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

Re: OT: Politics [Was:Social Contract]

Matthias Julius wrote:
> "Roberto C. Sanchez" <roberto@familiasanchez.net> writes:
>>Matthias Julius wrote:
>>>How do you recognize well-intentioned and law-abiding citizens?  What
>>>makes this difficult is that people change.  They buy a gun as a
>>>well-intentioned and law-abiding citizen in case they need to defend
>>>themselfes.  Then a while later when they are upset or drunk they find
>>>they have a gun handy and do harm somebody else.  A lot of such
>>>violent crimes are committed out of an emotional reaction.  While
>>>taking away guns may not completely prevent all such crimes ti might
>>>make them less harmfull.  Using a gun is too easy.
>>So, because little Johnny *might* misbehave, the whole third grade is
>>not allowed to attend the museum field trip.  Yup, that's definitely the
>>way to go.
> A hand gun is solely made to harm other people.  How can you compare
> the possession of a gun to a museum field trip of third graders?
You completely miss the point.  You hold people responsible for their
*individual* actions.  You do not punish all of society becuase of the
actions of a few.  The current hysteria over the war on terror is a
prime example.  We are much more likely to die in car accidents or
(non-terrorist-related) plane crashes, yet people are happily giving up
their rights for "security."

> How many people needed their gun for self defence?  Did you?  And how
> many people used their gun to harm others?  Do you know of any such
> statistics?
That is not the point.  I want the *freedom* to own a gun, if I so
choose.  Whether I want it for self-defense, marksmanship training, or
making cans and bottles into little shards of metal and glass, shouldn't
be anybody's business but my own.

>>If I was in my home and some invader came in, I would not want to first
>>find out what he was carrying and get a matching weapon.  That is
>>lunacy.  I want to know that I can defend myself.  Besides, how will
>>make sure that noone has a gun?
> I don't think nobody will have a gun just because there is a law that
> prohibits it.  But, I think the availability of guns will be
> drastically reduced and so will be the likelyhood that one will
> be pointed at you.  It is just too easy to shoot someone with a gun.
> Any 10 year old can do that.  It is much more voilent energy required
> to beat someone up.

Right.  But, if I have to defend my home against someone who *may* have
a gun, I don't want to exert the energy to beat them and risk getting
killed in the process just to defend myself.


Roberto C. Sanchez

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: