Jeez Oz, are you trying to make people sick?

OzOne wrote

Best part of that story is
"Click image to enlarge"

Of course not. There might be a few loonies that might. But
these are 90 million who would cheer if Micheal Moore fell
over dead, because he stepped over the line of decency
with his last movie.

People who take the time and trouble to get a gun permit,
place great value on two things. 1) the law, and 2) protecting
themselves. Criminals don't bother with permits.

Law abiding citizens avoid the use of firearms, except when life is
threatened, because they do not want to lose this right.

Do you think a person who passed background and FBI
checks, fingerprinting, high costs, and other hassles to obtain a
firearm permit, would risk losing it? No. These are the least
likely people to commit a crime, with the exception of politicians.

I hope this bodyguard takes it to court and fights it. Probably, he
will lose his gun and be charged with a misdemeanor. If it were
me, I'd appeal and try to take it to the Supreme Court.

Bart

OzOne wrote

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:17:43 -0500, "Bart Senior"
scribbled thusly:

The reason MM has a bodyguard is because he ****ed off
about 90 million people.

I would sincerely hope that there are not 90 million people in the US
who would want to harm Moore....

Does Australia have a national permit? How hard are they to
get?


OzOne wrote

Like I said, you need a national law to cover this.


On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:24:14 -0500, "Bart Senior"
scribbled thusly:

The two permit held by this bodyguard, allow this individual
to carry a permit in a total of 30 states, but not New York.

New York is one of the "NAZI" gun states that deny individuals
the right to protect themselves, unless they are rich liberal politicians.

This person was declaring it because he could not get it through
airport security. Even in checked baggage, it must be declared.

In New York, this will get you arrested, even if you are merely
changing planes passing through, without leaving the airport.

OzOne wrote

Only thing the guard did wrong was not have a licence to carry a
pistol in that state.

He declared it at checkin so was obviously unaware that he was in
breach.....Ya don't need to be smart to carry a gun.

Seems you need to look at national laws to cover this.



Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.




Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

OzOne wrote in message

Like I said, you need a national law to cover this.

We once fought a war over state's rights. Such a law would probably
stimulate another civil war. g

Max

"Bob Crantz" wrote in message

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,144921,00.html

Crantz, you dumbass--you've just started the ubiquitous gun control thread
again. Nice going.

Max

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 23:53:48 GMT, wrote
this crap:

Meanwhile, where do you suppose criminals get their guns? That's right! They get
them by stealing them from assholes like you who really haven't a clue as too
how important it is to keep guns locked up securely. If someone who gets into
your house can get at your guns, you are irresponsible.


You are blaming gun owners for the criminals stealing guns? That is
the ****ING MOST INSANE THING I EVER HEARD!!!!!!!!!






Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

wrote ...


Meanwhile, where do you suppose criminals get their guns? That's
right! They get
them by stealing them from assholes like you who really haven't a
clue as too
how important it is to keep guns locked up securely. If someone who
gets into
your house can get at your guns, you are irresponsible.


I sleep with my gun under my pillow, hammer cocked, finger on the
trigger.


--
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_

Scott Vernon wrote:
I sleep with my gun under my pillow, hammer cocked, finger on the
trigger.


I just keep mine under the covers, not under the pillow. And usually I
don't need to keep any fingers on it, still being a newlywed and all...

DSK

We once fought a war over state's rights. Such a law would probably
stimulate another civil war. g


OzOne wrote:
Didn't the side that wanted to more freedom win?

No, actually the exact opposite. The Confederate States was the ultimate
states-rights organization.



Surely freedom to carry a weapon interstate is a basic American right
;-)


Of course. You just have to be careful about not getting caught!

DSK

Do you understand the Constitution?

Did you know that gold is the only legal tender for payment of debt between
the states. Says so in the Constitution.

Molten lava and splinters foir you!

Amen!

BC

"Joe" wrote in message
oups.com...

Martin Baxter wrote:
Joe wrote:

Hey Martin,

Can you not read?

I read quite well. It is however unfortunate that you lack the
literary tools to make your point, it you in fact have one, succinctly.


"It you in fact have one"?

Your literary tools and ability to understand the written word is
about a sharp as a bowling ball for colombine.

I thought I made a point with concise and precise brevity and was to
the point. You failed to comprehend, or you failed to read the news
link.


Do you support the Constitution of The United States of America?

Yes I do. And I have.

How do feel about the ethics and sentiments propounded in
the Declaration of Independence,

The Declaration of Independence and the liberties recognized in it are
grounded in a higher law to which all human laws are answerable. This
higher law can be understood to derive from reason...the truths of the
Declaration are held to be "self-evident"...but also revelation.


or are they also "liberal, lilly livered Kerry crap"?


Hey you have the God given right to suck up to a piece of **** liar
like moore. Just like I have the liberty and freedom to think he is a
using, sorry, low down, hunk of ****, dirtbag has-been, asshole.
Don't Like It?

Cheers back at you!

Joe




Cheers
Marty