Why GA is Dying

Not enough guns in use by honest citizens.



--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Thomas Borchert" wrote in
message ...
| Emily,
|
| Personally, I think neighborhood watches are creepy.
|
|
| Especially in a country with, well, lose gun laws. But
let's not go
| there, the thread is bad enough as it is.
|
| --
| Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
|

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Emily,


Personally, I think neighborhood watches are creepy.



Especially in a country with, well, lose gun laws. But let's not go
there, the thread is bad enough as it is.


Fortunately, we haven't lost all of our gun laws yet. We're lost way
too many, but we can still possess firearms largely unrestricted in most
states (the safe states statistically, by the way).

Matt

Thomas Borchert wrote:
Emily,

Personally, I think neighborhood watches are creepy.


Especially in a country with, well, lose gun laws. But let's not go
there, the thread is bad enough as it is.

Loose gun laws? I dunno. I don't own a gun because someone in my state
filed a FOIA request to get a list of all gun owners. I would not want
to own a gun knowing that anyone who wanted to could find out I own one.

But you're right, it's bad enough as it is.

How is that any different than your neighbors setting up a neighborhood watch program?

When I get accosted by a cop because I took a picture in somebody else's
neighborhood, it is no different. Perhaps cameras should be registered
weapons.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
t...
How is that any different than your neighbors setting up a neighborhood
watch program?

When I get accosted by a cop because I took a picture in somebody else's
neighborhood, it is no different. Perhaps cameras should be registered
weapons.

Jose

Your choice of the word "accosted" rather than the word approached is quite
interesting; revealing one might say :-))
Dudley Henriques

"Jose" wrote in message
t...
How is that any different than your neighbors setting up a neighborhood
watch program?

When I get accosted by a cop because I took a picture in somebody else's
neighborhood, it is no different. Perhaps cameras should be registered
weapons.

Had you a journalist with you, he or she might have reminded the officer
that -anything that is in plain public view- is legal, fair game for both
photography and publication.

For example, if instead of driving through the neighborhood you'd have flown
over it, who knows what you might see in people's backyards, but, guess
what: They can't stop you from photographing it. The paparazzi, Google
Earth, news helicopters, etc prove this daily.

The benchmark cases for this, by the way, include a photo somebody shot of a
dead fish in a window fishbowl where there had been a housefire, and another
photo of the "shadow" of where a woman had died and the fire burned around
her. The fire investigators left the front door open, and the photographer
was able to shoot the image from a public sidewalk.

A third case had to do with a Chicago streetcar fire in which many people
perished trying to escape. Utterly horrific photograph that had no place in
general news photography, but a local newspaper showed the photo the next
day. Can't find the case on the internet, though. Wouldn't want to see the
photo again.


-c

Crash,

It only has to happen once for a tragedy to occur. No-one checked the soles
of your shoes for explosives until someone tried to blow up something with
explosives in their shoes either. A perfect example of not bothering with it
until a tragedy occurs.

Nope. A perfect example for understanding that there will always be a risk.
There is no total security. The question is: How much freedom do you give up
hunting the elusive "minimal risk".

When someone takes some pics of a plane, and those
pics are found in the apartment of someone who's just blown themselves and
your best mate up with that same plane somewhere down your street, will you
be complaining why nobody did anything when they saw him taking the pictures
at your local aerodrome?

No. Why would I? There is always risk in life.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

No-one checked the soles
of your shoes for explosives until someone
tried to blow up something with
explosives in their shoes either.

And now we all have to take our shoes off, which has added nothing to
the security of air travel. Nobody has examined my reading matter or my
carry-on food however. Do we have to wait for another tragedy when
somebody carries a book bomb on the airplane, or hides poison in a Big
Mac he's carried on board?

I can think of a hundred ways to cause mayhem on an airplane which do
not require explosives in shoes. You can too, I'm sure. Shouldn't we
be "protecting" the public?

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.