Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;silentnviolent, post: 2458041, member: 8797&quot;]I believe I have stated many specific points in the statute that are not simply objectionable but detrimental in this thread and the other, more current one on the amended version. </p><p><br /></p><p>Perhaps you missed that while equating your overwhelming opposition on this issue, myself included, to pigs. Very classy.</p><p><br /></p><p>Every point I&#039;ve made regarding the shipping clause, the definition of a bullion coin as any composed of 1% or more PM (REALLY? war nickels hardly count as bullion anywhere but here they do), the bond requirement is 10% so in reality only 10% of those swindled would be reimbursed and historically those victims have recovered more than 10% of their losses through restitution awarded through existing laws. </p><p><br /></p><p>My points were made. Either you first ignored them and then asked us to point out specific provisions in contention, or you need to reread and work on comprehension.</p><p><br /></p><p>That very act of ignoring valid points of opposition is how these nanny state laws get passed and frankly with the attitude you&#039;ve displayed here, if your regulatory position is truth I&#039;m not at all surprised that such a hastily compiled piece of garbage was passed.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in