Police search suspicious car as Times Square is sealed

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

If you want to outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them.....

People in possession of outlawed items are outlaws?



By the way, does that include just certain groups (citizens particularly) or everyone (including officers of the law, soldiers, etc.)?

[CaptainHaplo]

Ya know - its not the first time I've been called:

CAPTAIN OBVIOUS (which must be said in a booming radio announcer type voice for proper effect) Though if your going to call me that, at least warn me ahead of time so I can go don my cape!

However, SafeKeeper brought up the availability of guns as if that had something to do with this incident. I simply questioned why bring that up since it had no bearing - and logically came to the conclusion that he was indicating his opinion that the legal availability of firearms was somehow a danger. Thus I pointed out to him the danger of outlawing guns - which is that normal citizens - who have the right to firearms themselves currently - would lack the ability to protect their homes and property since criminals would secure guns regardless of whether they are legally available or not.

Edit - I mentioned to my lady about the Taliban claiming responsibility - her response was - and I quote: "If a fart caused fear in the US, the Taliban would claim they were the ones that let it loose." Needless to say, she doesn't think they have much of a legitimate claim.....

[SteamWake]

I was wondering when this 'connection' would be made.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/03...are-bomb-plot/

[tater]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Lenny down the road said it was him wot done it, can you please bomb the house he lives in without killing his poor old mammy?

The statement stands. If an organization wants to take credit for some horrific act, why not target them along with the real perps?

A subway is blown up killing innocent people. Two groups take credit, Al Qaida, and Jihad-R-Us. If the latter wants to get recruitment milage, Islamic street cred, etc from the claim, they should get killed just as dead as the real perps, AQ.

There is nothing at all to lose by prosecuting both targets.

Note that this presumes foreign terror. If they are citizens, then we have to prosecute them in court instead of just killing them. That said, terror laws are written in such a way that they'd do serious time just for making a claim (don't joke about terror in airports!).

PS—the Administration is saying it's looking like terrorism, and at least one suspect is a pakistani-american.

[tater]

http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...E4MGU3ZjcxZmQ=

Andy McCarthy again (prosecutor of the 1993 Trade Center bombing). Very instructive post by him, and raises some questions.

Originally Posted by tater

The statement stands. If an organization wants to take credit for some horrific act, why not target them along with the real perps?

A subway is blown up killing innocent people. Two groups take credit, Al Qaida, and Jihad-R-Us. If the latter wants to get recruitment milage, Islamic street cred, etc from the claim, they should get killed just as dead as the real perps, AQ.

There is nothing at all to lose by prosecuting both targets.

Note that this presumes foreign terror. If they are citizens, then we have to prosecute them in court instead of just killing them. That said, terror laws are written in such a way that they'd do serious time just for making a claim (don't joke about terror in airports!).

PS—the Administration is saying it's looking like terrorism, and at least one suspect is a pakistani-american.

"Run, Lenny, ruuun!"