OT way OT but GOOD for Mom!

[Han]

Leon wrote in news:nOGdnTA3de [e-mail]:

Well, I wouldn't take a gun anywhere . And I certainly wouldn't go with someone who is carrying a gun into any kind of drinking establishment. But now you are supposing guy #2 knew that guy #1 was carrying. Maybe yes, maybe no. Moreover, I don't know how excitable the guys are/were.

I thought they were just some drinking buddies who are/were generally peacable. But then, I like to be optimistic about peoples intentions. Which, my ultra-right wing buddie says, is just plain wrong.

[Leon]

Lets change that story to a friend drives another to the bank to make a deposit. The friend ends up robbing the place and gets killed. Now you go to jail responsible for his death.

[Larry Jaques]

They would have found a locked safe and left. And if you walked in and they wanted you to open it, you'd say "It's my wife's safe. I don't know the combo." Right?

Yeah, and nailguns with nails can be murder...

-- Worry is a misuse of imagination. -- Dan Zadra

[Leon]

Need to register kitchen knives also. Oh and your machete, your pitchfork, 2x4. All weapons of death in the wrong hands.

Take all guns off the streets and you have a new weapon of choice.

Have you ever seen a dog chasing his tail? Gun registration is not a fix for anything. It only gives the government one more power over you and I.

And how many of those in prison are there for a reasons because there was actually fowl play that involved a gun?? There are countless reasons for being in joail that does not involve a weapon.

Why a greater percentage? Because of way too many stupid laws. Seriously, someone kills your friend you are responsible for his death because you were with him. Make up your own reason to prosecute him. The only gun involved was the person doing the shooting with the registered gun.

[Leon]

I think he should be prosecuted for assisted burglary, not felony murder.

[Swingman]

I thought you were smarter than that. The scenario you propose, and what happened in the situation I was remarking upon, are totally different.

AAMOF, I CLEARLY stated that. Learn to read ...

[Leon]

Is that what the guy outside the trailer said??? Or did he say I'll wait out side while you go into inside "your trailer" to take a piss. Hey dude! Why are you kicking in your door??? BANG? The friend is dead and you are up for murder.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Being with someone is different than conspiring with someone. Different logic.

[Larry Jaques]

That's where the law can fall down. It leaves it up to the DA whether or not to prosecute the driver as a getaway conspirator or just let him go as an unsuspecting friend.

In places like Gnu Yawk Shitty, with foaming-at-the-mouth liberals like Bloomberg and his pet DA, you're hung before you're arrested.

-- Worry is a misuse of imagination. -- Dan Zadra

[Swingman]

What an asinine, thoughtless, irrelevant statement.

Just the thought of what could happen were your wife and daughter to walk into that kind of situation obviously goes right over your head, eh?

On second thought, add "stupid" to the first sentence ...

[Swingman]

In cases where it applies, yes.

That said, it's amazing at how many ignore the original circumstances and run rabbit trails on hypothetical, totally different scenarios, to bolster weak, eGoogglebrain, arguments.

[Swingman]

Considering your previous illogical and totally irrelevant table saw blade remark in this thread, your invoking the concept of "logic" in the above can be safely ignored.

[Leon]

Exactly! Lets not consider the actual facts and what actually happened.

Lets imagine the worst and go for that.

[Leon]

Then they shoot you for being a wuss.

Easy to speculate how you would react when it has not happened to you personally.

[Leon]

Desperation for a come back leads to stupid comments.

[Leon]

I think you may be coming around Han. ;~) No one knows everyone's intentions all of the time. Thank goodness a court of law is suppose to only use actual facts.

[Leon]

Totally agree. But it is only speculative that there was a conspiracy of what may have happened with the woman and her child. Fortunately she made sure that we could only speculate and probably saved the other guy in the yard from more serious charges.

[Leon]

Now you are seeing the light, I think. ;~) We would like for the other guy to get the worse punishment, that would make us all feel good. But not actually knowing all the facts does he really deserve it?

[Leon]

Equally funny as the guy in Oklahoma being charged for something that did not happen.

[Han]

Leon wrote in news:CpadnbRd8Z- [e-mail]:

Thanks, Leon, I think. I have a better idea of "the other guys'" concepts and preconceived views now. I don't necessarily agree ...

I am getting rather (not sarcastic, I forget the word now) of what it really is that a court of law does. We have trial by jury because who can trust a judge appointed for life or chosen by the "people", who has to run soon again for reelection. Then we have trial lawyers who get paid by their client (either the perp or complainant, or the "people") and sometimes do an excellent and convincing job of twisting the jury's mind. Think about OJ. etc. etc.