Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: unclewest who wrote (17360)	11/23/2003 6:38:18 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793755

That comment was horrible. The fact that it was later proven true was much worse. The Clintons brought in the "Anti-War" crowd from the 60s. First time they made it to the White House. I remember a picture of Bill meeting with the staff and an article about it talking about how super clean their people were compared to the previous Bushies. Just after that they had to fire a couple of guys from Arkansas for taking the Presidential chopper to play golf. Oh, if we had only known what was coming!

To: unclewest who wrote (17360)	11/23/2003 6:46:58 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793755

I normally don't post "Gun" stories, but this one is so bad I had to. I can hear the guys in "Blue Heaven" grinding their teeth. "One Hand Clapping" Blog. The outrageous 9th Circuit ruling against Glock Law.com reports that the federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Glock firearms and other gun makers, "... can be held liable for letting weapons fall into the hands of criminals ... ." The plaintiffs of the case concerned alleged, and the court found, ... that Glock Inc. and others, makers and the dealer of several weapons used to injure five and kill one, negligently flooded the market, fostering shady secondary markets where crooks could easily obtain a gun. Observes Darren Kaplan, So who did Glock "deliberately and recklessly" market their handgun to? It was the notorious illegal handgun purchaser known as the Cosmopolis Police Department in Washington State. After the Cosmopolis Police decided the Glock handgun was too small, the Cosmopolis Police sold it through a former reserve officer who owned a gun store to a man who claimed to be a gun collector. It was then sold twice at a gun show in Spokane, Wash. -- very near Hayden Lake, Idaho, the base of a neo-Nazi group to which Buford Furrow belonged. Furrow used the gun to shoot his victims, including one who died. UCLA law Prof. Eugene Volokh says the case is a clear one of judicial overreach. Not only that, says Volokh, "According to the 9th Circuit, Glock has to dictate to the police how to handle [gun sales], because they would know better than the police how to prevent crime," a glaringly stupid proposition. But here is the money part of the court's twisted thinking: Glock produced "... more firearms than the legitimate market demands ... ." What the court is holding is that it, not a business or the market itself, can define what the "legitimate market" for firearms is. The court is saying that a manufacturer can finely calibrate its rate of production so that only "legitimate" customers by the product. This is simply lunacy. It requires Glock deliberately to avoid growth of its business. There are certainly huge number of "legitimate" customers in the total handgun market than Glock now sells to. There are literally millions of men and women who can lawfully own Glock pistols but don't. So why can't Glock make millions to sell to them? Because the 9th Circuit says it can't. Why? Because if even just one of those pistols falls into "non-legitimate" hands, no matter how many lawful hands it passes through first. Note that the Glock pistol in question passed through five hands after it left Glock - and according to the court, Glock is supposed to be able to control this kind of activity by limiting its production. Note why the Cosmopolis police department got rid of the gun: it was the wrong size. They didn't look up one day and exclaim, "Dang! Where did all these Glocks come from? How'd we get so many? Quick, men, get them to the black market!" "Over-production" had nothing to do with it. The department made the wrong purchasing choice. How can Glock possibly be responsible for that? Bottom line: the 9th Circuit Court simply wanted to strike a blow against firearms and contorted itself out of any rational thought processes to make it so. donaldsensing.com

To: unclewest who wrote (17360)	11/23/2003 11:24:42 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793755

The latest development in Georgia, where President Eduard Shevardnadze has resigned, has interesting roots. He was going to use the Military to stay in power. They obviously refused to support him. Why? For the last five or so years, they have been trained by the American Military. Their Officer Corps has been "Professionalized" by us to a large degree. Our State Department had already condemed the last election. I see a combination of the new backbone of the Armed Forces combined with our quiet warnings to the Officers not to set up a Dictatorship.