Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 09:49 AM Tuesday 5/30/2006, Julia Thompson wrote:
David Hobby wrote:
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 08:36 PM Sunday 5/28/2006, David Hobby wrote:
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
Apparently that day is here:
<<http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006240126,00.html>>
"BatLeth" meant nothing to me, and it's not clear the thing is a
very useful weapon.
Let me elaborate: The thing is big and clumsy, but doesn't even
have any reach to make up for that. It's probably a bit better
than a quarterstaff, though, since it does have sharp parts.
And if as in this case you are trying to make the argument, "People
mustn't play with things with sharp points," raiding someone's house and
confiscating one makes it look like you are doing something. Not that
I've heard of anyone committing a mugging or robbing a convenience store
armed with a batleth. And it would be hard to see how it could violate
any concealed carry laws . . .
If you hold it right (and CAN hold it right, it takes practice!), you
can get a little reach out of it. I could hurt someone at 3' easily
enough IF I were in good practice with it.
So I'm okay as long as I stay 7' from you and carry a phaser. Or a .357
Magnum . . .
Yup. :)
Julia
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
