----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 8:20 PM Subject: Re: Keeping track of the news [was Re: UT (extreme:): the US and the human rights
> On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, John Sparks wrote: > > > <snip> > > > There are no civilized countries where the citizens are not allowed > > > to own guns. > > <snip> > > My dictionary defines civilize as "... get rid of barbarous habits..." > > Whilst I do not want to make any claims as to which country is or is not > > civilised, the only way I can see that owning guns might get rid of > > barbarous habits is by the citizens acting as an armed police force. That > > would only be necessary to control potentially bad citizens. Unfortunately > > they would also have guns! > > It's a pretty well documented fact that criminals are > deterred by the knowledge that potential victims "might be > armed." > That's kinda what I meant by the citizens acting as an armed police force. One of the roles of the police is to deter crime. What I was implying is that the cure may be worse than the disease. I don't have any stats to back that up, but it seems likely that whilst say robberies might be reduced, more guns means more people are going to get shot whether by criminal acts, accidents or insanity. How many deaths is it worth to prevent how many robberies? You quote some interesting examples. Switzerland may be an exception to my theory, but other factors may be involved John --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 10/01/03
