| Author | Post |
|---|
ProtectedBy9mm
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 21st, 2009 07:57 pm |
|
pussypounder wrote: ProtectedBy9mm wrote: pussypounder wrote: ProtectedBy9mm wrote: So, he just GETS off?
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=6884927
My opininon has been pursuaded by the media. However in light of the recent changes in gun law it may be the best choice for justice sake to dismiss this charge.
It would not seem fair to be convicted of an offense that no longer was a violation of the law. There are no real vicitms in this case so why not dismiss the violation?
Is that why they won't legalize marijuana?
They are going to HAVE to free millions of incarcerated offenders of possession?
...i swear i am the only one held accountable for my actions. 
I can assure you that you are not. Some people manage to skate around alot of things.
Those are the persons I refer to in my screen name. Seems to be somewhat unpopular to use that combination of words here....geesh.
But those persons that skate about and are never accoutable really piss me off.
You're only getting flak for your screen name b/c of the STATE that you are posting in.
trust me, i can't go the the Chevron and ask for a pack of smokes until the chick behind the counter make SURE i know her opposing views on the matter.
Suck it up, certain ppl don't care, some do: contribute to the forum and all will be well. 
|
SGT Jensen
State Researcher
| Joined: | Sat Feb 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | Santaquin, Utah USA |
| Posts: | 1956 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 21st, 2009 07:58 pm |
|
ProtectedBy9mm wrote: Is that why they won't legalize marijuana?
They are going to HAVE to free millions of incarcerated offenders of possession?
I wish they would. It would free up prison space for the real douchebags.
|
MudPounder
Banned
| Joined: | Sun Jun 21st, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 17 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 21st, 2009 08:00 pm |
|
SGT Jensen wrote: ProtectedBy9mm wrote: Is that why they won't legalize marijuana?
They are going to HAVE to free millions of incarcerated offenders of possession?
I wish they would. It would free up prison space for the real douchebags.
many a real Douchebag around to fill the vacancy IMO.
|
utbagpiper
State Researcher
| Joined: | Wed Jul 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 720 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 02:22 am |
|
SGT Jensen wrote:
I realize that I was comparing apples and oranges, but he made a claim that he "didn't speed".
Even ignoring the difference between accidentally cracking a posted limit, or even maintaining flow of traffic and doing nearly double the posted limit in a residential area, I know people who "don't speed." That need not mean they have never exceeded a posted limit. It can mean they do not do so on any regular basis.
Imagine asking an ex smoker if he smokes, or an ex-drinker if he drinks. If either says "No, I do not," is he being dishonest? Must he reveal past conduct in making a statement of current conduct?
Dell's attempt to justify his grossly reckless criminal conduct by comparing it to minor infractions was properly shut down by someone who may, very honesty, be very diligent in their regard to speed limits.
I can honestly say I do not speed in residential areas.
I freely admit to maintaining flow of traffic on freeways and highways. In 25 years of driving, all of the 5 speeding tickets I've received have been on rural stretches of highway or interstate. And the first 4 of those 5 were under the bad ol' double nickel.
So compared to any inconsiderate, moronic egomaniac who thinks speeding past homes and yards with kids is ok, I can honestly say, "No, I don't speed (in residential areas or school zones)."
Again, defend Dell if you like. But there is no need to even quibble over his reckless criminal speeding. He plead guilty to that.
Charles
|
Current time is 10:09 am | Page:   1 2 3 |
|
