Guns Guns Guns@!!!!!%@#^&$%*@#%^^&

Michael Rivero rivero at netcom.com
Tue May 23 13:01:06 EST 1995


In article <glasscd.121.2FC15359 at weka.lincoln.ac.nz> glasscd at weka.lincoln.ac.nz (Cameron David Glass) writes:
>>>If we can not trust a freeman with his right to keep and 
>>>bear arms, then how can we trust him with the right to 
>>>vote. Surely the right of a freeman to vote has a much 
>>>greater effect on our collective lives than does any 
>>>individual's firearm. If one argues that the effect of any 
>>>one freeman's vote is minimal, then why allow it in the 
>>>first place?  To be armed is to secure one's right to 
>>>representation.
>
>>>Thomas Mincher
>>>==========================================================
>
>A really worrying thing this obsession of the NRA and others with the 
>*right* to bear arms. More people are killed in the USA per head of 
>population from gun related incidents than in any other country at peace 
>in the world.
>
>The NRA etc it seems to me are the reason for this. Maybe its a conspiracy.
>
>

   Nice try at misdirection. It's true Americans have a traditional
connection with guns. We used guns to free ourselves from British
domination, and the development of "interchangeable parts" spurred America's
early indistrial boom. Certainly for most of our history we have served
as armourers to the world. Americans won the west  with the gun.


  Yes, other nations have gun control, and as a result, they have fewer
gun deaths. That does NOT mean that have fewer deaths.

  Japan, for example, has a traditional and historical attachment to
edged weapons, and make the finest swords in all the world (the finest
in modern times being made by Yasuhiro Kobayashi). The wearing of swords
has been outlawed in Japan just as the wearing of guns is outlawed here.
But in Japan, killing by knife is preferred to using a gun. It's quieter,
knives are cheap and freely available, and leave no bullets which can
be matched to a weapon still in your possession.

  But the victims are still just as dead.

  The most stringent gun control in the world today is in Jamaica. Because
the criminals feel safe that all sheep are disarmed, street crime is
running epidemic, and people die, not by guns, but by just about every
other means.

  In this country, women kill by crying "abuse" and setting their 
husbands on fire.

  People kill when they feel they can get away with it, using any weapon
they can. Poison, fire, knives, clubs, trained attack snails, whatever.


  Let's conduct a thought experiment.


  Theoretical population of 1000. 10 have criminal intent. 1 is smuggling
drugs to make LOTS-O-MONEY. He/she sells to the criminals, who in turn
sell it to a few others who are not criminals other than using the drugs.

  In this first case, guns are illegal.

  A dispute over sales territory breaks out. Our smuggler is also running
a few guns on the side, and sells some to the 10 criminals who start
shooting each other in the streets. Innocent bystanders get killed.

  The non-armed population is terrified. The crime problem takes
precidence over issues of civil rights and personal liberty.
The smuggler uses his/her LOTS-O-MONEY to run for elected office 
claiming he/she can end the crime in the streets.  He/she gets elected, 
rigs the courts so that the criminals are always returned to the streets
to keep up just enough fear to prevent the sheep from thinking about
personal liberties. Instead of smuggling, the elected smuggler
now has taxes with which to make LOTS-O-MONEY.


  
  Start again.


  Theoretical population of 1000. 10 have criminal intent. 1 is smuggling
drugs to make LOTS-O-MONEY. He/she sells to the criminals, who in turn
sell it to a few others who are not criminals other than using the drugs.

  In this case, guns are legal, and every able bodied citizen carries
a well regulated firearm (by the 1780's definition of "regulated").

  A dispute over sales territory breaks out. Our smuggler is also running
a few guns on the side, and sells some to the 10 criminals who
work for him/her. 

  The first criminal who opens fire in the streets dies in a hail of 
citizen's militia gunfire.

  No criminal dares repeat that folly. Without a crime "problem" the 
population votes for lower taxes and personal liberties, and if they 
don't get them, is eager to ask why. 




  The historical facts are....

1.  No gun control has ever worked to reduce crime.

2. Guns don't kill, nor does the NRA.  People, when motivated to kill, 
will use whatever means are available. Only recently, an American
woman strapped her two children into a car and shoved them into 
a lake, watching for 45 minutes until the car sank and the children
drowned. 

3. Every general disarmament has preceded a genocide. Hitler banned guns
and killed 6 million Jews. Stalin banned guns then proceeded to kill
20 million Russians. Cambodia outlawed guns just a few years before
the "Killing Kields".  

4. No disarmament plan put forward by any government takes guns away 
from the police and the government agencies, only from the law 
abiding citizens. Certainly, in the case of the Rodney King beating,
not all police can be trusted to act appropriatly in a situation
of total force superiority. And if saving lives is your argument,
then disarming the BATF would have CERTAINLY saved lives at
Ruby Ridge and Waco!




-- 
===========   T H E   A N I M A T I O N   P L A N T A T I O N  ============
|  Michael F. Rivero - rivero at netcom.com - 16 years in the business       |
|  Award Winning Digital Effects for TV & Feature Films  -  818-763-2800  |
|  RECENT: Coneheads, Son of Pink Panther, Brainscan, Stargate            |
|  -------------------------------------------------------------------    |
|                            I'm NOT the NRA!                             |
|                     But I'm damned well GOING TO BE!                    |
=========================================================================== 




More information about the Virology mailing list