imported post
Grapeshot wrote:
Citizen wrote:
Dad: "What are the twins fighting about, now?"
Mom: "Oh, you know. Ever since you gave them those stupid names, now we always have to have Courage in the face of Danger."
Warning required in the future - dang near choked on my chicken wings. :lol:
Yata hey
Which reminds me of an historical anecdote that I did not get from Peabody's Improbable History. Back in the early days of Massachusetts Colony, there was a problem with witchcraft. It was believed, however, that it was nearly impossible to tell who was, or was not a witch, except for the fact that Satan protected his minions from minor physical harm. So at the communal meals, people would eye each other suspiciously in order to see who choked on food and who did not. People would gag themselves intentionally on chicken bones to prove that they were not witches. But, being a fair minded and objective group, they realized that a failure to choke was not, in itself, evidence of an inability to choke. So they devised a second test: the ducking stool. Anyone who, having been strapped to the stool at the end of a long lever and ducked into the pond, was unable to drown, must be a witch. (There were some innocent bystanders who were unfortunately drowned, but their "stochastic deaths" were for the good of society.) Then, of course, they'd take the witch out and burn them. Which led to the old saying, "Duck'em if they can't fake a choke!"
But back to the original line of this multi-threaded conversation, I note that the defendant, carrying a gun in his hand, walked past a cop who recognized him and knew that the defendant had a prior conviction for a felony. I'd say it was all over at that point, because that alone gave the cop probable cause to arrest and perform a search incidental to the arrest. That seems like a slam-dunk for the prosecution to me.
