Re: OT: Politics [Was:Social Contract]
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 12:16:58PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> 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.
And if the neighbourhood thief is breaking into your home, he is more
likely to be armed with a gun if he thinks you probably are.
Thus do fears create expectations.
-- hendrik
Reply to: