 | | Re: The big lie
|
|
(...) Err...at the risk of being completely obtuse...I'm just curious: are you coming back to town this weekend? james, who doesn't know what either flechettes or tranqs are, but otherwise gets the point that firearm regulations under different (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The big lie
|
|
(...) Yes. And a fully private system with airlines and airports each making individual decisions on this may well be significantly more complex to administer and track. At least at first. (hmm... I'm flying to Hobby today... that means pack my (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The big lie
|
|
(...) I'm still resolving that part of the issue for myself, but it puts me in mind of the other side of the coin: Since the airlines are primarily private corporations, and the aircraft are their property, they are well within their rights (correct (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The big lie
|
|
(I accidentally e-mailed my reply, and I see Larry has already replied, but I'll add my thoughts anyway...) (...) issue, (...) By ensuring that private enterprise can be held accountable by free market means. This includes giving consumers free and (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The big lie
|
|
(...) Not I *M* O, though. See Friedman. "Heavy regulations" are not required, just full consequence facing. Current corporate law shields officers from culpability. We've had this discussion before. Nothing has changed my view. (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Debunk this?
|
|
(...) Really? (...) You didn't answer that question. (...) Still waiting on an answer to that. (...) What about it? (...) We should. (...) It wasn't and it should be undone. Which I have said before. ++Lar (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The big lie
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) Yes. (...) Yes. Or armed passengers if the airline so chooses. (...) No. But it should also not shield airlines from lawsuits for negligence and wrongful death if the airlines don't put sufficent standards and safeguards in place. (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Identification for Arab Americans?
|
|
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:GK7ptp.Ftt@lugnet.com... <snip> (...) corner. (...) this. GWB even used the word "crusade" in one speech, which must have gone down well when translated for the Arab press. Using "war" was (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Identification for Arab Americans?
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GK77vG.7wL@lugnet.com... (...) Hmmm....didn't a certain European country during the 1930s adopt a similar stratergy for Jews? You see where I'm going with the arguement to this.... (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The big lie
|
|
(...) Larry: I agree with you on principle here, but my question is how we can remove the incentive to cut corners from private enterprise when public safety is at issue, yet still maintain a true free-market enterprise? IMO, we just cannot really (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
