home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #26 / NN_1992_26.iso / spool / sci / crypt / 4693 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1992-11-12  |  2.9 KB
  1. Xref: sparky sci.crypt:4693 comp.org.eff.talk:6981 alt.privacy:2229 talk.politics.guns:24062
  2. Newsgroups: sci.crypt,comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy,talk.politics.guns
  3. Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU!SAIL.Stanford.EDU!andy
  4. From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
  5. Subject: Re: Registering "Assault Keys"
  6. Message-ID: <1992Nov12.234853.22372@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
  7. Followup-To: talk.politics.guns
  8. Sender: news@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU
  9. Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
  10. References: <1992Nov10.044148.22135@netcom.com> <BxIAG2.6s6@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> <1992Nov12.070004.1556@netcom.com>
  11. Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:48:53 GMT
  12. Lines: 55
  13.  
  14. In article <1992Nov12.070004.1556@netcom.com> gurgle@netcom.com (Pete Gontier) writes:
  15. >amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves) writes:
  16. >It might be that the U.S. is already too screwed up with weird
  17. >judeo-Xian guilt/hate for a ban on handguns to result in anything but
  18. >pandemonium. See? I'm a reasonable guy. I'm willing to fall back
  19. >to the position: "In any *reasonable* society, this would work..."
  20. >Like, perhaps, the majority of other western societies.
  21.  
  22. Try again.  By that definition of "reasonable", there are no
  23. reasonable society because the proposed measures haven't
  24. provided those benefits....
  25.  
  26. >>History has also proven
  27. >>that the first steps in oppressing a populace is to disarm them.
  28. >
  29. >Oh, that's alarmist talk. There are plenty of other countries
  30. >with a ban on handguns of which one wouldn't say the population
  31. >is being oppressed. There are plenty of countries of which you
  32. >*would* say it. But you certainly can't claim any causal
  33. >relation.
  34.  
  35. That's not the relevant measure.  The hypothesis is tested by
  36. the existence of an oppressed country where the populace was
  37. NOT disarmed.
  38.  
  39. The question isn't whether gun-banning necessarily leads to
  40. oppression, but whether oppression can happen absent gun-banning.
  41.  
  42. >>...and it would not achieve the desired effect. Even then so,
  43. >>about 5% of adults will carry a gun no matter if it's legal or not.
  44. >
  45. >Remember, we're talking about kids finding Daddy's gun, here.
  46.  
  47. Talk about it all you want, but it still isn't a significant problem.
  48.  
  49. >5% sounds to me like a lot less than the present percentage,
  50.  
  51. Which demonstrates that Gontier doesn't know much about the
  52. present percentage.  Moreover, it demonstrates that he doesn't
  53. understand how many criminals there are.  If 5% of the population
  54. carries, at least 80% of the people carrying aren't criminals.
  55.  
  56. Carry restrictions don't stop criminals.  Since no social benefit
  57. comes from prohibiting carry by "the rest of us"....
  58.  
  59. >the terms to which I'm so valiantly trying to limit the discussion,
  60. >that's a Good Thing.
  61.  
  62. Why should we limit our discussions to Gontier's delusions and exclude
  63. reality?
  64.  
  65. -andy
  66. --
  67. UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
  68. ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
  69.