[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT: Politics [Was:Social Contract]

Steve Lamb <grey@dmiyu.org> writes:

> Matthias Julius wrote:
>> Maybe if noone had a gun to threaten you with you wouldn't need one to
>> defend yourself?
>     So then what about carving knives, chainsaws, baseball bats,
>     automobiles...

I didn't say violence would cease to exist.

>     Again, if someone is intent on doing you harm, which is against the law,
> another law which tells them they can't use a particular method to do you harm
> is going to deter them?

Yes.  Shooting someone with a gun is too easy.

>     Finally, it there is a moral double standard here.  "I am unwilling to
> take responsibility to protect myself...  I pay that person over there to risk
> his life to defend mine!  Furthermore I do not feel you, a complete stranger,
> have the right to defend yourself as you might hurt me.  But that aformention
> perfect stranger is a-ok!"

How many people are really able to protect themselfes against a
violent criminal?  AFAIK in all Europe small firearms are prohibited
from the general public.  And I don't think it is a problem there.
Hardly any police officer died on his job over there neither.  And if
this does happen it involves highly violent criminals against whom a
gun would not help the average person.


Reply to: