Brian, >>> And again, people who want to do bad things will do them. >>> Banning weapons that can be used in defense of life does >>> NOTHING but disallow the good guys from protecting themselves. >>> I don't know how many examples of this people need before >>> they wake up to this simple fact, for me I only needed to >>> understand the basic logic of the issue.
On Friday, I struck up a conversation with a cab driver who was giving me a ride in downtown Boston. Since he spoke with an accent, I asked where he was original from. He said Somalia which he left about 15 years ago because of the civil war and the subsequent meltdown of all government institutions. I asked him where he lives now in the Boston area. He said he use to live in Roxbury, but now lives in Malden. He had to move out of Roxbury he said because there are too many kids running around with guns killing people. I guess he could have stayed in Roxbury and armed himself, his wife, and his kids with a guns for protection per your recommendation, but he instead voted with his feet, left Roxbury, and got himself and his family out of harms way. I'm wondering also if you see any ethical issues with gun makers promoting guns as protection devices for the "good guys" against the "bad guys" who the gun makers have also sold their products to? Aren't the gun makers simply trying to arm both sides in order to make more money? Richard _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
