Re: extropians-digest V4 #144

Joe E. Dees (
Sat, 29 May 1999 18:35:24 -0500

From:   (James Ganong)
Date sent:      	Sat, 29 May 1999 03:57:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:        	Re: extropians-digest V4 #144
Send reply to:

> Joe E. Dees wrote:
> >Here's the fucking liar Mark, fucking lying
> >again. Where have I ever advocated such
> >a thing (unless you're criminal, deranged,
> >deficient, abusive or a child, all of which I
> increasingly see as likelihoods with you)? >I simply said that I would
> be willing to kill >anyone who tried to kill me for holding my
> >opinions (it's called the 1st amendment, >nimrod), and so should
> anyone be willing >to defend freedom of thought and >expression in
> America.
> Please expand on your definition of deficient, as you just a short while
> ago included those who voted for Republi-
> Christians as being mentally unfit for gun
> ownership:
> >I don't want to repeal the 2nd Amendment,
> >I just want to restrict gun ownership to, >mainly, those who can vote
> (with a few >exceptions, such as abusers and the >mentally incompetent
> who keep voting >RepubliChristians
> Was this a serious statement or just tossed out in the heat of the
> flamewar?
> Either way, sir, it does you little credit.
> Would you seek similar limits on the 1st amendment rights of such
> people?
Hello??? SARCASM ALERT! If gun nuts can employ it, so can I!
> Please clarify your parameters for declaring someone deficient.
> Thank you.
A legitimate finding of diminished capacity by the appropriate agencies that the person is likely to be a danger to themselves or others, natch. It's done every day, in all fifty states, and is fully reviewable and appealable.
> James Ganong