[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kristin A. Ruhle) wrote: > > I have always been a pro-handgun supporter, but I have always said that >if > > someone comes up with a suitable non-lethal way (like a stun gun) to > > incapacitate a perpetrator from a distance that I would support the > > disarming of the public (like anyone would really care about my >position!) > >I have doubts about "non lethal." Everything touted as "non lethal" hws >wound up being blamed (justifiably or not) for killing somebody. Taser >guns, choke holds (cops and PCP user typically), you name it. Can you >really be sure that out of zillions of people some one wouldn't be >hypersensitive and get a fatal overdose of stun rays, or whatever? How about just "significantly less likely to be lethal" ? Joshua _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
