Thanks Doctor Wilko.

frtzw906

KMAN wrote:
in article et, rick
at
wrote on 2/24/05 10:44 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article
et, rick at
wrote on 2/24/05 9:12 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...


snippage...


Since I never made that claim, seems you are wrong as
usual.
=============
ROTFLMAO What a hoot! what part of...

"...I'm sure that's what the Framers had in mind...that a
crack dealer can arm
his posse with assault weapons with a trip to the gun shack
on
the corner
and spray the local park with semi-automatic (or perhaps
converted to
automatic) gunfire..." kamn 2/20/2005 1:41

...doesn't sound familier to you? Or, are you now claiming
that somebody else here is posting fraudulantly using your
name?

No look at what you said:

"You're the one that claimed that the drug dealers were
buying
assault weapons at the corner gun-mart, and that they killed
1000s of people every year"
==============
Yes, I repeated the gist of your previous spew... A spew that
is
so full of ignorance and idiocy that it only gets the derision
it
deserves.

Your "gist" include a specific claim that I did not make. Thus,
your "gist"
was an attempt to deceive that was exposed.
=====================
No, it was not. The only thing 'exposed' was you continued
ignorance on any subject you seem to reply to.





I remain confident that the Framers did not have in mind that
a
crack dealer could buy an assault weapon at the store on the
corner and spray the park with semi-automatic gunfire.
=======================
No, they didn't have that in mind, and only you belive it or
are
trying to say that that occurs. Crack dealers have no rights
to
buy arms.

Crack dealers who have not lost their rights to buy arms can
buy them. You
do realize that not every crack dealer ends up being convicted,
right? Heck,
all they have to do is go down to the corner and buy the right
weapon to
shoot any witnesses against them!
=====================
LOL Do you make this up as you go, or has your fantasies been
the main part of your life for years now?






What I did not say was that such incidents aco****ed for
1000s
of deaths each year, and thus, you are wrong to attribute
that
position.
==================
Yet you keep implying it. How many crack dealers are there,
how
many parks? Adds up to 1000s of people killed in your fantasy
world of make-believe.

I never said any such thing, nor implied it. If even one person
is killed
with an assault weapon - a gun that is designed to kill many
people quickly
- that's obviously too many.
=====================
Yes, that is exactly what you keep implying when you talk about
spraying in parks.

It happens.

http://www.freep.com/news/locway/shoot4_20040604.htm

Detroit shooting spree deaths climb

Multiple victims contribute to alarming homicide rate

June 4, 2004

Destiny Payne, 11, lost an eye after her home on Dequindre was shot
up in
April. With her is her mom, Yolanda Richardson. Police say the
suspect
admitted to having the wrong house. His real target was a rival drug
dealer.
Gunmen spraying bullets with high-powered weapons and killing more
than one
person during a single shooting spree are driving up Detroit's
homicide
rate.

Detroit police call it the new gangster mentality. The haphazard
shooters
kill more than one person in an effort to leave no witnesses behind
or to
send messages of dominance without regard to who is in the bullets'
paths.

Such manic gunplay is the latest trend in one of America's most
violent
cities, according to Detroit police, national experts and a Free
Press
analysis of homicide statistics over the past 2 1/2 years.

The numbers show:

* About 60 multiple-victim shootings through May 31 of this year.
In 17
of those cases, more than one person died, compared with seven such
deaths
at this time last year.

* The practice of shooting up homes, cars and yards is catching
children
in the cross fire, contributing to child homicides.

RELATED CONTENT

* HOMICIDE VICTIMS: Those in drug trade are statistic leaders

* Of the nation's 10 largest cities, Detroit -- ranked 10th --
experienced the greatest increase in homicides in the first five
months of
this year -- in large part, because of multiple-victim shootings.

But Detroit police say one of the biggest culprits in multiple-victim
homicides is rival drug dealers.

"There is a drug war in this city. It's not an organized war; it's a
guerrilla war," said a Detroit homicide detective, who asked not to
be named
because he feared retaliation for speaking without department
permission.
Criminologists say they do not know of any other city that is
experiencing
as many multiple-victim shootings and related homicides as Detroit.
According to police in the nine other largest cities, such shootings
are
rare.

Detroit homicide detectives call them common.

During a single week in May, there were three multiple-victim
shootings,
killing two people and injuring seven. There were no triple,
quadruple or
quintuple homicides at this time last year. But this year, there have
been.

"You may or may not have the right house. You may or may not have the
right
person. You may or may not have the right person in the right house,"
Detroit Homicide Lt. William Petersen said of shooters. "It's just
stupid.
There are so many people dying of stupidity out here."

And sometimes, children are the unintended victims.

This year, 11 children 16 and younger have been killed, four
accidentally.In
at least one case, children were injured when a shooter took aim at
the
wrong house.

Last Friday, a 4-year-old was killed when someone shot up her
father's car
as he was putting his children inside. The child's father also died.
A
6-month-old child was not injured. There have been no arrests.

Four children were wounded April 7 when the wrong house was sprayed
with
gunfire.

Yolanda Richardson was making Easter plans with her six children and
an
8-year-old guest at her home in the 17500 block of Dequindre when the
walls
exploded with bullets.

The bullets hit Richardson in the buttocks; they struck 16-year-old
Johnnie
and 9-year-old Precious in the foot.

Her daughter Destiny Payne, 11, started running upstairs, pushing her
friend
up with her, Richardson said. Destiny turned around and was hit once.

She lost her right eye.

Police arrested the alleged shooter, who they say admitted that he
shot up
the wrong house while looking for a rival drug dealer.

At the home, bullet holes remain in a chair and to the right of the
door.

Richardson is looking for a new home, but she can't afford one. The
family
is staying wherever they can find space.

"We were a house full of kids," she said. "Now we are everywhere."

But officers also deal with the other extreme -- when a shooter
deliberately
targets everyone inside.

On March 1, for example, someone got out of a white Ford Taurus and
opened
fire as he walked up to the home of a reputed drug dealer in the 9700
block
of Woodlawn. Using an AK47, he fatally shot Kevin Cooper, 33, Robert
Neal,
32, and Dorian Latham, 39, all of Detroit.

Two days later, Toryana Royal, 22, turned himself in to the 12th
(Palmer
Park) Precinct. Another suspect, Alfonzo Thomas, 20, is still on the
lam.

5 months, 3 increases

Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy said she cannot explain why
Detroit has
more multiple-victim shootings than most cities but that she thinks
better
technology could curtail them.

Worthy said she would like to have better ways to track guns and
casings so
her office could better link criminals to crimes. That linkage could
increase their prison sentences. She said criminals who kill more
than one
person often have committed other crimes.

In the span of five months, the city homicide rate has seen three
surges,
Detroit Police Chief Ella Bully-Cummings said. The chief declined to
be
interviewed for this story.

The first uptick was in January, when 18 people were killed in a
six-day
period -- including a triple and three double homicides.The homicide
rate
surged again in mid-February, resulting in a decision by police brass
to
require officers to work 12-hour shifts to help curb the trend.

The rate climbed again throughout much of April, when about 40 people
were
killed. In one week in April, there were four multiple-victim
shootings.

James Alan Fox, a Northeastern University criminologist, said there
has been
a slight increase in gang-related homicides nationally, led by Los
Angeles
and Chicago. But Detroit is not plagued by organized gangs.

That there are subcultures that don't know how to properly exercise our
rights, does not mean that the rest of us should be deprived of being
able to exercise those rights ourselves.

Using your logic, we should not be allowed to vote, speak or assemble
freely, travel freely, be free to pursue happiness, and be happy, have
a free press, because some misuse those freedoms.

The problem is not in having the right, but in exercising those rights.
It is the person pulling the trigger that kills someone, the gun and
the bullet, are just instruments. The instrument could just as easily
been a ball bat, or as in your neighborhood a hockey stick.

An assault weapon is obviously able to fire many projectiles in a short
period of time, and hence kill or wound multiple targets. However as a
military weapon, it is primarily designed to provide suppression fire
control, not necessarily kill power. If you want to kill a particular
target you would use a sniper rifle, firing a large bullet over a long
distance, at a very small target. On the other hand an assault weapon
would not need to hit anyone in order to accomplish its mission, which
is to cause the enemy combatant to keep his head down, allowing your
troops to advance on the combatants position, and possibly capture him
alive. Small caliber bullets and poor sights combined with a rapid fire
mode are not designed to kill primarily.

That thugs use the weapon, to indiscrimatly kill innocents who do not
have a chance to get out of the way, does not make the assault weapon
evil. Though it is within the scope of the Government to attempt to
restrict access to the weapon because of its illegal use. The AK-47 is
a typical assault weapon, though there are others such as the MAC-10.
None of which are suitable for hunting game because of their poor
sighting system, small caliber, and single shot capability.

Another identifing characteristic of military weapons is their poor fit
and finish. Battlefied conditions do not desire a tight close tolerance
in weapons subject to mud and debri, that would jamb a weapon. Also
less concern for finish is used for a weapon that may only be used for
very brief though intense time in a battlefield condition before it or
the operator is removed from service. Both of these issues make these
weapons undesirable for hunting purposes.

The only other use for such a weapon is in the case of close action
self defense such as in your home. Though most home owners would not
have practiced sufficiently to use one efficiently, and generally not
walking around the home with one at the ready, would likely only
succede in wounding himself, or friend, and generally doing alot of
property damage, before ever wounding the invader. A shotgun would
probably be a better choice for home protection, not requiring close
aiming, and being simpler to operate, without the penetration of a high
powered round.

All these things being considered, the Congress of US passed laws
restricting the personal ownership and possession of these types of
weapons. Certain zones such as D.C. are also supposedly gun free. All
this sounds resonable, until you consider that one of the main
proponents of the above objections, and the Congressional laws, Senator
John Kerry, apparently owns a number of AK-47 and posseses them in D.C.
Talk about Hypocrisy! TnT

"Wilko" wrote in message
...
rick wrote:

I realize that learning things contrary to your ideology is
hard for you, but you really should try it sometime. Rather
than just waving your hands and claiming who or who isn't
credible, look it up. But then, you've already proven that
that is too much for you, or to scary for you. maintaining
your ignorance appears to be paramount to your mental well
being.

Pot, kettle, black...
==============
LOL I leatrn new things all the time, and none of it scares me
so bad I refuse to accept it. But then, my ideology doesn't rule
my every thought...




--
Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o
t)nl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the
limitations.---
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

On 24-Feb-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

You said that agriculture should be reduced by 50% to save
water for other uses.

Still have problems with reading and comprehension? No one
said that. I gave the example that _if_ agriculture was
reduced 50%, then the population of CA could double without
changes in water consumption patterns. That was to emphasize
the degree to which agriculture hogs water in CA.

Learn to read.

Mike

"Wilko" wrote in message
...
BCITORGB wrote:

wilko, you warned about some of these characters... i may be
wrong,
because i'm new here, but after a constant barrage of rick
posts, i was
very happy to see scott back... am i going nuts myself?

Do you want me to tell you as it is or do you prefer a
politically correct answer? ;-)

Rick Pus is a troll in my book, but so is Last Word Weiser.
=======================
Then I suggest you have no clue as to the meaning of the word
troll either. I respond with discussion and reason. That you
refuse to accept facts that are contrary to your ideology is sad.


The
difference between them is not so big, with both telling their
prey, in an attempt at superiority, that they don't get it,
that the prey are fools or whatever. Scott can usually keep his
prey dangling a little longer with semi-coherent retorts and
vague arguments, before starting to call people stupid,
ignorant, fools, whatever, whereas Rick seems to leave out the
argumentation part, heading straight for the insults.
======================
LOL What a hoot! To leave not out the 'argumantation' would
mean that the person i reply to had an argument to begin with.
In the cases here so far, that has not been the case, as with any
of your posts on the subject. You have added nothing but idiocy,
making you more the troll...




Neither of them are very sophisticated when it comes to being
trolls, though.
=================
I bow to the master troll.....



--
Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o
t)nl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the
limitations.---
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

On 24-Feb-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

Canada might reach absolute numerical parity in gun deaths with the US in a
few years, but it'll take a long time because there are so few Canadians,
comparatively speaking.

You really can't read, can you? The _rate_ in Canada is far, far lower
than in the US. It will never be equal, since no other western country
is as violent as the US.

What's of interest is the increase in the per-capita RATE of violent crime,

And that rate is much, much lower outside the US. Pay more attention,
dickhead.

Mike

On 24-Feb-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

Anyone who says that agriculture contributes "little" to the economy is just
too stupid to bother arguing with.

I've already pointed out that it contributes less than 4% of CA's GDP.
That is a small amount of the economy. Given the capacity for creating
GDP in the rest of the economy, it can easily be argued that importing
food from other areas may be a better allocation of resources.

If there's been stupidity in this forum, it's all coming from your end.
You refuse to stay to the topics. You refuse to back up your claims
with anything resembling facts. You misquote and misrepresent what
others have written etc.

Mike

On 24-Feb-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

You guess wrong. You also, again, fail to understand the meaning of the
phrase. This deliberate misapprehension is commonplace amongst gun-banners.

No, you gun freaks deliberately ignore the intent of the constitution to
support using guns for any purpose.

No Supreme Court case has ever supported the notion that membership in the
Militia is a predicate to keeping and bearing arms. Ever.

No one ever accused the US supreme court of being more intelligent than
the rest of the US. That's part of the problem in a society as violent
as yours.

Mike

TnT says:
===================
That there are subcultures that don't know how to properly exercise our
rights, does not mean that the rest of us should be deprived of being
able to exercise those rights ourselves.
==================

Your argument is seductively simple, but it flies in the face of most
laws that are passed to restrict your actions.

Let's take a very simple example: lawn darts (at least that's what I
think those "toys" were called). After some period of use, it became
clear that these darts presented a serious danger to people using them
in recreational activities in backyards and on picnics (that is, people
ended up getting them stuck in their skulls).

The darts were subsequently taken off the shelves at your local ToysRUs
and, as far as I know, are no longer avalable for sale. Using your
logic, we should all be outraged that, because of a few careless
people, we've been denied the right to toss lethal darts in the air at
our mother-in-law's picnic.

That's the nature of laws in a civilized society -- the "people" decide
that certain activities, products, whatever, do more harm to the
"greater good" than it's worth. IMHO, guns fit into that category.

Many of you Americans clearly disagree. As you can. But as you
disagree, it might be useul to examine how much ownership of guns
parallels ownership of lawn darts. In both cases, innocent people are
injured and die due to accidents. Had the lawn darts/guns not been
lying around, that misery could have been avoided.

frtzw906

On 24-Feb-2005, "Wolfgang" wrote:

One cannot but believe they'd exist wherever the hell they
please.

As long as you are working with the Judeo-Christian God, you
are stuck with the fact that even among the faithful, there
is no story or myth where God exists in the physical world.
Every contact between God and man in the Bible is by proxy.

Mike