Path: utzoo!censor!geac!jtsv16!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pro-exchange.cts.com!rich
From: rich@pro-exchange.cts.com (Rich Sims)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: TOASTERS and NONSENSE
Message-ID: <8906101757.AA21112@crash.cts.com>
Date: 10 Jun 89 12:06:06 GMT
Reply-To: pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-exchange!rich@nosc.mil
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 19

Comment to message from: pnet01!crash!decvax.dec.com!ima!mirror!prism!jib (Unknown User)

> If you agree with the purpose [of the bill], you should support the bill;
> if you disagree with the purpose you should oppose it.

If you use that line of reasoning, then it's OK to suspend all our
constitutional rights, as long as the "purpose" is to put criminals in jail.

> Don't let the trees obscure the forest -- badly drafted bills are often
> reformed before passage, and if not, the courts will generally construe
> the law to follow the intent of a badly drafted law.

And if they're not, and the courts don't....??

Rich Sims

UUCP: crash!pro-exchange!rich
ARPA: crash!pro-exchange!rich@nosc.mil
INET: rich@pro-exchange.cts.com