LH: PA: You expect me to believe that the intruder broke into your client's house, stole the gun, and then broke in a second time only to have that same gun wrestled away from him by the client? DA: Yes. What a strange world we live in. PA: Strange, ideed. Your client owes us $50,000. Pay up, please. And advise you client that the next time it'll $50,000 plus 5 years in prison. Mike Geary Memphis ----- Original Message ----- From: Lawrence Helm To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 1:52 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Nutcase Control (law) What a boon your $50,000 idea would be for lawyers. A pretrial discussion PA (Prosecuting Attorney): Did your client shoot the intruder? DA (Defense Attorney) Yes, he admits that. He wrestled the gun away from the intruder and it went off accidentally. PA: Records show that the gun was registered to your client. DA: Yes, that's true. The intruder had such an easy time of it when he broke into my client's house previously, that he obviously came back. PA: Do you realize that variations on this defense have been used a number of times? DA: Yes. Interesting, isn't it? PA: Do you expect the jury to believe your client? DA: Of course. Would you rather they believed the armed intruder to be in the right? Shame on you. My client is an innocent victim attempting, while in an unarmed state, to defend himself against an armed intruder. I have no doubt but that the jury will find in my client's favor. In fact previous such trials should teach you not to bring such frivolous law suits to trial. PA: I was prepared to give your client a break, drop the murder charge, and reduce the fine to $10,000. DA: Forget it. See you in court. Lawrence ------------Original Message------------ From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Sat, Apr-21-2007 11:15 AM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Nutcase Control (law) >>Just making laws apparently doesn't get them automatically complied with. Mike, did you know this? << Duh... >>You're going to have to go well beyond just making your gun law to make yourself perfectly safe from guns.<< $50,000 per weapon will do the trick, I think. Prison for the 2nd offense. >>maybe Mike & his buddies can forgo their plans to organize all the Pacifist, Anti-Gun, LeftWingers into a Paramilitary force and conduct house to house searches in San Jacinto to take away all our guns.<< Relax, there won't be any need for house to house searches. As long as you're not caught out in public with your gun, the authorities won't know you own one. You'll never be able to use it, it's true, but that's the price of living in a civilized state. It's a policy of don't use, don't lose. Your guns will be your little secret. Mike Geary Memphis ----- Original Message ----- From: Lawrence Helm To: Lit-Ideas Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 10:21 AM Subject: [lit-ideas] Nutcase Control (law) Well looky here. There's already a Federal Law that would have prevented Cho getting his guns legally -- had it been complied with: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/21/us/21guns.html?em&ex=1177300800&en=fb403a48ef158b97&ei=5087%0A The Virginia Law isn't quite up to Federal Standards, but Mr. Bonnie, the Director of the University of Virginia Institute on Law, Psychiatry and Public Policy says "We are going to fix this." But note that as defective as the Virginia law is, Virginia is the leading state for reporting nutcases to the local police. Apparently the current Federal procedure is for someone privy to the psychiatric health of an individual to notify local police. The article goes on to say Carolyn McCarthy, Democrat of New York, has been pushing a bill to require states to automate their criminal history records so computer databases used to conduct background checks on gun buyers are more complete." Well done Carolyn McCarthy! Whew! If more states comply with the Federal Law and Carolyn McCarthy's bill gets passed Lawrence