Joe Dees wrote:
> >Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 08:52:12 -0800 (PST)
> >From: Brian D Williams <email@example.com>
> >To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> >Subject: [GUNS] Re: g*n c*ntr*l
> >Reply-To: email@example.com
> >From: "Joe E. Dees" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> >>I don't give a rotten fig whether or not some nimrod doofus or
> >>other killfiles me; when a comment appears on this list, it is to
> >>the list at large, which exactly for whom my reply is intended.
> >As yesterdays post made clear, everything you've been ranting about
> >is already existing federal law. You have been attacking a
> >strawman, your argument is exposed, and you are finished.
> >Expressing your opinions is one thing, name-calling of list members
> >is another, and I believe prohibited. While "nimrod" is actually a
> >compliment (in the bible Nimrod was a nephew of Noah, and a
> >renowned hunter) I doubt you were aware of that, and "doofus"
> >clearly is not a compliment.
> >Hopefully you've earned yourself a vacation from this list.
> >Regardless you're permanently >null.
> Without a purchase-prohibited list, such laws are unenforceable. It makes no sense for a group to on one hand call for the enforcement of existing laws, and on the other hand, oppose the measure that would maks such enforcement possible, unless their true interest is not progress, but propagandizing and footdragging.
And you've already been told that purchase-prohibited list databases are
already used. It is called the NICS Insta-Check system, and its been in
place for a couple years now. AND it was the NRA that made sure this
system was developed. HCI didn't want it.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:05:36 MDT