Re: cleaner wiring solution needed (resend)

["Frank Olson" <feolson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

"Robert L. Bass" <robertlbass@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:_4adnS4dauZQZqHfRVn-iA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Nope.  The "law" you're referring to isn't
>> called "larceny".
>
> Yes, it is.  You don't know what you're talking about.

Say what??


>
>> "Larceny" refers to a whole series of
>> criminal activities which by their very
>> nature are "against the law".
>
> Lots of things are "by their very nature against the law" -- not just
> larceny.  Stating so does not make you look knowledgeable (you're not).
> The definition of larceny is "The unlawful taking and removing of
> another's personal property with the intent of permanently depriving the
> owner; theft."

Check...  Larceny is not the law, though.  And the law is not larceny (with
the exception of the hourly rate of most attorneys these days)...  :-))


> That definition most definitely includes deliberately depriving someone of
> access to something which he has purchased.

Nope.  Not the same thing.  You're not "unlawfully taking and removing
another individuals property".  Nor are you depriving them from using it.
You're merely limiting access to qualified personnel.


>
>> "Double billing" a customer's credit card
>> (which you have engaged in only recently)
>> is a form of "larceny" for instance.
>
> Nope.  The client hit [Submit] twice.  I didn't double-bill him.  He did
> it himself.

That's a pretty lame excuse.  I suppose when you were waving your gun around
you were what;  "Cooling the barrel"??  ;-)