Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Blood of Tyrants
"There is NO provision in Craig's amendment that redefines AP ammunition."

I don't care. Armor piercing ammunition shouldn't be defined or regulated period. The idea here is to put in place a law that allows for re-definition later.

It's only a matter of time.

1. Definitions.

a) Armor piercing ammunition shall now be construed to mean any ammunition capable of piercing body armor made of wet toilet paper.

2. Possession Prohibited. Armor piercing ammuntion may not be possessed by anyone not wearing government jackboots.

Why is our alleged side proposing anything but eliminating regulations that define or regulate AP ammo?
151 posted on 02/27/2004 2:01:00 PM PST by agitator (...And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies ]


To: agitator
The idea here is to put in place a law that allows for re-definition later.

It's only a matter of time.

I was once a meat inspector in a sausage factory.

Figuratively speaking, that is.

Literally speaking, I was a commissioner who, along with six others, oversaw the production of laws in the State of Michigan.

When the "sausage makers" wanted to include an "inferior ingredient", they'd first try to simply put it in with the list of ingredients, and we'd of course say no, you can't do that. After a few tries -- and failures -- they'd wait a while, and then quietly slip it in without telling anyone.

That's not "literally" factual, because they did "disclose" it, after a fashion. They'd bury it in a stack of nonsense regs a half-inch thick, that they knew would receive "block approval" (i.e., the length of the gooseneck faucet in the janitor's closet. That's an actual reg, by the way).

Then, a few months later, when they'd casually mention how they'd implemented it, we'd perk up and say huh? We vetoed that request several times! They'd say yeah, you did, but then you approved it. See? Here it is, buried in this block of gobbledegook.

That's how the game is played, sadly.

They'll "only" approve a "study" now, and then perhaps they'll "only" prohibit "bad" ammunition. Then, a year or so later, buried in a six-inch thick bill that no one will read before voting for, they'll slip in a single line.

Gotcha!

169 posted on 02/27/2004 3:04:39 PM PST by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies ]

To: agitator
Why is our alleged side proposing anything but eliminating regulations that define or regulate AP ammo?

It's really amazing the kind of mileage you can get out of a mere 900 FBI Files.

I'll pawn you my watch
And I'll pawn you my chain;
Pawn you my gold diamond ring.
If this train runs me right
I'll be home tomorrow night.
I'm nine hundred files from my home.
And I hate to hear that lonesome whistle blow.

Apologies to Woodie Guthrie.

And for bonus points, apologies to Peter, Paul, and Mary:

Lord I’m one, lord I’m two, lord I’m three, lord I’m four, Lord I’m 900 files from my home. 900 files, 900 files, 900 files, 900 files Lord I’m nine hundred files from my home.

171 posted on 02/27/2004 3:16:45 PM PST by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson