At 11:17 AM 6/13/01, Jeroen wrote:
>At 10:44 12-6-01 -0700, Dean Forster wrote:
>
>>** Horrendous irresponsibility with guns still does
>>not justify their confiscation or governmental
>>regulation.
>
>Why not? If you drive your car irresponsibly, the government can take away
>your car and your driver's license. They do that because you are a danger
>to others. If you are irresponsible with guns, you are also a danger to
>others, so the government has every right to take your gun away from you.
>The government is then doing what they are supposed to do: protect the
>public from dangerous individuals.
>
>
>> The solution is, say it with me.. taking
>>personal responsibility. Making it a societal norm.
>
>The idea is nice, but it would take too long before it would become a
>societal norm. If we would start drilling personal responsibility into
>everyone today, it would still take a few generations before it would
>become a societal norm. The alternative is regulation. If we can
>dramatically reduce the number of accidental deaths by guns in two years
>through regulation, or reach that goal in two generations through teaching
>people responsibility, I'm all for regulation.
Many (in the US anyway) see today's major societal problem as a decline in
the average level of personal responsibility during the past 40 years or
so, caused in great part by increasing government programs that relieve the
individual of the need for personal responsibility, e.g., although welfare
programs do help those who find themselves in dire straits due to
circumstances entirely beyond their control (catastrophic illness, death of
the primary breadwinner in the family, etc.), it also encourages some to
make bad decisions by allowing them to escape the natural consequences of
their actions (e.g. having half a dozen kids by as many different fathers
before turning 20).
-- Ronn! :)
