and this was not 'argumentum ad hominem'??- "
Originally Posted by
leon http://www.iceinspace.com.au/vbiis/i...s/viewpost.gif
I reckon it is about time this thread was put to bed.
Leon
Alas probably true unless someone can suggest how to get
idiocy and sociopathic personallity disorder declared illegall
""
....twerp
to the issue...there is no implied "guilt" in being the registered owner/user of the devise... but the confirmation that said registered owner/user has and acknowledges full responsibility for said device and its lawful use.... and bears the brunt of the penalty thereby for knowingly breaching the terms of licence....
...but more importantly the likelihood of irresponsible twerps willynilly obtaining the devises for nefarious entertainments is somewhat reduced... and being caught in illegal possession of such gives the court a more direct route to prosecute the offender.
if you have no intent to do harm with it, why would you not accept responsible ownership of the device?? You are not being stopped from owning it.. just being asked to acknowledge that should you use it maliciously, you are aware of the penalties you will suffer if proven guilty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starless
So you prefer "he has one of those so he must have done it".
and if he did not arrest him anyway because he has one, so
is certainly going to do it.
Possesion of a gun does not make me a murderer.
Possesion of a car does not make me a hit & run driver.
In addition, there is no need to resort to argumentum ad hominem.
|