[Vision2020] Pres mans-up, Crabtree doesn't

[Garrett Clevenger]

g asks:

"In what way is it an infringement of your rights for a law abiding adult to exersize their right to hold and use weapons and which of your rights is it that's being violated when they do?"


As I stated before, I own a gun and am not trying to keep law abiding adults from using theirs.

Of course, the term law-abiding depends on what laws are on the books.  I imagine, in Moscow at least, there is a chance that someone could be cited under the noise ordinance if that person actually fires a shot.

Thus, that person's right to bear arms has been infringed.

Which right do you think should win out, the right to use your weapon in Moscow, or the public's right to not be bothered by you firing a shot?

You believe in restriction on using weapons.  So does Ringo.  I really doubt she deserved the treatment you gave her in your drive to keep her from getting votes and doubt the NRA (should really be National Weapon Association considering they ain't just about rifles) grade of F means much.

Unless of course you think people should be allowed to use any weapon.  She's probably uncomfortable with people armed with M-16s walking around downtown Moscow...

gclev



----- Original Message -----
From: "the lockshop" <lockshop at pull.twcbc.com>
To: "Garrett Clevenger" <garrettmc at frontier.com>, "vision2020_moscow.com" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2010 1:36:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Pres mans-up, Crabtree doesn't


O how soon they forget. I no longer carry on discussions with Mr. Campbell past the point of insult and acrimony at the request of no small number of vision subscribers and I don't think there can be much question but what that was where the converation was headed. If Mr. Campbell wants to carry on (and clearly he does), he can do it without further input from me. 

As to your question: 

" Should it be open-ended where anybody is allowed to bear (hold and use) any arm (weapon) at anyplace for any reason, or should there be regulations to insure others' rights are not infringed ?" 

There are restrictions in place which I find reasonable. Denying firearms to felons, non citizens, and children strikes me as quite reasonable. Not using them on others property without permission would be another. 

Now a question for you. In what way is it an infringement of your rights for a law abiding adult to exersize their right to hold and use weapons and which of your rights is it that's being violated when they do? 

g 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Garrett Clevenger" < garrettmc at frontier.com > 
To: "vision2020_moscow.com" < vision2020 at moscow.com > 
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:05 AM 
Subject: [Vision2020] Pres mans-up, Crabtree doesn't 

> Joe, don't expect Mr. Crabtree to answer your questions. 
> 
> He's good at ranting, but horrible at giving reasonable answers to questions. 
> 
> He bashed Ringo over her gun stance, yet when asked: 
> 
> "Should it be open-ended where anybody is allowed to bear (hold and use) any arm (weapon) at anyplace for any reason, or should there be regulations to insure others' rights are not infringed?" 
> 
> There is utter silence. 
> 
> That's not the first time he refuses to answer questions, so I've come to expect that from him. 
> 
> gclev 
> 
> ======================================================= 
> List services made available by First Step Internet, 
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. 
> http://www.fsr.net 
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com 
> ======================================================= 





No virus found in this incoming message. 
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 9.0.864 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3235 - Release Date: 11/03/10 01:36:00