EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28575
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 6:42:19 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

MKL seems to think it does, and with his wealth of knowlege on the subject can we doubt that? Or could he have merely talked his way into a corner he cannot get out of?



With his stunning IQ of 190, he can easily talk himself out of that corner and have all of us begging his forgiveness. Just wait..
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
mkl654321
mkl654321
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:09:34 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

MKL seems to think it does, and with his wealth of knowlege on the subject can we doubt that? Or could he have merely talked his way into a corner he cannot get out of?



I drew the distinction many times already. It's not my fault you don't, or can't, or won't, understand it. But as I do for the slow learners in my class, I'll spell it out one more time:

Private property: private ownership
Public property: public ownership
Public space: public has right of access
Private space: owner controls access

Now, a property, or a space, can be ANY TWO of the combinations of "property and "space". Get it?
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
mkl654321
mkl654321
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:10:38 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

With his stunning IQ of 190, he can easily talk himself out of that corner and have all of us begging his forgiveness. Just wait..



See my post for slow learners, Bob. You may yet grasp what I'm trying to say. I have hope.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
Aussie
Aussie
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 415
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
January 11th, 2011 at 7:13:42 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

With his stunning IQ of 190, he can easily talk himself out of that corner and have all of us begging his forgiveness. Just wait..




I never fail to get a laugh out of that 190 IQ thing. Brilliant!

As for panhandlers of course the casino can boot them out at any time they choose. Quite comical that someone would argue otherwise.
mkl654321
mkl654321
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:13:44 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

So, let me get this straight-I can go into the Wynn and ask Steve Wynn for cash and there is nothing he can do about it until the city (Henderson?) passes a law againstg panhandling because the casino is a "public space?"



I don't know why you obsess about the Wynn, but the answer to your question is, yes, he can. And he could do so even if the city of Paradise passed a law against "panhandling". You seem not to understand that "panhandling" is a narrowly defined term, in the legal sense--not in the very broad sense you use it, not as far as the law is concerned.

You do seem to be acquiring a rudimentary grasp of the term, "public space". I am encouraged.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:16:27 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

1. What, exactly, was the "Fremont Street Case"?
2. How did it establish precedent or practice in the overall body of law? Or was it simply one court ruling?


I found these:
http://wiki.nlchp.org/display/Manual/Challenges+to+anti-begging+and+anti-panhandling+laws
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
SanchoPanza
SanchoPanza
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 3502
Joined: May 10, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:17:25 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

1. What, exactly, was the "Fremont Street Case"?
2. How did it establish precedent or practice in the overall body of law? Or was it simply one court ruling?


The answer to both questions is in my posting of yesterday in this thread. It is odd that you would not know about it, seeing as how it pertains directly to a prior statement of yours.
mkl654321
mkl654321
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:26:25 PM permalink
Quote: Aussie

I never fail to get a laugh out of that 190 IQ thing. Brilliant!

As for panhandlers of course the casino can boot them out at any time they choose. Quite comical that someone would argue otherwise.



You may not know American law. You may also not know that I was not referring to "panhandlers". Posters like EvenBob keep obsessing about that term, but it was NOT what I was referring to.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
mkl654321
mkl654321
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:30:00 PM permalink
Quote: SanchoPanza

The answer to both questions is in my posting of yesterday in this thread. It is odd that you would not know about it, seeing as how it pertains directly to a prior statement of yours.



All you posted was this:

"January 1995--Approval and passage of solicitation ordinances, including a complete prohibition of panhandling within the Fremont Street Experience once the project becomes substantially complete."

Since this isn't even a grammatically complete sentence, let alone any kind of legal ruling, it hardly constitutes a prior answer to the questions I posed.

In any case, a legal ruling pertaining specifically to the public space, "The Fremont Street Experience" would not negate the law regarding public spaces in general. I did say elsewhere that on this thread, the law regarding public spaces only applied in the absence of any specific rules or ordinances to the contrary.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
SanchoPanza
SanchoPanza
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 3502
Joined: May 10, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:30:03 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

Now, a property, or a space, can be ANY TWO of the combinations of "property and "space". Get it?


That is incorrect, no matter which way it is sliced. Las Vegas is one of the top cities that fight problems like panhandling--yes, even in superpublic places:

"A Dream Denied:
The Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cites
National Coalition for the Homeless

The housing and homelessness crisis in the United States has worsened in 2005, with many cities reporting an increase in demands for emergency shelter. In 2005, 71 percent of the 24 cities surveyed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors reported a 6 percent increase in requests for emergency shelter. Even while the requests for emergency shelter have increased, cities do not have adequate shelter space to meet the need. In the 24 cities surveyed in the U.S. Conference of Mayors Hunger and Homelessness Homelessness Survey for 2005 (pdf), an average of 14 percent of overall emergency shelter requests went unmet, with 32 percent of shelter requests by homeless families unmet. The lack of available shelter space – a situation made worse by the Gulf Coast hurricanes - leaves many homeless persons with no choice but to struggle to survive on the streets of our cities.

Over the course of the year, 3.5 million Americans experience homelessness. The number of people living on the streets threatens to grow as thousands of people are now homeless as a result of Hurricane Katrina. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, as of late November, approximately 50,000 hurricane evacuees remained in hotels and motels awaiting alternative housing options.

An unfortunate trend in cities around the country over the past 25 years has been to turn to the criminal justice system to respond to people living in public spaces. This trend includes measures that target homeless persons by making it illegal to perform life-sustaining activities in public. These measures prohibit activities such as sleeping/camping, eating, sitting, and begging in public spaces, usually including criminal penalties for violation of these laws.

This report is the National Coalition for the Homeless’ (NCH) fourth report on the criminalization of homelessness and the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty’s (NLCHP) eighth report on the topic. The report documents the top 20 worst offenders of 2005, as well as initiatives in some cities that are more constructive approaches to the issue of people living in public spaces. The report includes the results of a survey of laws and practices in 224 cities around the country, as well as a survey of lawsuits from various jurisdictions in which those measures have been challenged.

Types of Criminalization Measures

The criminalization of homelessness takes many forms, including:

* Legislation that makes it illegal to sleep, sit, or store personal belongings in public spaces in cities where people are forced to live in public spaces;
* Selective enforcement of more neutral laws, such as loitering or open container laws, against homeless persons;
* Sweeps of city areas where homeless persons are living to drive them out of the area, frequently resulting in the destruction of those persons’ personal property, including important personal documents and medication; and
* Laws that punish people for begging or panhandling to move poor or homeless persons out of a city or downtown area.

Criminalization Measures Have Increased

City ordinances frequently serve as a prominent tool to criminalize homelessness. Of the 224 cities surveyed for our report:

* 28% prohibit “camping” in particular public places in the city and 16% had city-wide prohibitions on “camping.”
* 27% prohibit sitting/lying in certain public places.
* 39% prohibit loitering in particular public areas and 16% prohibit loitering city-wide.
* 43% prohibit begging in particular public places; 45% prohibit aggressive panhandling and 21% have city-wide prohibitions on begging.

The trend of criminalizing homelessness appears to be growing. Of the 67 cities surveyed in both NCH and NLCHP’s last joint report in 2002 and in this report:

* There is a 12% increase laws prohibiting begging in certain public places and an 18% increase in laws that prohibit aggressive panhandling.
* There is a 14% increase in laws prohibiting sitting or lying in certain public spaces.
* There is a 3% increase in laws prohibiting loitering, loafing, or vagrancy laws.

Another trend documented in the report is increased city efforts to target homeless persons indirectly by placing restrictions on providers serving food to poor and homeless persons in public spaces.

While cities are cracking down on homeless persons living in public spaces, according to the latest U.S. Conference of Mayors Hunger and Homelessness report, cities do not have adequate shelter to meet the need:

* 71% of the 24 cities surveyed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors reported a 6% increase in requests for emergency shelter.
* 16% of overall emergency shelter requests went unmet and 32% of emergency shelter requests by homeless families went unmet in cities surveyed.

The Meanest Cities

Although some of the report’s top 20 meanest cities have made some efforts to address homelessness in their communities, the punitive practices highlighted in the report impede progress in solving the problem. The top 20 meanest cities were chosen based on the number of anti-homeless laws in the city, the enforcement of those laws and severities of penalties, the general political climate toward homeless people in the city, local advocate support for the meanest designation, the city’s history of criminalization measures, and the existence of pending or recently enacted criminalization legislation in the city. Over the past year, the practices in the following top 5 meanest cities stand out as some of the worst examples of inhumane city treatment of homeless and poor people:

#1 Sarasota, FL. After two successive Sarasota anti-lodging laws were overturned as unconstitutional by state courts, Sarasota passed a third law banning lodging outdoors. This latest version appears to be explicitly aimed at homeless persons. One of the elements necessary for arrest under the law is that the person “has no other place to live.”

#2 Lawrence, KS. After a group of downtown Lawrence business leaders urged the city to cut social services and pass ordinances to target homeless persons, the city passed three “civility” ordinances, including an aggressive panhandling law, a law prohibiting trespass on rooftops, and a law limiting sleeping or sitting on city sidewalks.

#3 Little Rock, AR. Homeless persons have reported being kicked out of bus stations in Little Rock, even when they had valid bus tickets. Two homeless men reported that officers of the Little Rock Police Department, in separate incidents, had kicked them out of the Little Rock Bus Station, even after showing the police their tickets. In other instances, homeless persons have been told that they could not wait at the bus station "because you are homeless."

#4 Atlanta, GA. Amid waves of public protest and testimony opposing the Mayor’s proposed comprehensive ban on panhandling, the City Council passed the anti-panhandling ordinance in August 2005. In the devastating aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Atlanta stood firm in its resolve to criminalize panhandlers. A Katrina evacuee who was sleeping in his car with his family after seeking refuge in Atlanta was arrested for panhandling at a mall in the affluent Buckhead neighborhood, even after he showed the police his Louisiana driver’s license, car tag, and registration as proof that he was a Katrina evacuee. In addition, during the first week in December, the Atlanta Zoning Review Board approved a ban on supportive housing inside the city limits.

#5 Las Vegas, NV. Even as the city shelters are overcrowded and the city’s Crisis Intervention Center recently closed due to lack of funding, the city continues to target homeless persons living outside. The police conduct habitual sweeps of encampments which lead to extended jail time for repeat misdemeanor offenders. In order to keep homeless individuals out of future parks, the city considered privatizing the parks, enabling owners to kick out unwanted people. Mayor Oscar Goodman fervently supported the idea, saying, “I don’t want them there. They’re not going to be there. I’m not going to let it happen. They think I’m mean now; wait until the homeless try to go over there.”"
AZDuffman
AZDuffman 
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13885
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
January 11th, 2011 at 7:30:29 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

I don't know why you obsess about the Wynn, but the answer to your question is, yes, he can. And he could do so even if the city of Paradise passed a law against "panhandling". You seem not to understand that "panhandling" is a narrowly defined term, in the legal sense--not in the very broad sense you use it, not as far as the law is concerned.

You do seem to be acquiring a rudimentary grasp of the term, "public space". I am encouraged.



But before you said panhandling was permitted in a public space, the Wynn was a public space, ergo panhandling was allowed in the Wynn. Now you say Steve is perfectly within his rights to throw a panhandler out. Which is it?
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28575
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:34:25 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

But before you said panhandling was permitted in a public space, the Wynn was a public space, ergo panhandling was allowed in the Wynn. Now you say Steve is perfectly within his rights to throw a panhandler out. Which is it?



Don't confuse him, I'm enjoying watching him tap dance around everything.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
mkl654321
mkl654321
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:36:07 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

I found these:
http://wiki.nlchp.org/display/Manual/Challenges+to+anti-begging+and+anti-panhandling+laws



Thanks for locating this.

It seems that the appeals court overturned the hometown decision. The FSE was deemed a public space, and thus solicitation was held to be legal.

This makes sense. Putting a canopy over a portion of downtown Las Vegas didn't turn it from a public space (which, as the appeals court noted, downtown business areas have traditionally been) into a private space. It seems breathtakingly prsumptuous for the FSE plaintiffs to say that it had, and pretty ridiculous for the lower court to say that it had, except for the fact that local Vegas courts are and always have been casino lackeys.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
mkl654321
mkl654321
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:40:17 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

But before you said panhandling was permitted in a public space, the Wynn was a public space, ergo panhandling was allowed in the Wynn. Now you say Steve is perfectly within his rights to throw a panhandler out. Which is it?



I misused the pronoun. Reading EvenBob's posts can have that effect on a person.

Your original question:

So, let me get this straight-I can go into the Wynn and ask Steve Wynn for cash and there is nothing he can do about it until the city (Henderson?) passes a law againstg panhandling because the casino is a "public space?"

My answer, edited to use the correct pronoun:

I don't know why you obsess about the Wynn, but the answer to your question is, yes, <he> can. And <he> could do so even if the city of Paradise passed a law against "panhandling". You seem not to understand that "panhandling" is a narrowly defined term, in the legal sense--not in the very broad sense you use it, not as far as the law is concerned.

Change <he> to "you".

I know you and Bob (and, apparently Aussie) are having an extremely difficult time getting your heads around this concept, but it IS the law. I suspect the reason why you are refusing to understand it is that you don't like its implications. But one of the most important aspects of civil liberties is that those liberties still apply, even if they annoy some people (like, I daresay, Arizona conservatives).
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
mkl654321
mkl654321
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:41:44 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

Don't confuse him, I'm enjoying watching him tap dance around everything.



Block time, Bob. Bye.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28575
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 7:51:53 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321



I don't know why you obsess about the Wynn, but the answer to your question is, yes, <he> can. And <he> could do so even if the city of Paradise passed a law against "panhandling". .



You can also rob a bank if you wish. Whats your point?
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
EnvyBonus
EnvyBonus
  • Threads: 6
  • Posts: 100
Joined: Nov 24, 2009
January 11th, 2011 at 8:05:34 PM permalink
If AZDuffman asked Wynn for money just one time, as politely as possible, could Wynn throw AZD out or not? What if AZD was wearing a funny hat, could Wynn (lawfully) throw him out for wearing the hat? What if Wynn saw a picture of AZD in an Arizona newspaper, and said to his security employees "This guy is just too damn handsome. He'll make me look bad. If you ever see this guy in my casino, throw him out." Would that be lawful?
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28575
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 8:30:28 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

Block time, Bob. Bye.



MKL acts like its a bad thing to be blocked by him. What it means to me is, I won't have him to question my spelling and grammer, won't have him nit picking my posts, and won't have to put up with him constantly impugning my integrity. Its a win/win as far as I'm concerned.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
Mosca
Mosca
  • Threads: 191
  • Posts: 4140
Joined: Dec 14, 2009
January 11th, 2011 at 8:35:54 PM permalink
Don't worry, Bob. He won't be able to stand not knowing what you wrote, he'll have to peek!
A falling knife has no handle.
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28575
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 8:38:12 PM permalink
Quote: Mosca

Don't worry, Bob. He won't be able to stand not knowing what you wrote, he'll have to peek!



I know, its the umpteenth time he's blocked me, I stopped turning to drugs and alcohol months ago to ease my discomfort.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7237
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 8:38:13 PM permalink
Here in MN, most private buildings that are for public use (malls, other retail stores, office buildings, casinos, etc.) have a signs that say "no loitering" and/or "no solicitation." My understanding is that those rules are in place specifically to give the operators a "rule" for the vagrant to have "broken" so that they can have the vagrant removed if that's the desired course of action. I guess I didn't pay attention when I was in Vegas earlier this year...don't they do this there as well?
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
mkl654321
mkl654321
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 9:34:52 PM permalink
Quote: Mosca

Don't worry, Bob. He won't be able to stand not knowing what you wrote, he'll have to peek!



Heh heh. Not bloody likely. Bob has a persistent habit of incorrectly reading what people write and then railing against things that people didn't actually say. It has gotten kind of tiresome. Plus, the Arizona-conservative thing has gotten kind of old. I lived in that blighted mess of a state two times, and I got really sick of all those aging reactionaries howling at the moon. They make intolerance an art form.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28575
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
January 11th, 2011 at 9:43:33 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

Heh heh. Not bloody likely. Bob has a persistent habit of incorrectly reading what people write and then railing against things that people didn't actually say.



He thinks its an accident. 190 IQ, huh. Coulda fooled me..
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
SanchoPanza
SanchoPanza
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 3502
Joined: May 10, 2010
January 12th, 2011 at 6:28:09 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

It seems that the appeals court overturned the hometown decision.


At any rate, the Review-Journal makes it clear that panhandling is a criminal violation:
"http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2000/Jul-25-Tue-2000/lifestyles/13922585.html
Tuesday, July 25, 2000
Panhandlers discouraged from hanging out on Strip
By David Mirhadi
They're almost anywhere a person would expect: in supermarket parking lots, at gas stations, even at some major intersections, all with outstretched hands holding spent coffee cans and asking for a little spare change.
Panhandlers seemingly are everywhere; that is, except in the most heavily traveled area of Las Vegas, a place frequented by millions of tourists and gamblers, some presumably with change to give away.
On the Strip, panhandlers are persona non grata, according to hotel security forces and police who patrol the area.
The activities of panhandlers, they said, have been effectively minimized largely because of a constant presence of police and hotel security.
"Most of the time, when panhandlers see our security officers, they just leave and move on to the next property," said Jim Seagrave, spokesman for the Stardust. "We encounter (panhandlers) on a regular basis, but it's usually not a problem escorting them off our property. They don't resist us."
Panhandlers are less likely to frequent the Strip, according to police and hotel sources, than they are to loiter in places closer to downtown, with its proximity to bus stations and homeless shelters.
Those caught panhandling or loitering on private property are subject to either an obstruction of sidewalks charge or vagrancy, both misdemeanor charges in Clark County and in the city of Las Vegas. . . ."
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28575
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
January 12th, 2011 at 6:37:36 PM permalink
Quote: SanchoPanza


Those caught panhandling or loitering on private property are subject to either an obstruction of sidewalks charge or vagrancy, both misdemeanor charges in Clark County and in the city of Las Vegas. . . ."



Don't let MKL read this, he hates it when he's wrong..
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
AZDuffman
AZDuffman 
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13885
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
January 12th, 2011 at 6:41:52 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

Don't let MKL read this, he hates it when he's wrong..



You think he would be used to it by now, see the thread moved to FSZ for many examples.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
AZDuffman
AZDuffman 
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13885
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
January 12th, 2011 at 6:44:21 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

Heh heh. Not bloody likely. Bob has a persistent habit of incorrectly reading what people write and then railing against things that people didn't actually say. It has gotten kind of tiresome. Plus, the Arizona-conservative thing has gotten kind of old. I lived in that blighted mess of a state two times, and I got really sick of all those aging reactionaries howling at the moon. They make intolerance an art form.



So "intolerance" is what in your book? Enforcing a federal law the feds refuse to enforce because their refusal is lowering the quality of life for everyone? Not accepting a northeast liberal outlook? Believing in personal responsibility?
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
Mosca
Mosca
  • Threads: 191
  • Posts: 4140
Joined: Dec 14, 2009
January 12th, 2011 at 7:41:57 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

So "intolerance" is what in your book? Enforcing a federal law the feds refuse to enforce because their refusal is lowering the quality of life for everyone? Not accepting a northeast liberal outlook? Believing in personal responsibility?



He's a northwest liberal, I think. Us northeast liberals are more pragmatic; we figure that if we can compromise with the conservatives we might be able to profit from it.
A falling knife has no handle.
thecesspit
thecesspit
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
January 12th, 2011 at 7:56:14 PM permalink
He ain't no liberal.... even if he's from the Northwest...
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
  • Jump to: