On 8/1/2014 9:42 PM, atec77 wrote:
On 1/08/2014 10:37 PM, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jul 2014 14:49:54 -0400

I would argue that logic is exactly what the law needs, as in "Why is
that illegal?" with a reasoned answer that demonstrates harm if it
exists and a clear benefit from preventing whatever it is.


But the two are entirely different situations; the only commonality is
that both are privileges.


Yes, but don't you think that some sort of moral equivalence should
apply to those privileges?

Not unreasonable to suggest a person holding a ham ticket be of clean
criminal record and good morals , a short certificate to the effect
should be required for registration after a suitable police check surely ?



Too bad the same can't be done with politicians. But then we wouldn't
have any - which may be a good thing!

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================