Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 12:15:05 +0100 From: Mark Ovens <mark@ukug.uk.freebsd.org> To: "G. Adam Stanislav" <adam@whizkidtech.net> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: On "intelligent people" and "dangers to BSD" Message-ID: <20000326121505.D234@parish> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20000326005810.00a9dd00@mail85.pair.com>; from adam@whizkidtech.net on Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 12:58:10AM -0600 References: <38DCC0D3.99AB6F28@originative.co.uk> <38DB8D34.1A750C81@originative.co.uk> <Pine.BSF.4.05.10003241806320.805-100000@acp.swbell.net> <20000325104927.B234@parish> <38DCC0D3.99AB6F28@originative.co.uk> <20000325222749.D234@parish> <3.0.6.32.20000326005810.00a9dd00@mail85.pair.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 12:58:10AM -0600, G. Adam Stanislav wrote:
> At 22:27 25-03-2000 +0000, Mark Ovens wrote:
> >Perhaps if those who preached about civil liberties focussed on the
> >rights of victims more than the rights of criminals we may get
> >somewhere.
>
> The victims have the right to carry firearms. Unfortunately, most people do
> not carry them, many would not even know how to use them. Had the victims
> been armed and trained, most of them would not have been victimized.
>
> Criminals would be less likely to commit violent crimes if they expected
> most people to be armed and trained.
>
IOW it would be a deterrent? Somehow I don't think so. How effective a
deterrent has the death penalty been in states that has restored it,
i.e. has capital crime fallen significantly in those states since
restoration? OK, perhaps this isn't a totally fair comparison as your
victim pulling a gun on you is much more immediate than the long, long
route to the electric chair.
> I used to be a volunteer deputy sheriff for six years. Before that, I never
> owned a firearm.
Did you ever feel that should have had one? Presumably not otherwise
you would have gone out and bought one.
> When I became a deputy I quickly found out that most
> police officers I talked to wished every citizen were armed.
Hmm, do you not think that view is primarily because the risk to
police officers would be reduced? If the whole populace is armed they
can sort it out amongst themselves and by the time the police arrive
on the scene there's just a pile of bodies to clear up, no-one left to
shoot at the officers.
> At about that
> time a gunman walked into a California McDonald's and massacred people
> there. My firearms instructor was quick to point out that if at least one
> other person inside had a gun and knew how to use it, it would have been
> the gunman who'd end up massacred.
>
That pre-supposes of course that the gunman isn't well trained in the
use firearms, which would be very likely if everyone was armed, as you
propose below. The gunman, of course, would still have the advantage
in the element of surprise.
> Frankly, I believe the law should not try to ban firearms. It should
> require everyone except Buddhists to own and carry a firearm all the time.
> And, of course, to know how to use it properly.
>
How do I become a Buddhist ;-)
> Cheers,
> Adam
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
--
Seminars, n.:
From "semi" and "arse", hence, any half-assed discussion.
________________________________________________________________
FreeBSD - The Power To Serve http://www.freebsd.org
My Webpage http://ukug.uk.freebsd.org/~mark/
mailto:mark@ukug.uk.freebsd.org http://www.radan.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000326121505.D234>