Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 01:53:10 -0500 From: "Crist J. Clark" <cjc@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com> To: Mark Ovens <mark@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Cc: Jay Nelson <noslenj@swbell.net>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Guns and freedom [Was: Re: On "intelligent people" and "dangers to BSD"] Message-ID: <20000326015310.A846@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com> In-Reply-To: <20000325231656.E234@parish>; from mark@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org on Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 11:16:56PM %2B0000 References: <20000325104927.B234@parish> <Pine.BSF.4.05.10003251446080.3693-100000@acp.swbell.net> <20000325231656.E234@parish>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 11:16:56PM +0000, Mark Ovens wrote: > On Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 04:21:57PM -0600, Jay Nelson wrote: > > On Sat, 25 Mar 2000, Mark Ovens wrote: > > > > >On Fri, Mar 24, 2000 at 06:07:47PM -0600, Jay Nelson wrote: > > >> On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, Paul Richards wrote: > > >> > > >> >Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > > >> >> > > >> >> > > In one word: tyranny. > > >> >> > > > >> [snip] > > >> > > >> >Ok, not the best example. I guess the handguns law is a better one since > > >> >it's now illegal to have a handgun in the UK even if you bought it > > >> >before the law changed. > > >> > > > >> >Everyone here who had one was required to hand them in when the law came > > >> >in to effect. > > >> > > >> I hope they weren't foolish enough to actually hand them in. > > >> [snip] > > Unless I misread history, the hills of > > England weren't safe in 1940. England was also disarmed then. Why > > would you risk repeating the exercise? Once you start giving up > > freedom, when do you stop? > > > > What freedom? I would say that the freedom to go about your business > without the fear of being attacked, raped, stabbed, shot etc. > transcends any freedom to own/carry a gun (or any weapon for that > matter. > > I have a 13-year old daughter and her freedom is severely curtailed > (by me and my wife) compared to the freedom we had at that age (early > '70s). OK, so this isn't specifically because of guns, but because of > a general increase in lawlessness which threatens her safety. Even so, > she has had her freedom taken away. But how much of that is real and how much is perception? I don't have crime figures for GB at my finger tips, but I suspect things have not changed all that much in real numbers since the 70's. I'm a USA'n and I happen to know that _reported_ crimes and people's perception of the crime rate have steadily increased, while the actual occurance of crimes has not really changed all that much and has definately dropped in the last decade. (Note I am strictly talking violent crime; like those Mark listed.) > A popular TV programme over here is "Police, Camera, Action" which > comprises footage from the video cameras used in police cars and > helicopters and includes clips from many countries including the US. > Whilst a lot of it is amusing and entertaining some of it is decidedly > scary. One clip from an American police car showed the officer pulling > over a car full of kids. He walked to the driver's door and the driver > just shot him with a handgun. The officer was unhurt, apart from some > heavy bruising, thanks to his bullet-proof vest. Although it didn't > specify in the programme it is perfectly possible that the kid may > have owned the gun legitimately. How can anyone justify the "freedom" > to own firearms when that sort of thing happens? Well, right there we see a problem with how the media focuses on the extremes. Police officers have been shot by legal and illegal guns as long as their have been guns and police. You bring this up like it happens all of the time, and it does not. We just get it in our faces every single time it does, makes good press. You point out that you do not know if the gun is legal or illegal... so what is the weight of the argument? > Do you own a gun? If so, why do you own it? Have you ever used it in > anger? No. I don't. No. But the last one is a good point. If you own a gun, you are more likely to be killed by it than any other. You are also more likely to be killed by a gun than someone who does not own one. Safer for everyone if you don't have it; someone else might use _your_ gun in anger on _you._ > Americans and Britons will probably, for the most part, never agree on > the subject of firearms as we grew up in countries whose gun laws are > at opposite extremes. Oh, well, as a USA'n, I must say things probably are not too different. I think any arguments that handguns and assault weapons have any redeeming quailities is silly, look at the numbers. I grew up around rifles and shotguns, and I see value beyond the risks. And for those who are defending themselves from the Feds, ask that crew at Waco or Ruby Ridge how well that works. If you're a small group and the gov't wants you, it don't matter how many guns you have. There were injustices and abuses of power there, but the guns on either side did not help at all. Personally, I'm not afraid of the Feds turning all bad on us because (a) they just are not that smart or have the vision (remember a President only serves 8 years max, if he can't disarm enough before his term is up and declares martial law, why start the process?) to plan something like that and (b) I know too many military people and they are the most patriotic bunch around and are not about to be part of a military state (and would not be tricked into it because of (a)). The ATF, FBI, NSA, etc. don't give me warm fuzzies, but they _are_ accountable soley by the fact that if they piss off the people enough, then they piss off Congress enough, then they don't get $$$... And that is the worst fear of any gov't agency, cuts in appropriations. One of the things the Founding Fathers did get right (even if some ammendments about bearing arms were written too vaguely), give Congress the purse strings. It costs the tax payer some serious pain in pork barrel money, but it's worth the popular control on the rest. OK, give the Brit Parliament for being the model there. -- Crist J. Clark cjclark@home.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?20000326015310.A846>