Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Science Fiction > Written > Re: WTC Towers:...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 29 of 31 Topic 20577 of 22998
Post > Topic >>

Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition

by Walter Bushell <proto@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Mar 13, 2008 at 03:52 AM

In article <6a2gt3l53lhkfo04gdih3cjgdkbv7167ch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
 John Schilling <schillin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:29:46 GMT, Gene Ward Smith <gene@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
> 
> >Walter Bushell <proto@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
news:proto-E93B6E.18244510032008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >70-1-84-166.area1.spcsdns.net:
> 
> >> Speaking of politicians sucking, our esteemed and honorable governor
of 
> >> the State of New York has just been brought up on a Federal rap of 
> >> violating the Mann Act.
> 
> >Indeed. And if someone can explain why what he did had a Federal law
against 
> >it, I'd be interested.
> 
> Same reason there's a Federal law against buying a handgun outside of
your
> state of residence.  Different states have, legitimately, different laws
> and policies about that sort of thing; it's a monumental pain in the ass
> to have States trying to individually regulate interstate commerce with
> their own border checkpoints, etc, so if the issue is im****tant enough
to
> bother with, it's generally the Feds who do the bothering.
> 
> If you want to buy a gun, you buy it in your own state according to your
> own state's laws.  If you want to buy a hooker, same deal.  If you're
> just looking to rent a hooker (or a gun, for that matter) you can do
that
> in a state you're just visiting, so long as the transaction stays 
> in-state.
> 
> But I, as a Californian, cannot simply phone over to Nevada and say, "my
> state doesn't allow machine pistols or high-class prostitutes; please
> deliver one of each", and if I do it will very properly be the Federal
> government that says "no".
> 
> 
> Admittedly, it may be redundant to apply the Mann act where the
underlying
> transaction is illegal in *both* states, but that just makes it extra 
> stupid to be hiring one's callgirls from an out-of-state service.  Of 
> course the Feds are going to be dealing with interstate criminal
> conspiracies.  And really, doesn't New York have its own perfectly good
> hookers these days?

He im****ted a hooker to DC. LOL! As long as Congress meets there their 
will be no shortage of hookers.

-- 
What is done in the heat of battle is (normatively) judged
by different standards than what is leisurely planned in
comfortable conference rooms.
 




 31 Posts in Topic:
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Jenn <jennconductsREMO  2008-03-09 03:10:36 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
"David Morgan \(MAMS  2008-03-09 06:49:56 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Thomas Armagost <silly  2008-03-09 09:03:10 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
kludge@[EMAIL PROTECTED]   2008-03-09 09:36:34 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Gene Ward Smith <gene@  2008-03-09 18:18:49 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
"Mike Schilling"  2008-03-09 18:24:02 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Gene Ward Smith <gene@  2008-03-09 18:46:04 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
nance@[EMAIL PROTECTED]   2008-03-11 12:34:36 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
"Glenn Dowdy" &  2008-03-10 10:06:10 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Howard Brazee <howard@  2008-03-10 18:23:56 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Walter Bushell <proto@  2008-03-10 18:24:45 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Gene Ward Smith <gene@  2008-03-10 22:29:46 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
kludge@[EMAIL PROTECTED]   2008-03-11 09:01:01 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Gene Ward Smith <gene@  2008-03-11 17:51:29 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Gutless Umbrella Carrying  2008-03-11 18:01:12 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Les Cargill <lcargill@  2008-03-11 21:04:32 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
John Schilling <schill  2008-03-11 18:09:12 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Gene Ward Smith <gene@  2008-03-12 01:39:37 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
"Mike Schilling"  2008-03-11 18:51:14 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Gene Ward Smith <gene@  2008-03-12 02:03:16 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
"Mike Schilling"  2008-03-12 02:28:45 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Gene Ward Smith <gene@  2008-03-12 02:45:32 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
The Kat <news1@[EMAIL   2008-03-11 20:05:30 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
John Schilling <schill  2008-03-12 18:54:53 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
"Mike Schilling"  2008-03-11 18:49:09 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
John Schilling <schill  2008-03-12 18:54:53 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
"Mike Schilling"  2008-03-13 02:12:14 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Walter Bushell <proto@  2008-03-13 03:53:38 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
Walter Bushell <proto@  2008-03-13 03:52:59 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
wdstarr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-03-10 19:28:52 
Re: WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
"David Morgan \(MAMS  2008-03-11 09:16:34 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Mon Dec 1 14:36:37 CST 2008.