On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 21:50:37 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .

I miss Mary. Imagine my disappointment when I found out she really was
John...

Ed Huntress

but "she" was good in debate.

Gunner

The hell she was. After describing those armed guys as "students," she
neglected to mention that they were also police officers -- one of them
currently employed. That he had a bulletproof vest and handcuffs in his
car
should have attracted her curiosity about that fact. g


They Were students. And if one is not currently employed..he is not a
policeman. Correct?

Oh, for Christ's sake, Gunner. A "student," with a bulletproof vest and
handcuffs in his car?

No **** Sherlock. If they were taking classes, they were students, No?
Or were they ice cream sellers, or hummmm barnacle grinders?

Lott's editorial was about the role of "armed citizens" in stopping a crime.
He neglected to mention that the "armed citizens" were a currently employed
cop equipped with vest and 'cuffs, and another cop who was studying law.

Do you really want to go through that again? Lott gave up on it himself.

You seem to be missing the other 2.5 million individuals in your
distain for Lott. Thats hardly like you.


Sloppy or just didn't present facts that really were not germane to
the story? Were either student there for the express purpose of
responding to the criminals action? No. Were either of them on duty
and in uniform at the time? No. Would it have made any difference if
either of them had been gay interior decorators? No.

Then the story is that we need more off-duty and former cops. He said
nothing about cops. That's because, if he had, anyone with a lick of sense
would have realized that the story wasn't what he said it was.

Why would we need more off duty and former cops? An armed citizenry
does a fair job as it is now.

If that doesn't sink into your head, then you don't understand why Lott saw
fit to write an editorial about it in the first place...and why he neglected
to say anything about bulletproof vests, handcuffs, or cops.

They were not cops. They were students. When they went on duty, they
were cops. I have oodles more training than 95% of most cops..and Im
not a cop. Im just a citizen.

Your harping on this is a bit interesting. The issues you must be
carrying around with you are fascinating.

Gunner

No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound
woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil?
Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence,
they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest
animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that,
and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make
it work.
- L. Neil Smith