Dave Hinz wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:25:07 GMT, John R. Carroll
wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote:

Easy now, John. You said that the threat from the left was
"imaginary".
I provided a counterexample. And it's not their past misdeeds that
worry me, it's their future misdeeds.

Your examples are real, what isn't ( in my mind of course) is the
threat they present.

Your trust in those individuals is inspirational (in an unwise, naiive
kind of way).

Imagining ( ie imaginary ) future deeds while overlooking or
justifuing what is a clear and present danger just doesn't make
sense.

Just think what would happen if _both_ groups got their way.

Problem is the left wants to disarm people so they can't do anything
about other threats.

Not in my opinion.

Short memory? How about this gem?

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), on CBS` "60 Minutes"-- "If I could
have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an
outright
ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all
in, I would have done it."


I wish she had Dave. It would have gotten to the Supremes very quickly and
between the courts and the freshly minted congress that would have been the
product of the next election cycle, this issue would have been confronted
head on and dealt with clearly in the appropriate venue. You aren't afraid
to let the system resolve this issue in a definitive way are you? We either
have the greatest system on the planet or we don't. Which is it?

BTW, she was referring specifically to a particular category of fire arm.
Something I suspect you know.



There are skunks in both parties on this issue and they
are being handed the tools they need - today - to achieve their aims
at a later date.

YES. and if the left has you and I 'turn them all in' all we can do
about it is whine.

Well, we'll still be at "war" in 2006 and 2008 Dave so we'll have an
opportunity to see what the other side will do.
Unless of course the courts and the Congress will stand up to W before then.


You can spare me the prying out of my cold dead hands stuff. A
compelling case might get real traction and then you would find
yourself on the "wrong" side of the issue and an outlaw. You might,
in fact, be classified as a terrorist and your habeas corpus rights,
among others, would be out the window courtesy of the USA Patriot
Act. Now THERE is a misnomer if ever there was one.

Speaking of short memories, did your party's senators vote against the
original one? Other than Russ Feingold, they all went along...)

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.

Second, what's the difference? The votes that count are the ones about to
occur now, not the ones that didn't, might or might not at some future date.



--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com