Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/16/2014 4:48 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/16/14, 4:46 PM, jps wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:35:50 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d
wrote:

On 5/16/2014 3:27 PM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 15 May 2014 13:02:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 5/15/2014 12:52 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 13 May 2014 19:30:29 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"

wrote:

On 5/13/2014 5:15 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/13/14, 4:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

On 5/13/2014 3:31 PM, jps wrote:

You don't leave running cars lying around the house, nor are
they
designed to kill things. They're what's called
transportation, dummy.




One of the design purposes of a gun is to prevent *being* killed.


Another, of course, is to kill.



uh huh. So, who's going to declare a truce and disarm first ...
those
who try to kill or those who are trying to prevent being killed?

Those with guns who are trying to prevent being killed far outnumber
those who actually kill. The vast majority of gun owners are law
abiding and would only shoot someone as a last resort measure.

Most gun related events in the home aren't related to crime
prevention
or bodily injury prevention but accidents or domestic disputes
between
family members.

Prevention is among the least likely uses for guns in a home.


See? Some would argue that it works! :-)

I posed a question to you a week or so ago and don't know if you
responded with an answer or not. Might have missed it.
I asked what *your* position on guns is. Do you favor private
ownership
at all of handguns or are you an advocate to outlaw them entirely?

I'm in favor of people being able to defend themselves, their
families, their homes.

I would, however, put stringent controls on the sale, ownership and
transfer of weapons and treat those who misunderstand the law very
harshly.

So you have a gun(s). Yup, I knew it.

You either don't read very much or real good.



FlaJim's MOS in "letters" when he was in the Navy was deckpaint
chipper/head swabber.

You too could have served your country, if only you had a pair of balls. ;-)

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/16/2014 9:00 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/16/14, 7:48 PM, KC wrote:
On 5/16/2014 7:05 PM, BAR wrote:



It seriously is a liberal thing.... Look at the height of hypocrisy,
colleges. Rutgers a so called "bastion of free speech", just had it's
faculty lead a resistance that made Condi Rice turn down an invitation
when recently they paid "Snookie" to speak there... What a bunch of
morons let me add ****ing to that.. What a bunch of ****ing morons...

Actually, the students at Rutgers led the protests against Rice. Not to
worry, you couldn't get a job digging fence postholes there, either.



I am not sure *who* led what.

I purposely read several media reports on this to get a sense of bias.

Some report student objections only.
Some report both student and faculty objections.

Where the truth lies ... no one knows.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/16/2014 10:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/16/2014 9:00 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/16/14, 7:48 PM, KC wrote:
On 5/16/2014 7:05 PM, BAR wrote:



It seriously is a liberal thing.... Look at the height of hypocrisy,
colleges. Rutgers a so called "bastion of free speech", just had it's
faculty lead a resistance that made Condi Rice turn down an invitation
when recently they paid "Snookie" to speak there... What a bunch of
morons let me add ****ing to that.. What a bunch of ****ing morons...

Actually, the students at Rutgers led the protests against Rice. Not to
worry, you couldn't get a job digging fence postholes there, either.



I am not sure *who* led what.

I purposely read several media reports on this to get a sense of bias.

Some report student objections only.
Some report both student and faculty objections.

Where the truth lies ... no one knows.



My God man, there is video of the teacher.... man, change the channel.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/16/14, 10:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/16/2014 9:00 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/16/14, 7:48 PM, KC wrote:
On 5/16/2014 7:05 PM, BAR wrote:



It seriously is a liberal thing.... Look at the height of hypocrisy,
colleges. Rutgers a so called "bastion of free speech", just had it's
faculty lead a resistance that made Condi Rice turn down an invitation
when recently they paid "Snookie" to speak there... What a bunch of
morons let me add ****ing to that.. What a bunch of ****ing morons...

Actually, the students at Rutgers led the protests against Rice. Not to
worry, you couldn't get a job digging fence postholes there, either.



I am not sure *who* led what.

I purposely read several media reports on this to get a sense of bias.

Some report student objections only.
Some report both student and faculty objections.

Where the truth lies ... no one knows.




It's that language thingie again.

"Led" is not an excluding term.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/16/2014 10:29 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/16/14, 10:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/16/2014 9:00 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/16/14, 7:48 PM, KC wrote:
On 5/16/2014 7:05 PM, BAR wrote:



It seriously is a liberal thing.... Look at the height of hypocrisy,
colleges. Rutgers a so called "bastion of free speech", just had it's
faculty lead a resistance that made Condi Rice turn down an invitation
when recently they paid "Snookie" to speak there... What a bunch of
morons let me add ****ing to that.. What a bunch of ****ing morons...

Actually, the students at Rutgers led the protests against Rice. Not to
worry, you couldn't get a job digging fence postholes there, either.



I am not sure *who* led what.

I purposely read several media reports on this to get a sense of bias.

Some report student objections only.
Some report both student and faculty objections.

Where the truth lies ... no one knows.




It's that language thingie again.

"Led" is not an excluding term.



Good grief.

Funny thing is ... I was a full time college student in the late 60's as
a 18 year old, a part time student over the next decade and a semi-full
time college student again in 1978 as a 29 year old.

Nothing changed much in terms of professor or instructor liberal bias
over the years. The only thing that changed was me and how much I paid
attention to it.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 12:21 AM, BAR wrote:
In article , says...

On 5/16/14, 7:48 PM, KC wrote:
On 5/16/2014 7:05 PM, BAR wrote:



It seriously is a liberal thing.... Look at the height of hypocrisy,
colleges. Rutgers a so called "bastion of free speech", just had it's
faculty lead a resistance that made Condi Rice turn down an invitation
when recently they paid "Snookie" to speak there... What a bunch of
morons let me add ****ing to that.. What a bunch of ****ing morons...

Actually, the students at Rutgers led the protests against Rice. Not to
worry, you couldn't get a job digging fence postholes there, either.

And of course this is a lie.. The protest was nothing until two teachers
got involved. There is video for anybody who wants to look in places
where they play video liberals really don't want to see:)

It is astonishing to see such blatant closed minded group think
prevailing at an institute of higher learning. It appears that the
liberals beliefs and knowledge can't stand up to a little bit of the
other sides view.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/14, 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:37:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

It was decided in a court of law.
There were witnesses that put Martin on top of Zimmerman beating the
**** out of him.


As I said, there were no witnesses and it was Florida. Not too
worry...at some point Zimmerman will start a fight with the wrong woman
and she'll cave in his skull.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:37:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

It was decided in a court of law.
There were witnesses that put Martin on top of Zimmerman beating the
**** out of him.

As clear a case of self defense as I've ever seen. No matter if the
aggressor was black, white, or green. Harry needs to get over it.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/14, 11:47 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 11:33:18 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/17/14, 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:37:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

It was decided in a court of law.
There were witnesses that put Martin on top of Zimmerman beating the
**** out of him.


As I said, there were no witnesses.

You are entitled to your own opinion but you can't make up your own
facts.



No one came forward to report what happened at the moment Zimmerman
decided to shoot the kid. As I said, though, no worries...Zimmerman will
be put in his rightful place soon enough, and, I predict, by a woman.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 11:47 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 11:33:18 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/17/14, 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:37:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

It was decided in a court of law.
There were witnesses that put Martin on top of Zimmerman beating the
**** out of him.


As I said, there were no witnesses.

You are entitled to your own opinion but you can't make up your own
facts.


Why? Harry does it all the time.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 11:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 11:36:43 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d
wrote:

On 5/17/2014 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:37:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

It was decided in a court of law.
There were witnesses that put Martin on top of Zimmerman beating the
**** out of him.

As clear a case of self defense as I've ever seen. No matter if the
aggressor was black, white, or green. Harry needs to get over it.

Yup. They all demanded a trial in a case that was properly handled at
the police station and 2 years and 2 million dollars later, the court
decided it was handled correctly at the police station. Now guys like
Harry are disputing the validity of our justice system.

Harry wouldn't have been happy unless there were a couple of f aux wacko
liberal preachers on the panel to tip the scales of justice.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 11:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 11:36:43 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d
wrote:

On 5/17/2014 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:37:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

It was decided in a court of law.
There were witnesses that put Martin on top of Zimmerman beating the
**** out of him.

As clear a case of self defense as I've ever seen. No matter if the
aggressor was black, white, or green. Harry needs to get over it.

Yup. They all demanded a trial in a case that was properly handled at
the police station and 2 years and 2 million dollars later, the court
decided it was handled correctly at the police station. Now guys like
Harry are disputing the validity of our justice system.


Only cause it didn't go his way.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/14, 1:56 PM, KC wrote:
On 5/17/2014 11:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 11:36:43 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d
wrote:

On 5/17/2014 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:37:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that
handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

It was decided in a court of law.
There were witnesses that put Martin on top of Zimmerman beating the
**** out of him.

As clear a case of self defense as I've ever seen. No matter if the
aggressor was black, white, or green. Harry needs to get over it.

Yup. They all demanded a trial in a case that was properly handled at
the police station and 2 years and 2 million dollars later, the court
decided it was handled correctly at the police station. Now guys like
Harry are disputing the validity of our justice system.


Only cause it didn't go his way.


Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of suicide?

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 3:06 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/17/14, 1:56 PM, KC wrote:
On 5/17/2014 11:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 11:36:43 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d
wrote:

On 5/17/2014 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:37:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that
handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there
were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

It was decided in a court of law.
There were witnesses that put Martin on top of Zimmerman beating the
**** out of him.

As clear a case of self defense as I've ever seen. No matter if the
aggressor was black, white, or green. Harry needs to get over it.

Yup. They all demanded a trial in a case that was properly handled at
the police station and 2 years and 2 million dollars later, the court
decided it was handled correctly at the police station. Now guys like
Harry are disputing the validity of our justice system.


Only cause it didn't go his way.


Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of suicide?

I suspect that he might have considered the possibility of you keeling
over (naut. ref.) before he was able to complete his journey to your
humble abode. Not withstanding, your carcass is not the prize it might
have been at one time. Is it really worth the effort on Scott's part?

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 15:06:43 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of suicide?

I hope you get a fair trial.

Between the busted down door or window and the video tape and the history
of threats, I doubt there would be any charges.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

The L'il Connecticut Peter Pan may dream of grand adventures slaying his enemies but he's a mini version the whacko in Southern Ontario...all talk and no action...unless someone else does the actions.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/14, 4:37 PM, True North wrote:
The L'il Connecticut Peter Pan may dream of grand adventures slaying his enemies but he's a mini version the whacko in Southern Ontario...all talk and no action...unless someone else does the actions.



He's just an unemployable, foul-mouthed, foul-mannered little putz.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/14, 5:15 PM, wrote:
On 17 May 2014 20:17:23 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 15:06:43 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of suicide?

I hope you get a fair trial.

Between the busted down door or window and the video tape and the history
of threats, I doubt there would be any charges.


It sounds like you have this murder well planned out.
Good luck


Murder? Self-defense. It's not some kid carrying a bag of candy walking
through the neighborhood. We're talking about a thug who breaks into a
house looking to cause mayhem and who gets caught in the act by the
occupant and by videotape.

What would you do if a thug violently broke into your house in Florida
while you were sitting on the couch watching your favorite TV
commentator, Ann Coulter? Invite him to sit down for a beer and some
snacks?

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 3:58 PM, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote:
On 5/17/2014 3:06 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/17/14, 1:56 PM, KC wrote:
On 5/17/2014 11:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 11:36:43 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d
wrote:

On 5/17/2014 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:37:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that
handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there
were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

It was decided in a court of law.
There were witnesses that put Martin on top of Zimmerman beating the
**** out of him.

As clear a case of self defense as I've ever seen. No matter if the
aggressor was black, white, or green. Harry needs to get over it.

Yup. They all demanded a trial in a case that was properly handled at
the police station and 2 years and 2 million dollars later, the court
decided it was handled correctly at the police station. Now guys like
Harry are disputing the validity of our justice system.


Only cause it didn't go his way.


Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of suicide?

Are you still hallucinating about shooting somebody? **** you harry, if
I wanted you dead, you would already be rotted and forgotten...


I suspect that he might have considered the possibility of you keeling
over (naut. ref.) before he was able to complete his journey to your
humble abode. Not withstanding, your carcass is not the prize it might
have been at one time. Is it really worth the effort on Scott's part?

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 4:17 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 15:06:43 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of suicide?

I hope you get a fair trial.

Between the busted down door or window and the video tape and the history
of threats, I doubt there would be any charges.

Staging the scene already?

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 5:23 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/17/14, 5:15 PM, wrote:
On 17 May 2014 20:17:23 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 15:06:43 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have
your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of
suicide?

I hope you get a fair trial.

Between the busted down door or window and the video tape and the
history
of threats, I doubt there would be any charges.


It sounds like you have this murder well planned out.
Good luck


Murder? Self-defense. It's not some kid carrying a bag of candy walking
through the neighborhood. We're talking about a thug who breaks into a
house looking to cause mayhem and who gets caught in the act by the
occupant and by videotape.

What would you do if a thug violently broke into your house in Florida
while you were sitting on the couch watching your favorite TV
commentator, Ann Coulter? Invite him to sit down for a beer and some
snacks?


Interesting how you've already characterized Scotty as a thug. Also
interesting is how you've already mapped out in your mind how you'd
welcome a friendly visit by him.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 5:15 PM, wrote:
On 17 May 2014 20:17:23 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 15:06:43 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of suicide?

I hope you get a fair trial.

Between the busted down door or window and the video tape and the history
of threats, I doubt there would be any charges.


It sounds like you have this murder well planned out.
Good luck


"A little Indian brave who before he was ten, played war games in
the woods with his Indian friends, and he built a dream that when he
grew up, he would be a fearless warrior Indian Chief.

Many moons passed and more the dream grew strong, until tomorrow
He would sing his first war song,
And fight his first battle, but something went wrong,
surprise attack killed him in his sleep that night

And so castles made of sand, melts into the sea eventually." [Hendrix]



Like I would knock on his front door:)

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 5:13 PM, BAR wrote:
In article , says...

On 5/17/14, 1:56 PM, KC wrote:
On 5/17/2014 11:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 11:36:43 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d
wrote:

On 5/17/2014 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:37:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that
handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

It was decided in a court of law.
There were witnesses that put Martin on top of Zimmerman beating the
**** out of him.

As clear a case of self defense as I've ever seen. No matter if the
aggressor was black, white, or green. Harry needs to get over it.

Yup. They all demanded a trial in a case that was properly handled at
the police station and 2 years and 2 million dollars later, the court
decided it was handled correctly at the police station. Now guys like
Harry are disputing the validity of our justice system.


Only cause it didn't go his way.


Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of suicide?

Why would anybody, except law enforcement, show up on your doorstep. You
have stated that you are ready, willing and able to kill, with firearms,
anyone who shows up at your door unannounced.


Ironic if he showed up at a stop light one day with one behind the ear...

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 5:45 PM, KC wrote:
On 5/17/2014 3:58 PM, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote:
On 5/17/2014 3:06 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/17/14, 1:56 PM, KC wrote:
On 5/17/2014 11:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 11:36:43 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d
wrote:

On 5/17/2014 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:37:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/16/14, 10:51 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2014 16:50:14 -0400, F*O*A*D
wrote:

Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that
handgun and
you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and
civil
suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself."

No "innocent" people were shot by Zimmerman.



I wouldn't take Zimmerman's word on that. Unfortunately, there
were no
other witnesses and it was Florida.

It was decided in a court of law.
There were witnesses that put Martin on top of Zimmerman beating the
**** out of him.

As clear a case of self defense as I've ever seen. No matter if the
aggressor was black, white, or green. Harry needs to get over it.

Yup. They all demanded a trial in a case that was properly handled at
the police station and 2 years and 2 million dollars later, the court
decided it was handled correctly at the police station. Now guys like
Harry are disputing the validity of our justice system.


Only cause it didn't go his way.


Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of
suicide?

Are you still hallucinating about shooting somebody? **** you harry, if
I wanted you dead, you would already be rotted and forgotten...


I suspect that he might have considered the possibility of you keeling
over (naut. ref.) before he was able to complete his journey to your
humble abode. Not withstanding, your carcass is not the prize it might
have been at one time. Is it really worth the effort on Scott's part?

I don't know how anyone could care enough about him to wish him anything.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/14, 5:45 PM, KC wrote:

Are you still hallucinating about shooting somebody? **** you harry, if
I wanted you dead, you would already be rotted and forgotten...


snerk

Save your threats of blowjobs for your half-assed half-patch biker buddies.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 5:23 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/17/14, 5:15 PM, wrote:
On 17 May 2014 20:17:23 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 15:06:43 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have
your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of
suicide?

I hope you get a fair trial.

Between the busted down door or window and the video tape and the
history
of threats, I doubt there would be any charges.


It sounds like you have this murder well planned out.
Good luck


Murder? Self-defense. It's not some kid carrying a bag of candy walking
through the neighborhood. We're talking about a thug who breaks into a
house looking to cause mayhem and who gets caught in the act by the
occupant and by videotape.

What would you do if a thug violently broke into your house in Florida
while you were sitting on the couch watching your favorite TV
commentator, Ann Coulter? Invite him to sit down for a beer and some
snacks?




JPS would.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

In article ,
says...


What would you do if a thug violently broke into your house in Florida
while you were sitting on the couch watching your favorite TV
commentator, Ann Coulter? Invite him to sit down for a beer and some
snacks?




JPS would.

Pure snark.
I don't have guns in my house, and I'm certainly not worried about a
"thug violently breaking into" my house.
Never heard about it happening around here.
Lot of that happening in your area?
BTW, do you worry about a meteor hit?

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/14, 7:51 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...


What would you do if a thug violently broke into your house in Florida
while you were sitting on the couch watching your favorite TV
commentator, Ann Coulter? Invite him to sit down for a beer and some
snacks?




JPS would.

Pure snark.
I don't have guns in my house, and I'm certainly not worried about a
"thug violently breaking into" my house.
Never heard about it happening around here.
Lot of that happening in your area?
BTW, do you worry about a meteor hit?



There was one such incident I can recall in our county a couple of years
ago. It comes up from time to time because one of the posters here who
cannot control his temper has threatened to do that, and has also
threatened to "sic" one of his motorcycle gang buddies to do the job for
him. I contacted the police in his town, and they paid him a "home visit."

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/14, 8:01 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 17:23:42 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/17/14, 5:15 PM, wrote:

Between the busted down door or window and the video tape and the history
of threats, I doubt there would be any charges.


It sounds like you have this murder well planned out.
Good luck


Murder? Self-defense. It's not some kid carrying a bag of candy walking
through the neighborhood. We're talking about a thug who breaks into a
house looking to cause mayhem and who gets caught in the act by the
occupant and by videotape.

You seem like you have rehearsed this killing and in your state that
will mean you pull a charge.

What would you do if a thug violently broke into your house in Florida
while you were sitting on the couch watching your favorite TV
commentator, Ann Coulter? Invite him to sit down for a beer and some
snacks?

If you are sitting on the couch, you are probably going to be at his
mercy unless you have your gun in your hand.
That is why it is a good thing to have a big dog that is more alert
than most people can be.
It *might* buy you time to get to your safe room and a gun.
Anything else is just fantasy.
If I was trying to repel a team of home invaders and I was able to get
to a safe and defensible place, I would certainly want more than a 6
shooter.




I'm unimpressed by your knowledge of "the law." Thinking out what to do
in advance of a criminal breaking in is no different than thinking
through a plan for a fire or a tornado.

There's really no such thing as a "safe room" in a modern house with
wood stud/drywall walls, light door frames and hollow doors.

My six shooter is not my weapon of choice to repel a home invader. I
didn't buy it for that purpose.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 7:51 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...


What would you do if a thug violently broke into your house in Florida
while you were sitting on the couch watching your favorite TV
commentator, Ann Coulter? Invite him to sit down for a beer and some
snacks?




JPS would.

Pure snark.
I don't have guns in my house, and I'm certainly not worried about a
"thug violently breaking into" my house.
Never heard about it happening around here.
Lot of that happening in your area?
BTW, do you worry about a meteor hit?



My comment was intended to be humor. JPS has stated he has no objection
to owning a firearm for personal protection or home defense.

I never had any interest in having guns when we were younger and had
kids in the house. I started thinking about getting one about 6 years
ago when I realized I wasn't the young guy I used to be and my wife and
I were in a different stage in our lives. We don't live in a high crime
area but break-ins do occur from time to time. One idiot in our town
decided to break into a town cop's house one night about a year ago.
Didn't work out well for him.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/2014 8:08 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/17/14, 8:01 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 17:23:42 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/17/14, 5:15 PM, wrote:

Between the busted down door or window and the video tape and the
history
of threats, I doubt there would be any charges.


It sounds like you have this murder well planned out.
Good luck


Murder? Self-defense. It's not some kid carrying a bag of candy walking
through the neighborhood. We're talking about a thug who breaks into a
house looking to cause mayhem and who gets caught in the act by the
occupant and by videotape.

You seem like you have rehearsed this killing and in your state that
will mean you pull a charge.

What would you do if a thug violently broke into your house in Florida
while you were sitting on the couch watching your favorite TV
commentator, Ann Coulter? Invite him to sit down for a beer and some
snacks?

If you are sitting on the couch, you are probably going to be at his
mercy unless you have your gun in your hand.
That is why it is a good thing to have a big dog that is more alert
than most people can be.
It *might* buy you time to get to your safe room and a gun.
Anything else is just fantasy.
If I was trying to repel a team of home invaders and I was able to get
to a safe and defensible place, I would certainly want more than a 6
shooter.




I'm unimpressed by your knowledge of "the law." Thinking out what to do
in advance of a criminal breaking in is no different than thinking
through a plan for a fire or a tornado.

There's really no such thing as a "safe room" in a modern house with
wood stud/drywall walls, light door frames and hollow doors.

My six shooter is not my weapon of choice to repel a home invader. I
didn't buy it for that purpose.


Some people (BOA for example) don't seem to realize that having a nice
firearm and going to the range or other authorized area and becoming
proficient at using it is enjoyable for many people. It's not all
about being prepared to shoot someone or even hunting.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/14, 9:53 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 20:08:45 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

There's really no such thing as a "safe room" in a modern house with
wood stud/drywall walls, light door frames and hollow doors.

Probably true. You should have bought a block home.
My bedroom has block walls on all 4 sides, fire code solid core door.
(used to be the garage)



We don't have a whole lot of concrete block multi-story single family
homes being built around here. For one thing, the usual finish coats of
traditional stucco that you fellas have down south fail up here if any
moisture gets between the stucco and the block, and it always does. When
that happens in a freeze-thaw cycle area, the stucco is prone to
failure. And even if there were block homes as you describe up here, it
isn't likely the interior walls would be block masonry.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On Saturday, May 17, 2014 3:41:03 PM UTC-7, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/17/14, 5:45 PM, KC wrote:



Are you still hallucinating about shooting somebody? **** you harry, if

I wanted you dead, you would already be rotted and forgotten...





snerk



Save your threats of blowjobs for your half-assed half-patch biker buddies.

Save yours for JPS.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On Saturday, May 17, 2014 5:13:40 PM UTC-7, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/17/2014 7:51 PM, Boating All Out wrote:

In article ,

says...





What would you do if a thug violently broke into your house in Florida

while you were sitting on the couch watching your favorite TV

commentator, Ann Coulter? Invite him to sit down for a beer and some

snacks?









JPS would.



Pure snark.

I don't have guns in my house, and I'm certainly not worried about a

"thug violently breaking into" my house.

Never heard about it happening around here.

Lot of that happening in your area?

BTW, do you worry about a meteor hit?







My comment was intended to be humor. JPS has stated he has no objection

to owning a firearm for personal protection or home defense.



I never had any interest in having guns when we were younger and had

kids in the house. I started thinking about getting one about 6 years

ago when I realized I wasn't the young guy I used to be and my wife and

I were in a different stage in our lives. We don't live in a high crime

area but break-ins do occur from time to time. One idiot in our town

decided to break into a town cop's house one night about a year ago.

Didn't work out well for him.

A kid in a local Provincial town was charged for burglary, yet was released by the magistrate (with a probationary period and minor fine) because it was a first time offence.

That evening the kid broke into another home and gathered up some valuables, made a sandwich from the refrigerator, and sat on the couch to enjoy a bottle of wine.

Thee fool fell a sleep on the couch. Then the home owner arrived and noticed thee side door and been tampered with and called for a constable. Upon entry they found the kid who was before the judges bench that morning. in the mean time the kid found that he had broken into the judges home...

Not good.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

In article ,
says...


Some people (BOA for example) don't seem to realize that having a nice
firearm and going to the range or other authorized area and becoming
proficient at using it is enjoyable for many people. It's not all
about being prepared to shoot someone or even hunting.

Huh? I don't care if you do that. But unless you're using a target gun
you're gaining proficiency for what? To shoot an "intruder" or "bad
guy" with your non-target gun. And I don't care if you do that.
If I feared "intruders" and "bad guys" I'd do it too.
None of my business as long as you stay within the law. Have at it.
You're a big boy. Choose your hobbies, and I'll choose mine.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/18/14, 12:50 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 18 May 2014 08:17:56 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 5/17/14, 9:53 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 20:08:45 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

There's really no such thing as a "safe room" in a modern house with
wood stud/drywall walls, light door frames and hollow doors.

Probably true. You should have bought a block home.
My bedroom has block walls on all 4 sides, fire code solid core door.
(used to be the garage)



We don't have a whole lot of concrete block multi-story single family
homes being built around here. For one thing, the usual finish coats of
traditional stucco that you fellas have down south fail up here if any
moisture gets between the stucco and the block, and it always does. When
that happens in a freeze-thaw cycle area, the stucco is prone to
failure. And even if there were block homes as you describe up here, it
isn't likely the interior walls would be block masonry.

Bull****
Stucco is basically the same "parging" they use on the block portion
of virtually every house up there with a basement. The only difference
is they put a pattern in it here and call it stucco. They are both
type "S" mortar with a bonding agent in it. In fact back when I was up
there, parging was just sand and portland with no admix at all.
There was no prep of the wall surface either.


The mix for a parge coat isn't the same as the mix for stucco. The parge
coat also gets a coating of waterproofing tar. Stucco does not. The
parge coat is also mostly underground, where the temps are more stable.

I recall seeing some decades ago houses in different subdivisions within
Reston, Virginia, where the stucco over block failed.
Carpenters were nailing wood strips to the damaged surface to
accommodate T1-11 siding, a cure I am not sure was any better than the
disease.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/17/14, 1:17 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 15:06:43 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of suicide?

I hope you get a fair trial.

Between the busted down door or window and the video tape and the history
of threats, I doubt there would be any charges.

no witnesses, you broke the door later. Fair?

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/19/14, 7:37 PM, Bill McKee wrote:
On 5/17/14, 1:17 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014 15:06:43 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Are you still planning an illegal home invasion down here, or have your
age, infirmities and meds helped you decide against that form of
suicide?

I hope you get a fair trial.

Between the busted down door or window and the video tape and the history
of threats, I doubt there would be any charges.

no witnesses, you broke the door later. Fair?


You missed the part about the security videotape cameras, I suppose.

Totally legal? No arrests...
 

On 5/19/14, 9:11 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 19 May 2014 19:51:54 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

videotape

I assume that is a euphemism.
Surely with all of that DASD at your house you are not using video
tape.

The oldy moldy W/98 security software is smart enough to save a local
copy and also send another copy just about anywhere you can connect to
(LAN or internet)



Indeed a euphemism, but I started my advertising career in the early
1970s when videotaping was just beginning to compete for commercials
with 35mm film. So, to it, it's videotape. Even if it is digital.

The first TV commercial I did, in fact, was a totally digital animation
recorded on videotape. It was for the state teacher union and promoted
their PAC ideas. The PAC director was a former NY state assemblyman, a
Republican. In those days, northern Republicans were mostly moderate and
pragmatic, and their ranks were not comprised of crazies like, oh, Scott
Ingersoll.