From: "Deranged Mutant" <WlkngOwl@UNiX.asb.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 12:29:45 +0800
To: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Subject: Re: Another Motivation for the CDA
Message-ID: <199603080011.TAA13347@UNiX.asb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Note: This post is 100% free of crypto and conspiracy theories.


My response to Tim:
> >I think you're reading too much into motives, Tim.  I don't think that
> >most in congress are capable of thinking that elaborately, and besides,
> >if someone is convicted of violating the CDA for saying "fuck" online,
> >that is the type of felony that one can get a judge's waiver for...

Jim Bell's response to mine:

> I am NOT relieved at hearing this.  If one must have a "judge's waiver," 
> then that means he probably can "request" whatever other conditions he 
> chooses to put on his waiver.  The government still has a motivation to make 

Yes and no. Depends on the judge.  Some are hard-assed about granting 
waivers, others aren't.  Part of the problerm is that judges have too 
much discretion.  Another is in the constitution, w/regards to right 
to vote (it can be denied to felons... I know a couple of people 
convicted of DWIs that can no longer vote... they just don't care 
enough to go to a judge and get a waiver.)

Not that you would want to put faith in getting a waiver.  I'm just 
critical of Tim's assertion/speculation that gun-control is related 
to voting for the CDA.



 
Rob. 

---
Send a blank message with the subject "send pgp-key" (not in
quotes) to <WlkngOwl@unix.asb.com> for a copy of my PGP key.