More on Travis Corcoran

Tuesday, January 25th, 2011

I have more on his case over at Hit & Run.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

5 Responses to “More on Travis Corcoran”

  1. #1 |  Tweets that mention More on Travis Corcoran | The Agitator -- Topsy.com | 

    […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by FoxArtCultTech, teaist atts. teaist atts said: More on Travis Corcoran http://bit.ly/eOr54Y $ http://f.tatsn.com […]

  2. #2 |  KBCraig | 

    I’m reminded, once again, why I prefer to comment here, rather than at Reason, where the comments are all too reddit-y.

    Unfortunately for Mr. Corcoran, he made one of the most unwise choices possible for a gun enthusiast: he chose to live in Massachusetts.

    Unlike the Iowa case (Iowa is the newest right-to-carry state), Massachusetts gun licenses (which are required to own any gun, or even carry pepper spray!) are always subject to the local police chief’s judgment of one’s “suitability” to own firearms.

    I don’t believe the Iowa state judge’s ruling will have any effect in Massachusetts. After all, Mass is the state where a Manchester-by-the-Sea man spent months in jail on a “dangerousness” charge, after false allegations by his wife and her boyfriend. The acts alleged weren’t even illegal.

    Google “Gregory Girard” for details.

  3. #3 |  André | 

    “But 24 hours after an attempted political assassination that killed five people, while the country is still reeling from that attack, and just after you’ve posted a comment for all the world to see about shooting politicians and their staff . . . this is not the time to have that discussion.”

    I agree with you, but on the other hand, the first amendment doesn’t require you to be sensitive or tasteful when expressing your opinion. I think he’s an idiot but criminalizing idiocy would leave very few people for me to pick up in bars.

  4. #4 |  Steve | 

    If Alex Seitz-Wald needs to look up anarcho-capitalist and still can’t get his head around what the term means, he has no business writing about political issues. He looks and sounds like a student than a professional.

    Give that boy a stack of books and put him on the back bench for a few more years.

  5. #5 |  Steve Verdon | 

    I agree with you, but on the other hand, the first amendment doesn’t require you to be sensitive or tasteful when expressing your opinion. I think he’s an idiot but criminalizing idiocy would leave very few people for me to pick up in bars.

    Yeah…uhhh…that was one of the points Radley was making. The First Amendment protects one’s right to be an outspoken retard if one wants to be such a retard.

Leave a Reply