Police Seize Home Arsenal Fire Alerts Authorities to Nearly 500 (legal) Weapons

The Asbury Park Press ^ | 12-03-02 | Michael Clancy

[Iron Eagle]

Published in the Asbury Park Press 12/03/02 Fire alerts authorities to nearly 500 weapons By MICHAEL CLANCY STAFF WRITER FAIR HAVEN -- Three dump trucks removed an arsenal of live ammunition and almost 500 weapons -- all of them apparently held legally -- which police found in a home after the fire department responded to a chimney fire and the homeowner threatened the fire chief with a rifle, authorities said yesterday.

[Cultural Jihad]

#430> A loathsome philosophy.

#433> Yep, you are both loathsome people.

Here's an example where a statement on an idea (in this case a mind-set) is returned with a personal attack.

[tpaine]

DAnconia55:
"The moral crime with child porn lies in the taking of the photograph, which a child cannot consent to."

Ah, a true libertarian. It's illegal to take the picture, but it's not illegal to slobber over the pictures of a four-year-old in a sex act.
364 posted on 12/03/2002 6:59 PM PST by Catspaw

To: Catspaw
"Ah, a true libertarian. It's illegal to take the picture, but it's not illegal to slobber over the pictures of a four-year-old in a sex act."

A loathsome philosophy.
430 - roscoe -


#430> A loathsome philosophy.
#433> Yep, you are both loathsome people.
Here's an example where a statement on an idea (in this case a mind-set) is returned with a personal attack. - CJ -

Nope, not at all, CJ.
-- In context, - it is quite evident that #368 by 'catspaw', and her reply to my objection, is the original loathsome comment in this teapot tempest.

[Catspaw]

To: tpaine

Hah! That's rich. "Personal attacks and insults" are your first and last names and inflicting pain is your game. Abuse reports from people with unclean hands are not taken seriously. If you want to be taken seriously on this forum you might think about cleaning up your act.

257 posted on 7/28/02 4:10 PM Pacific by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256

[Cultural Jihad]

It was a self-avowed libertarian, DAnconia55, who stated in #359 that possession of child pornography should not be a crime. That makes his philosophy very loathsome.

[Catspaw]

I forgot to ping you for post #443.

[Catspaw]

Another gem from pain's home page:

791 of 820 tpaine, You are a disruptor, tpaine. You are not a legitimate poster. Your sole aim in maintaining your presence here is as a charade to enable you to kill off any debate that exposes your positions as being unconstitutional. The issues in these threads are issues critical to the restoration of our constitutional republic, and to the everlasting shame of FreeRepublic.com, you are permitted, even encouraged, to kill debate by shouting down, sidetracking, trivializing and obfuscating these issues. For the benefit of other viewers of this thread, I've appended to the bottom of this post, four prime examples that are representative of how tpaine intentionally kills all reasoned attempts at debating the important constitutional issues involved in the war on drugs. For what ever reason, Jim Robinson has permitted certain types of threads to degenerate into abysmal bimodal distributions of warring sides, so extreme in position as to prevent nearly any reasoned exchange of important ideas and information. This has occurred through his acts of omission, in failing to exercise the same control over participants and extreme content here, that is the norm on other threads. Rather than honestly deal with this issue of debate killing tactics used by posters like tpaine, some have chosen to sweep it under the rug by pretending that it is just a personality conflict. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is not about hurt feelings or wounded pride, it is about whether the debate over constitutional principle and a free republic will triumph over the demagoguery of those who intentionally seek to kill that debate. As site owner, Jim Robinson can choose to duck this issue by the simple, but intellectually dishonest, expedient of just banning the "squeaky wheel" that has pinged him to this post. But that would be only postponing the inevitable, which is that the problem will not go away with my banning, it will only get worse. Jim Robinson needs to take responsibility for his acts of omission in failing to provide the leadership so obviously lacking on these threads, so that these issues, that are such a critical part of the restoration we all seek, and are so rich in constitutional history and principle, can be fairly discussed and debated. Nobody's hands are clean in this matter, not even Jim Robinson's, who has posted his own fair share of personal abuse. But personal abuse is not the issue here. The issue is whether Jim intends to remain true to his stated goals of open discussion and debate of issues that have the most fundamental relevance to the future of our constitutional republic. Or whether he will permit a select few to kill debate to serve their own dark purposes. I didn't come here to start trouble, Jim, it found me. But I won't run away and hide from either the poster, the thread or the topic. Admittedly, this is a problem of a whole different sort for you. This is not just a case of anti-Semitism or name calling or threats or disclosing someone's private information. Those are all objective abuses and relatively easy to identify and control. This, on the other hand, is a very much more subtle and subjective problem: A poster who intentionally seeks to kill debate through the very nature of their abusive posting practices. So what's it going to be Jim? You can ignore this, or you can make a quick cosmetic fix by banning the squeaky wheel here, or you can face up to the responsibility of providing the necessary leadership. Your site, your choice. Respectfully, Boot Hill

[tpaine]

"It was a self-avowed libertarian, DAnconia55, who stated in #359 that possession of child pornography should not be a crime. That makes his philosophy very loathsome."


So call in the mods and get him banned if you can. -- Otherwise, take your loathsome comments to the backroom.

[tpaine]

I'm sure bootie will appreciate you reposting his wild accusations about JR & I.
I certainly do. - Thanks.

[stands2reason]

The man called the Fire Department to put out the chimmeny fire (which are incredibly dangerous and difficult to extinguish).

I looked all through that article and didn't see where he called them. It may have been a neighbor.

[mac_truck]

I'm not sure it matters who called the fire department first. The home owner in question is a kook, as are those on this forum defending him.

[GovernmentShrinker]

Speaking of how things OUGHT to be under the law (rather than how they may actually be in this jurisdiction), if your home is situation close enough to other homes that the fire could reasonably spread to those homes, I don't think a homeowner or resident should be able to prohibit firefighters from coming in to do their job. Likewise if there are children or disabled adults still inside, or if there is reasonable fear that loaded guns, piles of ammo, grenades, etc. may start popping off and endangering people on neighboring properties. You should have the right to prevent government employees or volunteer emergency workers from saving YOUR life and property, but you shouldn't have the right to prevent them from saving OTHER PEOPLE's lives and property.

[Boot Hill]

Thanks for reposting that, Catspaw, but there are other "tpaine-isms" that I like even better.

Like this one...

To: tpaine

Hah! That's rich. "Personal attacks and insults" are your first and last names and inflicting pain is your game. Abuse reports from people with unclean hands are not taken seriously. If you want to be taken seriously on this forum you might think about cleaning up your act.

257 posted on 7/28/02 4:10 PM Pacific by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

And then there is this one...

To: Boot Hill

I'll ignore it. Thanks

792 posted on 11/21/2002 6:59 PM Pacific by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

---

To: Boot Hill

(like I do 98.6% of TPaine's posts)

793 posted on 11/21/2002 7:01 PM Pacific by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Wow, a posting history so disreputable that Jim Robinson felt it necessary to point out to everyone that, of any 70 tpaine posts, you would be lucky to find even one that doesn't deserve to be outright disregarded. Personally, I think tpaine caught him in a very benevolent mood that evening.

--Boot Hill

[Catspaw]

I did post your #1 Jim Rob/pain post in my #443--it and your others are treasures that deserve reposting at appropriate moments. Thanks so much, Boot Hill for the archives.

[GovernmentShrinker]

And there was also the matter of the grenades, which later proved not to be live, but in a house with hundreds of guns (many loaded) scattered around, and littered with ammo, I wouldn't expect any firefighter to take this nutjob's word on the status of the grenades.

[ZULU]

When the DemocRATs in New Jersey finish with getting their "Smart Gun" Law approved, and their "Ballistics Fingerprinting Law" approved, you can expect them to introduce a new law banning "Personal Arsenals". A "Personal Arsenal" will probably be defined as more than one gun.


Remember you heard it here first.

[GovernmentShrinker]

I think that feature may be newer than JimRob's post.

[montag813]

"The ammo could have exploded and shot all over," McGovern said. "If it got hot enough and the gunpowder ignited, the rounds would have become projectiles shooting out of the home."

Sounds to me like a pretext to violate private property rights in the name of "community safety". Look for a bill soon in NJ to place a maxiumum limit on ammo, and which allows inspections of private residences at any time.

[montag813]

I'm just figuring if they made him leave, he feared the mysterious loss of some valuable items if a couple dozen strangers were wandering around his house without him being around. He put himself in this situation and did not consider the consequences.

Maybe he read the story about the Firemen who alledgedly stole clothes from the WTC area after Sept 11.

[montag813]

Where is this place. I have a few firearms and do not have even one "permit" to own them. Nor am I required to have any permit to own them. Exactly what permits were in "order" that made the firearms legal?

What state are you in? Sounds great.

[LibTeeth]

Yes it is certainly reasonable to expect a gun-nut-job in NJ to have live grenades scattered about his home. Never can tell with them gun-nut-jobs. If they even reach for something that looks like a weapon- book 'em Danno. Of course, the guy could have had a 1 lb can of FFFG that is a real risk in a fire, or cans of gas for his mower in the garage, or an LP tank on the patio, but real risks are so undramatic. There are 200+ million guns in America, 99.97% benignly held by 80 million people, many who ARE unsafe, ignorant, belligerant, or just plain tragic. This schmuck's misfortune was that he had the audacity to treat firemen as civil servants and elevate himself as an unwise property owner. He doesn't stand a chance of ever portraying himself as anything but an uppity serf. The benefit of the doubt is in short supply these days, particularly where evil guns are involved.