| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Gactimus" |
| Date: |
20 Jan 2005 09:27:17 AM |
| Object: |
Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
It looks like Spike Lee was right. Mr. Michael "Bowling for Columbine"
Moore's bodyguards do carry guns,
"Filmmaker Michael Moore's bodyguard was arrested for carrying an unlicensed
weapon in New York's JFK airport Wednesday night."
Well, well, well, could a man who believes that you don't have the "right to
bear arms" actually have a gun packing bodyguard protecting him? I guess as
far as Moore is concerned, there's one standard for all of us peons and
another standard for VILs (very important liberals) like himself.
Sure, Moore may think that "ordinary people" -- like YOU -- can't be trusted
to have a gun to defend your families. It's just too risky. Oh, but if
Michael Moore might be in danger, well that's a different matter all
together; he's special, you see, the rules that he wants to apply to the
"little people" shouldn't apply to him.
What a hypocrite.
.
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 12:33:39 PM |
|
|
In article <w-2dnXAgVY_GGGfcRVn-rg@comcast.com>, JTEM
<gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Yardpilot" <yardpilot@gorge.net> wrote
Lomax said she fired two or three shots and called
police to report the trespassing.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3011938
The trespassers CLAIM she shot at them.
She STATED that she fired two or three shots.
"Judging from the phone calls I have received in
support of Mrs. Lomax, I have serious concerns
as to why this assistant district attorney would seek
an indictment on this particular case, especially
without communicating with me first on the matter,"
said her attorney, Abel Reyna
Wow. It's almost as if her lawyer works for her, and
not the district attorney's office...
Imagine that...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Yardpilot" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 10:42:19 PM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:280120051033392462%spam@aol.com...
In article <w-2dnXAgVY_GGGfcRVn-rg@comcast.com>, JTEM
<gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Yardpilot" <yardpilot@gorge.net> wrote
Lomax said she fired two or three shots and called
police to report the trespassing.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3011938
The trespassers CLAIM she shot at them.
She STATED that she fired two or three shots.
"Judging from the phone calls I have received in
support of Mrs. Lomax, I have serious concerns
as to why this assistant district attorney would seek
an indictment on this particular case, especially
without communicating with me first on the matter,"
said her attorney, Abel Reyna
Wow. It's almost as if her lawyer works for her, and
not the district attorney's office...
Imagine that...
You're backing his unsupported claim. Try proving that she fired at them.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Larry Hewitt" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 11:39:49 AM |
|
|
"Yardpilot" <yardpilot@gorge.net> wrote in message
news:10vkr5mhne7e4f6@corp.supernews.com...
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dIWdnXMGrPlPWWTcRVn-3A@comcast.com...
Associated Press
WACO - A longtime Republican Party activist has
been indicted on charges of shooting at workers
cutting down trees at her Woodway home.
Carolyn Payne Lomax, 63, was indicted Wednesday
on two counts of aggravated assault in a 2004
incident when Asplundh Co. workers were
trimming trees around utility lines for utility
company Oncor.
[---snip---]
This time, Lomax said, the workers appeared to be
mocking her in Spanish. After repeated pleas, she
said, she went inside and grabbed a .22-caliber
pistol from a desk drawer.
"I went back out in the yard and I said, 'I have a gun.
Get off of my property. You're trespassing,'" Lomax
said. "They laughed, and they continued to cut."
Lomax said she fired two or three shots and called
police to report the trespassing.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3011938
The trespassers CLAIM she shot at them.
She _admits_ she fired at them. From the last sentence above the cite "Lomax
said she fired two or three shots and called police to report the
trespassing."
"Judging from the phone calls I have received in support of Mrs. Lomax, I
have serious concerns as to why this assistant district attorney would
seek
an indictment on this particular case, especially without communicating
with
me first on the matter," said her attorney, Abel Reyna
_Of course_ her attorney is going to spin on her behalf. _Of course_ her
attorney ios going to complain about an indictment to the press. _Of course_
her attorney is upset that he didn;t have a chance to try to spin the
indictment away before it went down.
For the record, the DA is under no obligation to consult with a defense
attorney on the appropriateness of an indictment.
Larry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Yardpilot" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 09:12:30 PM |
|
|
"Larry Hewitt" <larryhewi@comporium.net> wrote in message
news:ctdt82$8t8e$1@news3.infoave.net...
"Yardpilot" <yardpilot@gorge.net> wrote in message
news:10vkr5mhne7e4f6@corp.supernews.com...
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dIWdnXMGrPlPWWTcRVn-3A@comcast.com...
Associated Press
WACO - A longtime Republican Party activist has
been indicted on charges of shooting at workers
cutting down trees at her Woodway home.
Carolyn Payne Lomax, 63, was indicted Wednesday
on two counts of aggravated assault in a 2004
incident when Asplundh Co. workers were
trimming trees around utility lines for utility
company Oncor.
[---snip---]
This time, Lomax said, the workers appeared to be
mocking her in Spanish. After repeated pleas, she
said, she went inside and grabbed a .22-caliber
pistol from a desk drawer.
"I went back out in the yard and I said, 'I have a gun.
Get off of my property. You're trespassing,'" Lomax
said. "They laughed, and they continued to cut."
Lomax said she fired two or three shots and called
police to report the trespassing.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3011938
The trespassers CLAIM she shot at them.
She _admits_ she fired at them.
Nope.
From the last sentence above the cite "Lomax
said she fired two or three shots and called police to report the
trespassing."
At no point there does she say she fired at them. She says she fired her
gun, that's all.
"Judging from the phone calls I have received in support of Mrs. Lomax,
I
have serious concerns as to why this assistant district attorney would
seek
an indictment on this particular case, especially without communicating
with
me first on the matter," said her attorney, Abel Reyna
_Of course_ her attorney is going to spin on her behalf.
_Of course_ her
attorney ios going to complain about an indictment to the press. _Of
course_
her attorney is upset that he didn;t have a chance to try to spin the
indictment away before it went down.
Interesting claim. Prove it.
For the record, the DA is under no obligation to consult with a defense
attorney on the appropriateness of an indictment.
No, but he has a responsibility or tow to the people to do his job honestly.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 12:10:40 PM |
|
|
In article <ctdt82$8t8e$1@news3.infoave.net>, Larry Hewitt
<larryhewi@comporium.net> wrote:
"Yardpilot" <yardpilot@gorge.net> wrote in message
news:10vkr5mhne7e4f6@corp.supernews.com...
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dIWdnXMGrPlPWWTcRVn-3A@comcast.com...
Associated Press
WACO - A longtime Republican Party activist has
been indicted on charges of shooting at workers
cutting down trees at her Woodway home.
Carolyn Payne Lomax, 63, was indicted Wednesday
on two counts of aggravated assault in a 2004
incident when Asplundh Co. workers were
trimming trees around utility lines for utility
company Oncor.
[---snip---]
This time, Lomax said, the workers appeared to be
mocking her in Spanish. After repeated pleas, she
said, she went inside and grabbed a .22-caliber
pistol from a desk drawer.
"I went back out in the yard and I said, 'I have a gun.
Get off of my property. You're trespassing,'" Lomax
said. "They laughed, and they continued to cut."
Lomax said she fired two or three shots and called
police to report the trespassing.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3011938
The trespassers CLAIM she shot at them.
She _admits_ she fired at them. From the last sentence above the cite "Lomax
said she fired two or three shots and called police to report the
trespassing."
The truth evades these guys.
"Judging from the phone calls I have received in support of Mrs. Lomax, I
have serious concerns as to why this assistant district attorney would
seek
an indictment on this particular case, especially without communicating
with
me first on the matter," said her attorney, Abel Reyna
_Of course_ her attorney is going to spin on her behalf. _Of course_ her
attorney ios going to complain about an indictment to the press. _Of course_
her attorney is upset that he didn;t have a chance to try to spin the
indictment away before it went down.
That is part of the job of the attorney.
For the record, the DA is under no obligation to consult with a defense
attorney on the appropriateness of an indictment.
And they never do.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AH#49 writes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 12:06:02 PM |
|
|
Larry Hewitt wrote:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3011938
The trespassers CLAIM she shot at them.
She _admits_ she fired at them. From the last sentence above the cite "Lomax
said she fired two or three shots and called police to report the
trespassing."
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should be locked up and
evaluated, no where in the story presented does it say that she admitted
firing _at_ those city workers.
The WORKERS said that she did.
Just wanted to clear that up.
The story just said that she fired off some rounds. _She_ doesn't say
where.
And for that alone, she sounds to me like a mental case.
But the sadder part is, that stories writer and said papers editor had
to first mention her political "activism" before mentioning her
stupidity when she was not under threat of bodily harm or damage to her
property.
That crazy ***** DOES belong in jail for years, if indeed the rest of
that story is even remotely true.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 12:49:18 PM |
|
|
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gactimus" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
28 Jan 2005 01:36:59 PM |
|
|
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:YeKdnT9I4_T-GmfcRVn-3w@comcast.com:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Prove it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 12:46:31 PM |
|
|
In article <YeKdnT9I4_T-GmfcRVn-3w@comcast.com>, JTEM
<gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Now days, everything is a crime. Republicans think the answer to all
problems is. "Make it illegal, throw them in jail."
.
|
|
|
| User: "AH#49 writes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 01:51:28 PM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" wrote:
In article <YeKdnT9I4_T-GmfcRVn-3w@comcast.com>, JTEM
<gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Could be.
After all "brandishing" can be construded as such.
I don't care or give a rats *****.
All I have to give a ***** about is what the original story said.
And that's enough for me to see her as a loose nut, regardless of her
political affiliation.
Now days, everything is a crime. Republicans think the answer to all
problems is. "Make it illegal, throw them in jail."
And Liberals like you say: "I don't care how crazy they are! Let them
loose!"
So tell us, Dave.
What would you have done with this crazed woman that fires off several
rounds?
Give the gun back to her and tell her: "Now, Granny? Stop that! It was
just my friends hooking up the porn channel for ya!"
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 01:52:18 PM |
|
|
In article <41FA97C0.EA969F48@BCComics.net>, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" wrote:
In article <YeKdnT9I4_T-GmfcRVn-3w@comcast.com>, JTEM
<gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Could be.
After all "brandishing" can be construded as such.
I don't care or give a rats *****.
Which wasn't the issue.
All I have to give a ***** about is what the original story said.
And that's enough for me to see her as a loose nut, regardless of her
political affiliation.
Also not the issue.
Now days, everything is a crime. Republicans think the answer to all
problems is. "Make it illegal, throw them in jail."
And Liberals like you say: "I don't care how crazy they are! Let them
loose!"
You Republicans are sure frighten a lot. Why is that?
So tell us, Dave.
What would you have done with this crazed woman that fires off several
rounds?
Look into it. Determine the issue. Better yet, she shouldn't have had
a gun. But then, I guess you would say she could have run over these
people with her SUV.
Give the gun back to her and tell her: "Now, Granny? Stop that! It was
just my friends hooking up the porn channel for ya!"
You said the government can't deny her the right to a firearm. Make up
your "mind."
.
|
|
|
| User: "AH#49 writes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 04:03:54 PM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" wrote:
In article <41FA97C0.EA969F48@BCComics.net>, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" wrote:
In article <YeKdnT9I4_T-GmfcRVn-3w@comcast.com>, JTEM
<gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Could be.
After all "brandishing" can be construded as such.
I don't care or give a rats *****.
Which wasn't the issue.
Yes it was, you retard!
Why did "granny" shoot her firearm?
Use the STORY as written/posted, and tell us all why SHE had to use her
firearm against hired city workers that were under orders to "do what"?
All I have to give a ***** about is what the original story said.
And that's enough for me to see her as a loose nut, regardless of her
political affiliation.
Also not the issue.
So what are you saying?
That old hag had the right to let loose a few indiscriminate rounds?
How STUPID are you?
You said the government can't deny her the right to a firearm. Make up
your "mind."
Indeed I might have!
But I never said the government gave her the right to _remain_ armed
and stupid!
YOU, on the other hand, want that stunt ***** released, forgiven, and all
forgotten!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "AH#49 writes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 02:02:44 PM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAAA!
You make me giggle.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 03:31:31 PM |
|
|
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAAA!
You make me giggle.
No prob. I'll tighten those nipple claps....
.
|
|
|
| User: "AH#49 writes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 05:52:15 PM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAAA!
You make me giggle.
No prob. I'll tighten those nipple claps....
Yeah, you go clap it up, you Ru Paul wannabe.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 02:01:28 PM |
|
|
In article <41FA9A64.C922B9B7@BCComics.net>, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote:
JTEM wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAAA!
You make me giggle.
But he is probably correct. (Not that this has ever made any
difference to you...)
.
|
|
|
| User: "AH#49 writes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 04:08:49 PM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" wrote:
In article <41FA9A64.C922B9B7@BCComics.net>, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote:
JTEM wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAAA!
You make me giggle.
But he is probably correct.
I do indeed adore that "probably correct" part!
I just love it when you make a total tool out of yourself!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "You Know Who " |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 07:29:20 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:01:28 -0800, "David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com>
wrote:
In article <41FA9A64.C922B9B7@BCComics.net>, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote:
JTEM wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAAA!
You make me giggle.
But he is probably correct.
No he's not, as I've already proven.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "You Know Who " |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 12:49:59 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 13:49:18 -0500, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Cite the statute.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 03:13:39 PM |
|
|
"You Know Who" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com > wrote
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Cite the statute.
What on earth did you think "assault" was?
"Battery" involves personal contact: Hitting them, shooting
them or stabbing them... anything like that. If you merely
threaten someone with a gun or a knife it's assault.
Damn. I hope you're *Really* young.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 01:13:19 PM |
|
|
In article <da2lv0hsid5q35d2dcftoi7q1l6b390djj@4ax.com>, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 13:49:18 -0500, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Cite the statute.
Look it up, *****.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Linoleum Blownapart" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 01:26:23 PM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:280120051113195275%spam@aol.com...
In article <da2lv0hsid5q35d2dcftoi7q1l6b390djj@4ax.com>, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 13:49:18 -0500, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Cite the statute.
Look it up, *****.
LOL
Look WHAT up, butt munch? You can't "look up" something that isn't there.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 03:29:51 PM |
|
|
"Linoleum Blownapart" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote
You can't "look up" something that isn't there.
Your penis, for example.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 07:11:17 PM |
|
|
In article <Xt6dnQ3abtWYMGfcRVn-jw@comcast.com>, JTEM
<gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Linoleum Blownapart" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote
You can't "look up" something that isn't there.
Your penis, for example.
LOL! Give them up - they are idiots.
.
|
|
|
| User: "You Know Who " |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 07:29:45 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:11:17 -0800, "David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com>
wrote:
In article <Xt6dnQ3abtWYMGfcRVn-jw@comcast.com>, JTEM
<gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Linoleum Blownapart" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote
You can't "look up" something that isn't there.
Your penis, for example.
LOL! Give them up - they are idiots.
TRANSLATION- "We've been caught lying again. RUN AWAY!"
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "AH#49 writes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 05:50:31 PM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
"Linoleum Blownapart" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote
You can't "look up" something that isn't there.
Your penis, for example.
There it is!
JTEM uses a PENIS for any and all excuses to lose yet another argument!
BRAVISIMO!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "You Know Who " |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 07:28:54 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:29:51 -0500, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"Linoleum Blownapart" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote
You can't "look up" something that isn't there.
Your penis, for example.
LOL- you gun grabbing monkeys just can't stop thinking about my penis,
can you?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 01:48:37 PM |
|
|
In article <1106940387.f4289927ad48804d6836d9c127979fd4@teranews>,
Linoleum Blownapart <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:280120051113195275%spam@aol.com...
In article <da2lv0hsid5q35d2dcftoi7q1l6b390djj@4ax.com>, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 13:49:18 -0500, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Cite the statute.
Look it up, *****.
LOL
Look WHAT up, butt munch? You can't "look up" something that isn't there.
It's there.
.
|
|
|
| User: "You Know Who " |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 07:28:19 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:48:37 -0800, "David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com>
wrote:
In article <1106940387.f4289927ad48804d6836d9c127979fd4@teranews>,
Linoleum Blownapart <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:280120051113195275%spam@aol.com...
In article <da2lv0hsid5q35d2dcftoi7q1l6b390djj@4ax.com>, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 13:49:18 -0500, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Cite the statute.
Look it up, *****.
LOL
Look WHAT up, butt munch? You can't "look up" something that isn't there.
It's there.
So's the ***** you use for brains
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "AH#49 writes" |
|
| Title: Re: Gun Owners: Self Defense |
28 Jan 2005 01:59:05 PM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" wrote:
In article <da2lv0hsid5q35d2dcftoi7q1l6b390djj@4ax.com>, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 13:49:18 -0500, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"AH#49 writes" <GRONK@BCComics.net> wrote
While I agree that the ***** is crazy and she should
be locked up and evaluated, no where in the story
presented does it say that she admitted firing _at_
those city workers.
Just going outside and showing them the gun, under
these circumstances, is a felony.
Cite the statute.
Look it up, *****.
It's not up to others to prove a negative, Davy.
After all, I go outside all the time and show people my guns...IN NJ!
Does Davey W.Barnes know the meaning of "brandishing?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
