Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 11:50:31 +0200 (IST) From: Nadav Eiron <nadav@cs.Technion.AC.IL> To: "G. Adam Stanislav" <adam@whizkidtech.net> Cc: cjclark@home.com, chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Guns ans roses Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95-heb-2.07.1000327113604.14934B-100000@csd> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20000327010532.00a9a7c0@mail85.pair.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, G. Adam Stanislav wrote: > At 22:24 26-03-2000 -0500, Crist J. Clark wrote: > >Yes, this is a excellent point. With all of the driving training > >people are required to have and the hours upon hours of everyday > >experience people have with cars, there are no longer problems with > >people injuring themselves and others with cars. > > Of course there are problems. And will continue to be. But history shows > there are fewer problems when people are trained. > > Part of our training in police school was: When you go to a bar, leave your > gun and badge at home. > > There will always be violence among us, there will always be criminals > among us. That is a fact of life, a fact of imperfect human condition. > Stupidity cannot be outlawed, because stupidity is a basic human right. > > It is notpossible to stop all violence, certainly not by legislative > means. What legislators can do, is reduce it as much as possible. And it is > my humble opinion that, in the US, proper training is the best way to go. Well, let me throw another culture/law system into the debate: In Israel, law requires licensing of firearms, and in theory, it's hard to get a license. In practice, a _huge_ percentage of the population has them. You are required to undergo training by a licensed instructor every two years to keep your license. On top of that, with compulsory army service (and a relatively long one) practicaly everyone who owns a gun knows what it can and can't do. This goes beyond what you get by training as a civillian. I know what my handgun is capable of. I know how long it takes me to draw, and what power a 9mm bullet has. I know what chance I have at stopping someone who is attacking me at various ranges. I can compare that to an M16, an Uzi or a machine gun (or a hand grenade, or a 60mm mortar or an RPG). This is simply because I shot many thousands of bullets in each of these, and so have most of the people who are licensed to carry firearms. Everyone also knows when you should and shouldn't use a gun, and the law is very strict about this as well: If you shoot someone who broke into your house, while he was unarmed, or if you had a good chance of running away, you have a good chance of being in prison longer than he will. Use of firearms for self defense is only permitted by law when it is the _only_ remaining option. This is also something everyone is taught in the army, and, as I see it, one of the points people in the US (at least some of them) will have a hard time accepting. A sign saying "Trespassers will be shot" is illegal here. You can't shoot someone for trespassing - only for trying to kill you, and only if the _only_ way to avoid it is killing him first. This system is working pretty well (I think). I don't have accurate statistics, but licensed firearms are not involved (at least in my perception) in any significant percentage of violent crime acts. They do prevent, from time to time, acts of violence or terrorism. On the other hand, this is only because trigger-happy maniacs get diagnosed in the army, and will not be given a license when they become civillians. I'm not saying that handing out guns is a good thing to do, I'm just saying that under certain circumstances it can be done with minimal ill-effects. > > We obviously have a difference of opinion, and that's just fine. > > Cheers, > Adam > Nadav 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?Pine.GSO.3.95-heb-2.07.1000327113604.14934B-100000>