Paul Hughes wrote:
> Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
> Witness the outpouring of lawsuits being filed by Democratic
> Party controlled city and county governments against the gun
> manufacturers for the 'costs' imposed by the use of guns in
> their cities where guns are already illegal (and have the
> highest crime rates). It looks like the final push is on,
> They ignore the fact that this will make it impossible for
> the poor and working class folks to afford to protect
> themselves, while the rich can easily afford firearms even
> at such inflated prices. Thus the Democrats are favoring the
> rich and penalizing the poor, an interesting turnaround. The
> dems want this especially because they need a new lever to
> keep the poor imprisoned in the grips of the Democratic
> Party political machine, which still controls most big
> cities, now that welfare reform is allowing the poor and
> minorities to escape the bounds of the ghetto.
> Paul's Response:
> At the risk of oversimplifying things, I'd like to add to
> your sentiments by saying that ultimately all laws,
> advertently or inadvertently, end up hurting the poor and
> helping the rich. Which ironically is a growing sentiment
> of hip laws students at Ivy league schools! A nagging
> feeling that has continued to grow for me, is that the
> entire legal system (at least in the US) is increasingly
> becoming a complete joke perpetrated on the rest of us as a
> smokescreen to benefit the corporate interests of the rich
> at the expense of everyone else. The gun control issue is
> the latest to magnify this effect. I'm therefore not
> surprised that the Democratic party is behind this.
> Although they have operated on the pretense that they are
> the common person's party, their actions have spoken
I don't see how you can describe a legal jihad against the gun manufacturing industry as some sort of smokescreen to perpetutate corporate interests...If the gun industry goes out of business, the certainly don't gain anything. If their products are taxed at several hundred percent rates, this will not only reduce market demand, but their ability to make a profit, which also goes against corporate interests.
What corporations make money off of less guns?
> A Republican run CIA overthrows third world dictators and
> institutes their own pupppet-dictators and righ-wing
Uh, I don't see how you can say this about anything in the last 30 years. Lessee, Ferdinand Marcos got tossed out and Cory Aquino became president, who is hardly right wing. The autocratic government of South Korea lost an election to a former political prisoner and is now themselves in prison on corruption and human rights charges. The new democratic government of Nicaragua is hardly right-wing, nor is the government of Panama. Pinochet is out and Fujimoro is in. Afghanistan is about the only one I can think of which might fit your description....
> A Democratic run CIA floods the country in question with
> 'free' grain and foodstuffs, thereby putting all of the
> local farmers out of business.
Uh, you mean pre-revolutionary Iran? Actually, it was Nixon and Ford who were the big freinds of the Shah and instituted the free grain program..Carter just inheritied the mess.
> The end result is the same - the US federal government
> controls the country.
Lets see now. We got tossed out of the Phillipines, out of Vietnam, out of Iran, out of Afghanistan, and we are leaving Panama..... Yeah, we are really in control, aren't we?
-- TANSTAAFL!!! Michael Lorrey ------------------------------------------------------------ mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org MikeySoft: Graphic Design/Animation/Publishing/Engineering ------------------------------------------------------------ How many fnords did you see before breakfast today?