun folks don't quite comprehend is that homicidal intent is not weapon dependent. I had to wait to get my Concealed Carry Permit or alternatively, I would have to wait to get a gun. That wouldn't help much if I had a festering homicidal intent. The problem Gene is that there are so many ****ing weapons on the street that your truism may have validity. If we hadn't let the cat out of the bag and had exercised a little better foresight, there wouldn't be a profusion of easily obtainable weapons... Second amendment is not meant to make certain the entire ****ing country is armed. Have you visited a trauma ward recently? I have a friend who works in the local ward. It's filled with shooting victims and the occasional idiot who's cramed his head into a sidewalk from a motorcycle. |
#14
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
jps wrote:
On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 09:19:39 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote: On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:34:44 -0700, jps penned the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: | |No such chance. | |The easy availability of hand guns made killing Steve McNair easy. | |Gun purchased one or two days prior without a waiting period through a |private sale. | |Nice work NRA. What rabid anti-gun folks don't quite comprehend is that homicidal intent is not weapon dependent. I had to wait to get my Concealed Carry Permit or alternatively, I would have to wait to get a gun. That wouldn't help much if I had a festering homicidal intent. The problem Gene is that there are so many ****ing weapons on the street that your truism may have validity. If we hadn't let the cat out of the bag and had exercised a little better foresight, there wouldn't be a profusion of easily obtainable weapons... Second amendment is not meant to make certain the entire ****ing country is armed. Have you visited a trauma ward recently? I have a friend who works in the local ward. It's filled with shooting victims and the occasional idiot who's cramed his head into a sidewalk from a motorcycle. In Virginia and some other states, there's no waiting period and no paperwork. You simply go to a gun show and find a private seller. There's the ones at the show doing sales out of the trunks of their cars. Perfectly legal in Virginia. |
#15
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#16
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#17
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:34:44 -0700, jps penned the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: | |No such chance. | |The easy availability of hand guns made killing Steve McNair easy. | |Gun purchased one or two days prior without a waiting period through a |private sale. | |Nice work NRA. What rabid anti-gun folks don't quite comprehend is that homicidal intent is not weapon dependent. I had to wait to get my Concealed Carry Permit or alternatively, I would have to wait to get a gun. That wouldn't help much if I had a festering homicidal intent. If I were committed to the task... as it appears, other folks, deprived of guns, and committed to the task seek other tools of the trade.... http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...icle603869.ece And, yes, thank you, NRA.... I support you and your efforts to uphold the American Constitution and the rights granted to us to hold and use firearms.... Please seek understanding in the truism that, "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will own guns...." I agree with this post. -NRA Life Member |
#18
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
HK wrote:
wrote: On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:02:11 -0400, HK wrote: Theft, typically, is a non-violent offense. So basically you just slap them on the hand and let them keep stealing until a ****ed homeowner shoots them? I agree that is pretty much the policy now. We had a guy here who was a multiple conviction offender (theft and burglary), caught by the homeowner inside his house and turned over at gunpoint to the sheriff. The bottom line, he was back on the street in 90 days. The guy who caught him says, next time he will be turned over to the coroner. Florida is a castle state. The last guy we had shot dead, in an RV in the driveway, didn't even draw a charge. An RV is a dwelling unit in the eyes of the law here. I didn't give a long answer, but typically I would differentiate between "theft" and "robbery." Theft typically involves stealing, and usually not by force. "Robbery" typically is the more serious offense, and usually involves force. Now, laws and definitions differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, so obviously in some places "theft" can include characteristics of a more serious offense. Generally, I would not give long prison sentences to non-violent thieves. I don't support some aspects of some castle laws or the ways they are interpreted. . If someone is actively breaking into your house, or potentially making you a victim of a carjacking, or something similar, then I think you can stand your ground and do whatever you need to do to protect your life. I recall a case in Texas, I think, where two men apparently were breaking into an empty house, and the neighbor came out and shot them both, even though the police told him not to do so. The shooter was found not guilty of anything, if memory serves. Well, that's beyond the intent of castle laws, I think. When I was newspaper reporter, I remember a case where a shop owner rigged a shotgun to go off in case someone broke into his store when he was not there. Well, it worked...the gun killed a fireman who was part of a crew answering a fire alarm. The shopkeeper was prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced. You really are out of your mind! BTW - it's burglary or robbery. The difference is that robbery involves a person rather than an unoccupied dwelling or unattended personal property. Would you feel the same if you came home and Karen's house was empty and your desk (gasp!) in your basement living quarters was gone along with your mainframe and multiple workstations? And what connection does any of that have to do with a story about a moron who booby trapped his store? WAFA! |
#19
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
HK wrote:
wrote: On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:02:11 -0400, HK wrote: Theft, typically, is a non-violent offense. So basically you just slap them on the hand and let them keep stealing until a ****ed homeowner shoots them? I agree that is pretty much the policy now. We had a guy here who was a multiple conviction offender (theft and burglary), caught by the homeowner inside his house and turned over at gunpoint to the sheriff. The bottom line, he was back on the street in 90 days. The guy who caught him says, next time he will be turned over to the coroner. Florida is a castle state. The last guy we had shot dead, in an RV in the driveway, didn't even draw a charge. An RV is a dwelling unit in the eyes of the law here. I didn't give a long answer, but typically I would differentiate between "theft" and "robbery." Theft typically involves stealing, and usually not by force. "Robbery" typically is the more serious offense, and usually involves force. Now, laws and definitions differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, so obviously in some places "theft" can include characteristics of a more serious offense. Generally, I would not give long prison sentences to non-violent thieves. I don't support some aspects of some castle laws or the ways they are interpreted. . If someone is actively breaking into your house, or potentially making you a victim of a carjacking, or something similar, then I think you can stand your ground and do whatever you need to do to protect your life. I recall a case in Texas, I think, where two men apparently were breaking into an empty house, and the neighbor came out and shot them both, even though the police told him not to do so. The shooter was found not guilty of anything, if memory serves. Well, that's beyond the intent of castle laws, I think. When I was newspaper reporter, I remember a case where a shop owner rigged a shotgun to go off in case someone broke into his store when he was not there. Well, it worked...the gun killed a fireman who was part of a crew answering a fire alarm. The shopkeeper was prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced. Didn't you try to kill someone with your truck for a non violent crime? Don't you threaten to kill anyone who comes in your home uninvited? Sounds like you can't keep your stories straight. -- Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. This Newsgroup post is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects |
#20
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
is this dead or what? | General | |||
Is he dead....? | ASA | |||
Dead... | General | |||
.ASA is dead | ASA | |||
Our Hero is Dead, Dead, Dead | General |