Matthias Julius wrote: > "Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
