('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)
>Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:37:25 -0400
> Mike Lorrey <mlorrey@datamann.com> extropians@extropy.org Re: MEDIA/POLITICS/GUNS "The changing politics of Guns"Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org
>
>Joe Dees wrote:
>>
>> >Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 08:14:39 -0700
>> > "Michael M. Butler" <butler@comp-lib.org> extropians@extropy.org Re: MEDIA/POLITICS/GUNS "The changing politics of Guns"Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org
>> >
>> >Mike Lorrey wrote:
>> >
>> >> He was arresting her.
>> >
>> >Bear in mind that, for instance, "displaying a gun in a threatening or rude manner, except in self defense", is unlawful
>> >in California. Cops get to do things mere mortals don't. Arrest at gunpoint of an unarmed person, even by a witness to a
>> >felony, is a tricky area in many places.
>> >
>> >Just FYI.
>> >
>> That's right; and there was no felony here, except the one committed by the gun-waving loonie. He could even be convicted of kidnapping for holding her at gunpoint.
>
>Emerson has, in the course of his work as a doctor, performed abortions
>on occasion. Therefore, the interference of his separated wife in his
>place of business is a federal felony.
>
The answer to which situation is, of course (providing that this practice is true of that office at that time - did he perform them in that office?), to call the police, and not to play froggy cowboy and draw down on an unarmed woman. The 'federal felony' line cannot be employed if he did not perform abortions at that office.
------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:10 MDT