Posted on 01/31/2003 3:28:07 PM PST by MikalM
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:41:45 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Let's examine your expert logic for a moment. Guns are used to murder people therefore guns...bad.
Under federal law, that simply makes them unindicted co-conspirators. They aided and abetted the commission of a federal offense. Moreover, they have no legal defense, since they have plenty of lawyers to consult in the city attorney's office.
Rosenthal should consider ratting them out.
I make a great deal of sense. It isn't my fault, nor my problem, that YOU don't understand what I post.
When YOU begin to make intelligent replies, do, please alert me. :-)
It's certainly not much of a defense at trial. But try telling that to some of his defenders on this thread. They think his nice table manners form a defense. I can think of a lot of people who are "kind" and "honest" in their dealings with me, but if any one of those "kind, honest" people are caught breaking a law that won't help them.
I firmly believe we need the death penalty for dealing, ANY quanity. And much stiffer penalties for using.
Maybe. But his friends on this thread say he's such a kind and honest lawbreaker and drug dealer. Would he really do such a thing?
(Ya think he's a Republican?)
Every marijuana user is persecuted, in every country in the world.
(You hear that, Amsterdam? Note: In the same interview linked above, it is pointed out that Belgium and Portugal have decriminalized use and possession, and that other countries like the UK have become lax on enforcement -- but the interviewer was apparently too stoned to note the contradiction between these facts and Rosenthal's sweeping claim of persecution.)
IMHO, you're unlikely to get any kind of rational discussion from someone about something they're afraid of, nor are you likely to get the truth from someone who uses that fear to manipulate them to their own advantage.
so if I was to announce that if you smoke dried roses in much the same way one smokes marijuana, you can get a high, it relieves stress (from overbearing people who try to assert their ways of life over others), and is a good substitute for addictive medicines, if smoking this rose will do all these things..... are they going to make roses illegal ? I hope some of these folks in here can get the point~~ different strokes for different folks~~
As usual you have it backwards, O Contrarian. The moral-liberal LP Brownshirts want to prohibit prohibitions. They want to rob people of their right to determine what kind of a society they are to live in.
Are you selling hunting licenses? Offering bounties? Does your brownshirt need tucking in? Or are you just trolling for unstable anarcho-libertarians for the BATF?
Perhaps you have forgotten this passage from Romans 13, verses 1 - 4 :
And appears in the KJV (King James version) ROMANS 13, verses 1 - 4 (with some annotation added by me):1. Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.2. Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.
3. For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same;
4. for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practises evil.
1. Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers [note: Paul is talking about the *earthly* powers and authorities here].
For there is no power but of God [otherwise - why would the distinction bemade here]: the powers [the gov't] that be are ordained of God [basically stated: "God authorizes gov't over man"].
2. Whosoever therefore resisteth [clear enough for you here] the power [again, Paul is writing about that *earthly* power called "the gov't" in this passage], resisteth the ordinance of God [i.e., that which God ordains, that being the earthly power and the authority that earthly power possesses]:
and they that resist [for instance, Vernon Howell in his refusal to surrender] shall receive to themselves damnation. [clear enough? I positively expect an answer in the affirmative here ...]
3. For rulers [*I guess* this would, as much as I hate to say it, include Bill Xlinton] are not a terror to good [I would have to beg to differ with Paul, the author of this epistle on this point] works, but to the evil [well - I would hope so!].
Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power [RESPECT those in power, that is...]? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same [does THIS sound so hard? Why was Vernon Howell, supposed 'leader' of the Davidians, dealing with illegal firearms then?]:
4. For he [the 'ruler'] is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil [as in 'fight the law'], be afraid [the 'law' will most likely arise and take action];
for he [the gov't] beareth not the sword in vain [the rulers/gov't need "teeth" to rule and achieve compliance with "rules"]:
for he [the ruler including but not limited to the ruler's agent or agents] is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
WHY does it take six months from conviction to sentence? A week or two to review the proceedings for errors then passing sentence seems right.
As opposed to the moral-authoritarians who want to rob the "people" of the opportunity to develop their own moral identity. Rather have it imposed from the top down by a learned council of moral elders, just in case a few happen to get it wrong; that's so much more "god-like," if only in form.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.