🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <25185@oasys.dt.navy.mil> mulvihil@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Lawrence Mulvihill) writes:
>
<reasonable District representation argument dropped>
>
>Recall that
>our founding fathers had little respect for the law.
>Recall the Boston Tea Party (vandalism, theft),  taring
>and feathering (assault), and armed rebellion against
>the government!  A little crack looks like a very trivial
>think against that backdrop, speaking in terms of
>respect for law that is.

So Marion Barry is part of a publicly announced secessionist movement
which has existed for several years, has a publicly declared platform,
the sympathy of a large portion of the population and uses drugs only
as an integral means to acheiving his high-minded goals?  Is *that*
what you mean?

There is a difference between disrespect for the law, and an open rebellion,
in that one is criminal as a end, and the other is criminal as a means.
Certainly you would not argue that the criminal acts of the founding fathers
were done without purpose, solely for their own gratification?

David Pipes
robear@digex.com