On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 20:20:46 -0000, John Sparks wrote: > I will have to concede then that in the current USA widespread gun ownership > is desirable.
> I grew up in suburban UK and almost no-one had a gun. I never saw anyone > carrying a gun (other than children's toys) and only knew 2 people who owned > guns (one an air pistol and one a revolver with no ammunition) Exceptions > were the military and fairgrounds and the like. 30 years ago in my > environment people did not get shot, none. No guns = no shootings period. > Unfortunately that is no longer true, especially in some areas. But I still > believe that no guns is a desirable state of affairs. Why does there seem to be simply the consentration upon "no guns" as being the answer to preventing crime ? Why not..... no knives.... no clubs.... no swords.... no weapons of any kind ??? Is that not exactly what every dictator through-out history has done ??? (remove every weapon they could from the hands of the civilians) Did removeing weapons from the civilians prevent crime ? Or did it simply make it easier for that dictator to maintain controll over the civilian population ? -- Glenn http://arachne.cz/ http://www.delorie.com/listserv/mime/ http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/download.htm http://www.thispagecannotbedisplayed.com/
