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

Skip to comments.

America's 80 Million Potential Snipers
Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership ^ | Posted October 23, 2002 | By Timothy Wheeler, M.D.

Posted on 10/27/2002 10:11:12 AM PST by vannrox

The Claremont Institute
This is the print version of http://www.claremont.org/projects/doctors/021020wheeler.html.


America's 80 Million Potential Snipers

By Timothy Wheeler, M.D.
Posted October 23, 2002

As fear grips residents of Virginia and Maryland over the latest sniper murders, gun-control groups see the opportunity to advance their agenda. Never shy about exploiting public horrors, they now clamor for stricter controls on the latest politically incorrect gun: the sporting rifle.

Working to portray weekend target shooters as sharing the spirit of the killer, the Violence Policy Center lays out on its Web site a jeremiad against a "sniper culture." This group is apparently made up of anyone who owns or reads hobby magazines about target rifles chambered for military ammunition. Physicians for Social Responsibility chimes in with a general-purpose condemnation of all firearms, especially those that shoot the popular .223 caliber round. In fact, Physicians for Social Responsibility's Web site breathlessly informs us, .223 bullets are "highly lethal bullets that cause extreme internal damage." Well, yes. Any bullet causes too much damage when used by a vicious murderer on an innocent victim. The .223 is one in a long line of military cartridges adopted for civilian use. Along with the .308 rifle cartridge and the .45 caliber and 9 millimeter pistol cartridges, it is seen on target ranges every weekend. Since these are all arguably high-power, tissue-damaging military bullets, just about all of America's 80 million gun owners are potential snipers, according to the gun banners' logic.

It was inevitable that those who want to ban guns would finally get around to rifles used for hunting and target shooting. Remember "assault weapons"? These hobbyist and collector guns shoot one bullet at a time, as do any other legal firearms. But their black metal and plastic military look made them an easy target for gun control demagogues. Hence the assault-weapon bans of the 1990s.

And how about "pocket rockets" and "junk guns"? The clunky assault weapons were too big and powerful, the gun banners said. But these compact handguns were too little and easily concealed. So they, too, had to be demonized. This deception paved the way for several state laws further restricting citizens' access to guns suitable for self-defense.

So far the Violence Policy Center and Physicians for Social Responsibility have not produced a list of guns they do approve of. Or perhaps they don't approve of any, and would like to ban them all. If so, why can't they be honest and state their true goal of a total gun ban, once and for all?

The answer comes from the gun banners themselves. In a letter to The Journal of the American Medical Association, public health gun grabber Dr. Jeremiah Barondess and his colleagues in New York City wrote that ideally all handguns would be banned, but such a ban was not yet politically feasible.

The writers therefore proposed a raft of lesser restrictions, all of which would make owning guns more difficult for average Americans.

The Violence Policy Center's own Tom Diaz all but admitted on National Public Radio's "Fresh Air," on Jan. 20, 1999 that such half-measures are only steps to the big prize — a total ban. UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh's blog dated Sept. 17, 2002 quotes Diaz as advocating that the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms regulate firearms out of existence. As Diaz puts it, "certainly [BATF] would not allow semi-automatic assault weapons to be manufactured and sold, and we believe that, ultimately, handguns would be phased out through such an agency."

None of this is to suggest that there can be no reasonable limitations on gun ownership. Convicted violent felons and the seriously mentally disturbed are reasonably prohibited from having guns. But groups like Violence Policy Center and PSR have left no doubt that they want to disarm America. When they try to tar good citizens as potential serial killers because they own target rifles, we know they are guilty of their own crime-character assassination.

The Washington-area sniper will be caught and imprisoned. Life will return to normal. We will come to view this harrowing episode for what it is — an isolated, bizarre crime in the life of a great and good nation. The lesson we should surely not take is that the sniper is even remotely akin to the average American gun owner.

Timothy Wheeler, M.D., is director of Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, a project of the Claremont Institute.


© Copyright 2002, The Claremont Institute.

Visit the Claremont Institute at claremont.org.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2nd; ak47; amendment; ban; banglist; bill; control; democrat; dnc; doctor; election; freedom; gun; hate; liberty; pistol; rights; second
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last
Barf Alert.

VOTE. Make sure you VOTE.
1 posted on 10/27/2002 10:11:12 AM PST by vannrox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Barf alert?
2 posted on 10/27/2002 10:14:16 AM PST by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list
.


POLITICIANS PREFER
UNARMED PEASANTS.



.
3 posted on 10/27/2002 10:14:27 AM PST by vannrox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch
Sorry. Not the article ... but rather the idea that we are all "snipers" as fostered up here in Boston.
4 posted on 10/27/2002 10:15:48 AM PST by vannrox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
80 million . . . Hey the gun owners ARE America!
The five or ten million "elite" leftists are NOT America.
5 posted on 10/27/2002 10:16:25 AM PST by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
This is just like the augument you hear radical feminists use that all men on college campuses are "potential rapists" becuase of what's between their legs...
6 posted on 10/27/2002 10:19:51 AM PST by Brian Mosely
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
all of America's 80 million gun owners are potential snipers, according to the gun banners' logic.

Kind of like the (il)logic used by feminazis, that "all men are potential rapists."

7 posted on 10/27/2002 10:20:55 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brian Mosely
You beat me to it.
8 posted on 10/27/2002 10:21:24 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Leftist scum exploiting the murders of innocents to advance their fascist agenda. I'm angry and disgusted, yet again. Remember when they were just after "saturday night specials"? Remember when the brady bill was up for passage and she said "this is all the gun control we'll ever need"? The next day she called it "a good start".
VOTE PRO GUN!!
9 posted on 10/27/2002 10:28:49 AM PST by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
"America's 80 Million Potential Snipers

only 80 mil?...everybody I Know even libs are packin... In a gun grab...they flat out lose.

10 posted on 10/27/2002 10:29:09 AM PST by alphadog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
"We will come to view this harrowing episode for what it is — an isolated, bizarre crime in the life of a great and good nation."

Or a preview of the terms of engagement for something far more insidious.

11 posted on 10/27/2002 10:31:37 AM PST by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
The Washington-area sniper will be caught and imprisoned. Life will return to normal. We will come to view this harrowing episode for what it is — an isolated, bizarre crime in the life of a great and good nation.

Apparently the author or authors have not seen this:

Here is a lengthy but important document which should be read by all!

Jihadis in the Hood
Race, Urban Islam and the War on Terror

12 posted on 10/27/2002 10:36:38 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox

The American left consists of those who are mainly social outcasts; vice addicts, criminals, alien non-westerners, and bungled non-productive incompetents. These people, due to Americans attending to private affairs instead of public affairs, have achieved office, sit on juries, teach our young, control the means of communication. As a result they are living out of the public trough, think they have prestige, money and power. However, they know they will bungle. They cannot help it they will by their very nature cause damage and hurt. If Americans ever wake up guns create the means of resistance. Thus, to alleviate their own fears and consolidate their recent rise they are attempting to remove the guns.
13 posted on 10/27/2002 10:42:43 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
yeah and now only if 80-100 million gun owners would get out and vote. We wouldnt have to worry about this crap
14 posted on 10/27/2002 11:04:51 AM PST by 700pss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
Here is some ammo to counter the gun grabbers.

Parle & Probation

Recidivisim

15 posted on 10/27/2002 11:07:23 AM PST by GailA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
"America's 80 Million Potential Snipers" ......... My mistake, I thougt it was an article about the DemonRAT Party!
16 posted on 10/27/2002 11:08:55 AM PST by Highest Authority
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
80 million potential snipers? Does that mean 80 million potential dead Al Qaedas?
17 posted on 10/27/2002 11:09:03 AM PST by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 700pss
yeah and now only if 80-100 million gun owners would get out and vote. We wouldnt have to worry about this crap

Ok, it's deer season across America. We all know hunters who have a 30.06 and a 12 gauge.

Many hunters remain aloof on gun control issues, since they feel they are not affected. After all, Hillary goes duck hunting as does Jean Carnahan. Al Gore promised Pennsylvania hunters that he wasn't after their guns.

Now we have the VPC and the Bradys saying that the .223, .308 and .50 calibers are the tools of snipers.

They may laugh and say I don't shoot those calibers. Ask if they think the 30.06 will be exempt if they're going after the .308.

"And who needs a .50 caliber anyway?" Remind them that they won't stop with the .50 BMG, and will readily include all of the .50 caliber black powder rifles also. After all, the sniper only took one shot at a time.

If you can't convince these apathetic hunters that their guns are in the crosshairs now, you never will.

18 posted on 10/27/2002 11:15:01 AM PST by TC Rider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
Isn't it the DUTY of every abled bodied American to be ready to defend our country in the case of attack? Isn't the duty of every abled body American to serve their country in some way? This is all part of being a free citizen.

That's the concept that allowed our country exist in the first place. Had the founding fathers not had arms and the skills to use them we would still be British subjects. BTW - a good shot does not make a sniper.
19 posted on 10/27/2002 11:22:55 AM PST by Dutch Boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Dutch Boy
"Isn't it the DUTY of every abled bodied American to be ready to defend our country in the case of attack?"

Well, I've always thought so! "BTW - a good shot does not make a sniper."

I'm a good shot with a pistol at a target range, but I agree that there is a world of difference between a static target at a range and a live target shooting at ME! Even if 80 million Americans had rifles with scopes, and even if they were good shots, though not necessarily of sniper quality, it comes down to what is in their hearts. I'm aware from you post that you already know that. The absurdity of the left's arguments is that those guns represent a threat to the unarmed population. The point of the right, is that those guns may ultimately help safeguard the unarmed population, and hopefully, will represent a terrible, vengeful threat to the enemies of this nation.

20 posted on 10/27/2002 11:57:29 AM PST by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list

21 posted on 10/27/2002 1:28:29 PM PST by Joe Brower
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dd5339; cavtrooper21
At last...not a barf alert.
22 posted on 10/27/2002 1:39:58 PM PST by Vic3O3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TC Rider
"And who needs a .50 caliber anyway?"

I dont I all ready have mine. I have over $9000.00 invested in mine (rifle, scope, reloading equipment and materials) and Ill be dammed if these morons will take it. Or anything else right down to my 10/22's

Here is a letter from a 50 cal manufactures site to Rep. Henry Waxman that I particularly like. Its old but its still good.

From:

DATE: 14 May 1999
TO: Rep. Henry Waxman
FROM:
SUBJECT: .50 Caliber Rifles
CC: Rep. Mark Sanford, Rep. Robert Barr, Sen. Strom Thurmond, Sen. Ernest Hollings NUMBER OF PAGES: I (Including cover page)
I have become aware of your furtive attempt to infringe upon my ownership of my Barrett rifle. I am a former Captain USMC, state marksmanship champion, NRA member, member of the Fifty Caliber Shooter's Association and an avid hunter of deer and hogs. To my knowledge, no .50 caliber rifle has ever been used in the commission of a crime. My rifle cost $6,750. The telescope on the rifle cost $4,500. The ammunition I most often shoot costs @ $4.00 per round. While I tell you this, understand that what I'm trying to tell you is that I would be an idiot to spend $11,000 on a rifle to risk losing it in the legal aftermath of its illegal use. Get the hell out of my personal life and go play kissy face with Diane Feinstein, Barney Frank, Charles Schumer and those other leftists.
I am now an investment banker and make $400,000 per year. I also have a Harley Davidson motorcycle and several cars with V-8 engines. Are you next going to tell me I don't NEED a V-8 engine ... don't NEED such a heavy, powerful motorcycle ... don't NEED a house with five bedrooms ... don't NEED a wife with such large breasts...don't NEED a dog with such sharp teeth and so on?
This kind of "Chicken Little" reactionary noise is entirely useless. I am going to notify every legislator in my food chain that they need to take you behind the Capital and beat the crap out of you.

CC: Sen. Trent Lott
Sen. Orrin Hatch
Sen. Susan Collins
from - A 1976 Captain USMC, Ret.

Regardless I saw a poll this morning on fox that saying that only 14% believed that stricter gun controls would have stopped this shooting spree by these homeless black gay Muslims.

23 posted on 10/27/2002 2:15:28 PM PST by 700pss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Brian Mosely
Ah...the way to turn that one back on them is to comment that they are equipped for prostitution....but they're not prostitutes, right?
24 posted on 10/27/2002 2:34:50 PM PST by ExSoldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
None of this is to suggest that there can be no reasonable limitations on gun ownership.

I agree with the doctor on almost all his article, but I disagree with that statement. Gun laws DO NOT keep criminals from getting guns. The ONLY people who are prevented from obtaining guns by gun laws are the law abiding people who pose no threat to anyone to begin with.

For almost all of the 19th century gun control laws were unknown. Anyone anywhere could buy any gun he or she could afford, and guns could usually be ordered direct from the factories and mailed to the customer. But even without any gun control at all, crime rates were far lower than today with all our restrictive laws in place.

I read somewhere (probably on FR) recently that the U.S. murder rate in 1900 was less than 1 murder per 100,000 persons. 100 years later it was around 6.8 murders per 100,000, after peaking in the late 1980's at almost 10 per 100,000. 100 years, 22,000 gun laws, and more than a 7-fold increase in murders. Seems to me that if gun laws were intended to prevent crime, they have done a very poor job.

If every one of the 22,000 gun control laws on the books today were repealed tomorrow, I don't believe there would be any rise in crime or an increase in accidental shootings. In fact, if more law abiding people obtained guns as a result of repealing those laws, I would expect a considerable drop in the crime rate. Maybe even back to 19th century levels when most law abiding people owned guns and would-be criminals knew it.

25 posted on 10/27/2002 2:34:58 PM PST by epow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 700pss
I'm jealous. I want one.

I'll probably get an AR-15 first, considering my budget.

I'm also tempted to get one of the Mac Tech carbine conversions for my Glock.
26 posted on 10/27/2002 2:37:04 PM PST by TC Rider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
as a physician I hang my head in shame that these dolts share my profession
27 posted on 10/27/2002 2:38:51 PM PST by TheRedSoxWinThePennant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch
Barf alert?

Didn't read the post, huh?
28 posted on 10/27/2002 2:43:27 PM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch
Barf alert?

Sorry, my comment should have gone to the poster of the article!
29 posted on 10/27/2002 2:44:34 PM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Sorry. Not the article ... but rather the idea that we are all "snipers" as fostered up here in Boston.

Never mind my immediately preceeding comment. It's great there are some folks like Dr. Tim to counter those morons in Physicians for Social Responsibility.
30 posted on 10/27/2002 2:46:31 PM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Oh great, now it starts.

What is stupid is this guy is no sniper in the rite of passage by training that eliminates people like him before they graduate.

Even that expert qualification isn't what it used to be. He had to qualify with forty rounds to hit pop-up silhouettes at various distances on a firing range.

In 1976, I had to fire 80 at these things in basic combat training. (I hit 73 and scored expert myself.)

Gun grabbers are licking their chops over the thought of maing political hay over this murderer. They must be stopped.

31 posted on 10/27/2002 2:51:03 PM PST by Glutton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
America's 80 million gun owners are potential snipers, according to the gun banners' logic

I've got news for these pasty-mouthed little Liberal piss-ants...

If even a small portion of these feared 80 million gun owners decided to do the very things these pansy bed-wetters accuse them of wanting to do, these Stalin wannabees wouldn't be around to write such trash and advocate their un-Constitutional actions. They would have been history long ago, just like King George III!

They can just thank their lucky stars we aren't as psycho as they think we are.

... but, don't push us, you creepy morons....

32 posted on 10/27/2002 2:56:12 PM PST by Gritty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
So far the Violence Policy Center and Physicians for Social Responsibility have not produced a list of guns they do approve of.

Non firing, of course.

33 posted on 10/27/2002 2:56:16 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
America's 80 Million Potential Snipers

80 Million is not enough, if 200 mil + Americans (estimated amount of law abiding citizens) were armed and ready we would not have to ever worry about crime and domestic terrorism.

There was not terrorism in 1800's America, since most population was armed, and streets were safe too, so were communities, large cities, small towns, let any gun hater argue this point.

34 posted on 10/27/2002 2:59:16 PM PST by Anticommie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TC Rider
Get the AR15 everyone should have one. Or two. I got a M4 after my bmg.

All I have to say is buy one! A 50. There so much fun. But realize if you do it is a totally different realm of shooting.

When your at the range doing your initial site in and you set off car alarms from the concussion 40-50 feet away. I sh!t you not (and up a hill). You get some smiles from the other shooters and you make some really cool friends. :-)

And thats all in the price you pay. Its worth it

I take mine with my TC 50cal flintlock Hawken (the original assault rifle) they look real nice together side by side.

After that I take it up in the foothills of the Olympics or the Cascades and turn cinder blocks into pumice at 6-800 yards shooting a 700grn ap bullet
35 posted on 10/27/2002 3:09:25 PM PST by 700pss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Glutton
Gun grabbers are licking their chops over the thought of making political hay over this murderer. They must be stopped.

Remain calm. The anti-gunners will get nothing from this. Support your pro-gun organization of choice and stay after your political representatives.

From what I can see (and hear from neighbors who aren't "gun people") "regular citizens" know gun laws don't and won't prevent lunatics from hurting folks if that's what they intend.

36 posted on 10/27/2002 3:15:43 PM PST by toddst
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Hey morons, I guess all that doctoral work didn't impart any thinking skills. If there are 80 million potential snipers, and the only one who snipes is a Muslim who identifies with the attacks on the WTC (read terrorist), THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD SIGN THAT AMERICANS CAN BE TRUSTED WITH THEIR FIREARMS!!
37 posted on 10/27/2002 3:18:47 PM PST by copycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: copycat
My bad, the doctors are the good guys in this one. My comments still apply to anyone who thinks of America's gun owners as 80 million potential snipers.

If VPC were right, shouldn't there be more than ONE sniper?

38 posted on 10/27/2002 3:21:28 PM PST by copycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Sorry. Not the article ... but rather the idea that we are all "snipers" as fostered up here in Boston.

Yeah well the tyrants better remember if they try to impose their tyramy on us there WILL BE 80 million snipers ready to make them pay....

Sic Semper Tyranus
39 posted on 10/27/2002 3:27:51 PM PST by Kozak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
80,000,000 gun owners? (snigger) Why, that would make the largest standing army on earth by an order of magnitude. (chortle) In fact I'd guess offhand that that's more armed men and women than all the soldiers in all the armies of the world. (Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!)

Sorry for all the laughing and giggling. Sometimes I just can't keep a straight face.

Molon labe, liberals.
40 posted on 10/27/2002 3:49:00 PM PST by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
I'm getting about sick of the idiocy of the left-wing press. I especially noted Brokaw's castigation of the bushmaster .223 as a sniping weapon. To all the idiots in the media, there are about 2000 calibers that can kill a person. A new one can be made up by a competent gunsmith in a few hours. John "religion of peace" Mohammed already broke a slew of laws in toting this gun around. Hey libs, why don't you just pass a law outlawing sniping from a hole in your trunk! Americans please don't give up your constitutional 2nd amendment rights because some gutless libs want the world safe for their NAMBLA parties.
41 posted on 10/27/2002 3:56:50 PM PST by 2nd Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

In a letter to The Journal of the American Medical Association, public health gun grabber Dr. Jeremiah Barondess and his colleagues in New York City wrote that ideally all handguns would be banned, but such a ban was not yet politically feasible.

As Diaz puts it, "certainly [BATF] would not allow semi-automatic assault weapons to be manufactured and sold, and we believe that, ultimately, handguns would be phased out through such an agency."

When a person or activist group chooses irrationality over reason, chooses dishonesty over honesty, chooses false context or partial context over full-context the numbers and statistics they use to support their claims -- having failed on reason, honesty and full context -- will be presented irrationally, dishonestly and with false context.

What's the solution?

Putting Occam's Razor to work. Occam's Razor is a theory wherein the simplest explanation has the highest probability of being the correct explanation. The most useful statement of the principle for scientists is: "when you have two competing theories which make exactly the same predictions, the one that is simpler is the better."

Applying Occam's razor to the gun debate. One example is the question: "How can women better protect themselves from being rapped?" Now, to put that question in context so that a person unfamiliar with firearms can grasp the answer via Occam's Razor:

Simple question for women (Or asked of a man in regards to his wife or daughter's safety.): If your were confronted by a criminal wanting to rape you which would you prefer?

1) A cell phone to dial 911. (Keep in mind that you'd have no defense to stop the rapist from ripping the cell phone out of your hand before you can dial 911.)

2) A hand gun that you were trained on to use in self-defense.

It should be obvious to the reader that honest, full-context statistics can answer the question. But we're dealing with irrationality, dishonesty and false-context/partial-context. Thus the reason for applying Occam's Razor as though both sides had equal weight. This has the added benefit of demonstrating how the side that is being deceptive uses statistics in attempt to defy common-sense logic.

Here's another example of Occam's Razor to work. This example regards the "war on drugs". The question needing an explanation is: Why has the war on drugs by all accounts failed to be won? Answer: That DEA has no motivation to reduce any drug problem. For, it has no desire to reduce its jobs or power.

Further edification:

If a person thinks they've harmed by a person's drug possession they can take the defendant to court and do their best to prove to an impartial jury that they/plaintiff had been hammed by that. The plaintiff would be lucky to convince a third of the jurors that they had been harmed by the defendant -- let alone convince all twelve jurors, which the plaintiff needs to obtain a guilty verdict.

Proof is simple and best expressed by a defendant's lawyer speaking to an impartial jury:

"Clearly the plaintiff and his lawyer have failed by all accounts to show any evidence -- failed to show even one single piece of evidence -- to support his claim that he has been harmed by my client's drug possession. The plaintiff's claim is wholly unsupported.

"Since supporters of the war on drugs have nothing but wholly unsupported claims they chose to harm people that possess drugs by enlisting government agents to initiate force on their behalf. That is, they are truly guilty of that which they falsely accuse others of -- initiating harm against a person that's minding his or her own business."


42 posted on 10/27/2002 4:21:59 PM PST by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zon
Hmmm. I'm not quite sure I completely understand the principle of Occam's Razor. Let me take a stab at it:

Would you rather have a neighbor that was...

A. ...a hippie that smoked pot and shot gophers off his back porch?

or

B. ...a martini drinking liberal who voted?

How's that? ; )
43 posted on 10/27/2002 5:04:42 PM PST by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Rye
all of America's 80 million gun owners are potential snipers, according to the gun banners' logic.

Kind of like the (il)logic used by feminazis, that "all men are potential rapists."


Well, let's all turn in our guns and go and be castrated and then everything will be just ducky. Oh, we're off to see the wizard.
44 posted on 10/27/2002 5:09:49 PM PST by RipSawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Per your "example", you don't understand Occam's Razor. Not that you were intending to show that you did. ;)
45 posted on 10/27/2002 5:18:28 PM PST by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Anticommie
There was not terrorism in 1800's America

Sure there was. They were called Indian raids.

.. since most population was armed

Just imagine if the state and federal governments in 1800 asked all citizens to disarm in response to an Indian raid. Pretty stupid. Now consider the terrorism that goes on daily in in Washington D.C. neighborhoods.

, and streets were safe too, so were communities, large cities, small towns, let any gun hater argue this point.

It's fair to remember that Police and Constables are a luxury and convenience that we allowed and began first in communties that could afford it, not because anyone believed the right of law enforcement belonged solely to the Constablry and not to the citizenry.

46 posted on 10/27/2002 5:23:55 PM PST by Rightwing Conspiratr1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Zon
I'll have to study up on it, soon's I git this gopher population thinned down a bit. :^)
47 posted on 10/27/2002 5:24:17 PM PST by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: 700pss
"And who needs a .50 caliber anyway"

because they don't make a .60 caliber, thats why.

48 posted on 10/27/2002 5:28:52 PM PST by SSN558
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Brian Mosely
110 million Americans are potential prostitutes.
49 posted on 10/27/2002 5:32:21 PM PST by oyez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2nd Amendment
***Americans please dont't give up your constitutional 2nd amendment rights because some gutless libs want the world safe for their NAMBLA parties.***

Funny you should mention this. The UN is working on this very concept. America has to be disarmed before the "rights of the Child"(sexual liberty) can be implemented.

50 posted on 10/27/2002 5:56:02 PM PST by martian_22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

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.

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