 | | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) should (...) order (...) The reason that I think it makes sense is that if it took 75% of the people to agree, most of them wouldn't be voted back in place. We would have the obvious victimizations illegal and some meta-organizational issues (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) That argument won't stand up in court. Well, maybe it will in Texas... (...) Ahhh, the Death Penalty for power tools! Forgive me if I was not paying attention: is that more defensible than the Death Penalty for a crust of bread? (...) Hey, no (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) OK, you are right with regard to the fireman situation. I should have qualified the unidentified person better. In general, if a stranger is in my home uninvited I'll be going after them with everything that I have until they are either (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) In the "leave" sense not the "bolt action rifle" sense. If we get an actual majority to vote themselves bread and circuses in a fair and honest way, they are welcome to their little experiment, I'll vote with my feet. But what we have now, (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) Generally, no, you are wrong. You have to establish reasonable belief that your life was in danger. Example, I'm standing there admiring your Lego with you, when you spot a 10 year old ripping off one of your sets (Black Seas Schooner, dang, a (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
