Get 'em, Ted.
![boxing :boxing](./images/smilies/boxing_smiley.gif)
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/exp ... 07602.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
We have bullets that IMPLODE?!?! Not sure why I would want one, I prefer the ones that EXPLODE...but I'm willing to shoot them to "research" and see what the fuss is all aboutI've seen the bullets that implode.
Excellent retort. Thank you.Jaguar wrote:She uses child porn in her example of curtailing 1st Amendment rights. The fact is, we don't outlaw high capacity cameras with assault lenses because some people use them for illegal activates. Just as we don't (shouldn't) outlaw firearms because some people will use those for illegal activities.
We cannot yell "FIRE" in a theater, but that doesn't mean we tape everyone's mouth shut before they go in a theater (although I wouldn't mind if they did at times.)
I doubt she could understand the fallacy of her position, as she does have a 6th grade mentality.
stevie_d_64 wrote:Remember that Feinstien is the definative expert on guns in the Senate...She scours through publications, diagrams, specs, and other visual aids to increase her expertise on the subject of guns...And she has never had to really handle or shoot many of them either...
If this is true, then every teenage boy in this country could be considered a gynochologist...
I don't think it's illegal yell "FIRE" in a theater if there is actually a fire. It's not the act that is illegal it's the consequences of that act. At least in my opinion. Others may have a different opinion.Jaguar wrote:We cannot yell "FIRE" in a theater, but that doesn't mean we tape everyone's mouth shut before they go in a theater (although I wouldn't mind if they did at times.)
Zackly.Mack wrote:I don't think it's illegal yell "FIRE" in a theater if there is actually a fire. It's not the act that is illegal it's the consequences of that act. At least in my opinion. Others may have a different opinion.Jaguar wrote:We cannot yell "FIRE" in a theater, but that doesn't mean we tape everyone's mouth shut before they go in a theater (although I wouldn't mind if they did at times.)
The court, if memory serves me correctly, rules the act of doing so was illegal rather than the result, which was a very poor ruling as it confused freedom of action or choice and/or freedom of speech with rights. It is a confusion which persists to this day as a result. If we viewed it with a more correct lense, you have the freedom to choose to say such a thing, it isn't outside the bounds of free speech to do so. However you do not have the right to transgress on the rights of others, specifically in this situation thier private property rights, this being ownership of thier physical selves.Mack wrote:I don't think it's illegal yell "FIRE" in a theater if there is actually a fire. It's not the act that is illegal it's the consequences of that act. At least in my opinion. Others may have a different opinion.Jaguar wrote:We cannot yell "FIRE" in a theater, but that doesn't mean we tape everyone's mouth shut before they go in a theater (although I wouldn't mind if they did at times.)
Jaguar wrote:She uses child porn in her example of curtailing 1st Amendment rights. The fact is, we don't outlaw high capacity cameras with assault lenses because some people use them for illegal activates. Just as we don't (shouldn't) outlaw firearms because some people will use those for illegal activities.
We cannot yell "FIRE" in a theater, but that doesn't mean we tape everyone's mouth shut before they go in a theater (although I wouldn't mind if they did at times.)
I doubt she could understand the fallacy of her position, as she does have a 6th grade mentality.