Text 34070, 78 rader
Skriven 2009-07-02 16:00:36 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Jeff Smith (1:14/5)
Ärende: Saberi vs Blom
======================
Hello Jeff,

On Thursday June 25 2009 01:25, you wrote to me:

 MV>> I beg to differ. Here gun addicts are considered dangerous. They can
 MV>> kill people with their guns. That is why we have made laws to re-
 MV>> strict gun addicts. But we do not go so far as to lure gun addicts
 MV>> people from other countries into our jurisdiction so that they can be
 MV>> stopped too.

 JS>     So... Anyone owning or wanting to own a gun is a gun addict. I
 JS> always thought an addict was someone with a compulsive desire.

And I always thought that child molestors are people that have actually
molested a child. Goes to shwo one can be in error when applying one's own
definitions to another culture,

 JS>  If so that leaves me a non-addict. Sorry Michiel. Here some are gun
 JS> collectors.

By YOUR definition. HERE I aplly MY definition.

 JS>  They do feel the desire to buy rare or unique firearms. But usually
 JS> rarely if ever fire them. Are they automatically addicts?
 JS> It's soo easy isn't it Michiel to label anyone that differs from YOUR
 JS> idea of what is right an addict. He owns a gun so he MUST be an
 JS> addict.

You owe more that one gun. Among them at least one hand gun. You target
practise with them, In my defintion that makes you a gun edict. Arguing is
useless as it is MY definition that applies to my perception of you.

 MV>> No, Blom ciommunicated with what IN YOUR PERCEPTION was a child.

 JS>     As well as his. If someone portrays themself as a child online and
 JS> and others online respond. Who are those people responding to?

Who says the cop was percieved as a child by Blom? You say that, does not mean
it is so.

Is it impossible for you imagine Blom never gave the child/adult matter any
thought at all. Yes the cop presented himself as 14 year old. But why should
that have given Blom the idea that the cop was presenting himself as a child
when HERE a 14 year old is not a child per se.

 JS> Blom responded to the child that he thought he was communicating
 JS> with.

No Blom responded to what he was presented with.

 JS>  At what point did the LEO announce or make Blom aware that he
 JS> was communicating with an adult let alone a adult LEO? Your claim
 JS> Michiel that Blom didn't think he was contacting a child isn't
 JS> supported by the reality of what happened.

What happened was that he came to meet someone. That he thought of that as a
chils is not supported by the facts.

But I see it is useless to argue with you about this point. Youe mind is set.

 MV>> Your repeated mention of the word "child" does not prove that
 MV>> Blom thought he was trying top have sex with a chikd. It only
 MV>> proves that YOU think he thought that.

 JS>     Blom's actions show who he thought he was contacting.

No it doesn't. It only shows he thought he was going top meet someone willing
to have sex with him.

 JS>  Yor constant denial doesn't change that one little bit.

Your constant claims to the contrary do not change that one bit.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)