|
Alphecca is a member of "the lunatic fringe of the US right" --Guardian (UK) 6/26/06 *******************
Email me at:
gunnut -at- alphecca -dot- com Check it out:
My Latest Blatherings...
Do We Need "Assault Weapons?" DC Congressional Seat Tied To Gun Rights Go Stats Installed Grass Roots & Gun Rights Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes. . . Gun Control Bills Advancing Bye-Bye SiteMeter Gun Rights in Texas KS Bill Would Overrule City Gun Laws Some Good News More on Alphecca and IE 7 More on Giuliani on Gun Control Bloomberg Pushes Pelosi on Gun Control NY: Now it's Bullet Control Trouble Reading Alphecca With IE7? Hit Job on Gun Rights Lawyer WaPo & Guns: A Good Question SCOTUS Review of DC Circuit Could Sidestep Central Issue George Will Warns Dems on Gun Control Meanwhile in Knife-Free Scotland. . . Dell Computer Support Howler of the Day Friday Bear Blogging Idiot of the Day on Gun Rights MO: Bill To Prevent Gun Confiscations Advances Proximity Laws Against Guns? No Slippery Slope? Stuck in Massachusetts Please Welcome... NY: Gov. Spitzer to Promote Hunting?
Care to comment?
Take your best shot:
Note: Comments close-down on posts after seven days.
Yes, I coined the term
"stupid-fucking-computer" Alphecca gets noticed! Check out these GLOWING REVIEWS I've just made up:
|
May 22, 2004Snatching Victory Where You CanFrom the Chicago Tribune comes this column by Eric Zorn about the acquittal of a young man for not carrying a firearm in his car properly:
Read the whole thing of course but it was obvious that the judge was set against the defendent's lawyer's defense of need. Rather obvious that the cops who arrested Pritchett were, too. But the jury felt otherwise and justice was served. Posted by Jeff Soyer at May 22, 2004 08:26 AM Comments
Actually, according to the thread on the High Road, there was no jury. This was a trial just in front of the judge. He may not have accepted the defense of need, but he recognized that the defendant deserved the benefit of the doubt and acquitted him. The only real question was whether or not the gun was stored loaded - unloaded is legal, loaded is not. Two police officers said it was loaded, the defendant claimed it was unloaded. The police officers did not show up for the trial, but the defense attorney accepted their affidavits as evidence. The judge apparently decided that that was not sufficiently strong proof to convict. Posted by: Roger Ritter at May 23, 2004 06:21 PMthe comment input form disappears. Your comments are welcome. You don't need to enter a URL and you don't need a "valid" email address, either. Note though that MT Blacklist is installed to flag suspiciously spam-like strings. Unfortunately, because of the bastard spammers, the strings "google.com" and "yahoo.com" (even in your email address) are currently banned as well. So are strings such as "cialis" (a common spam) which rules out words such as "socialism". Try putting a hyphan in a word like that. By Golly, you're reading an archived post. Click Here to head to the main page and read current stuff...Into science fiction? Check out my group blog novel, Colony: Alchibah. See the reader's guide there for first-timer tips. |