--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > How about if we change Jan's statement to something like:
> >
> > C) everyone [who wants to own a gun and who has not been convicted of a
> > violent crime or diagnosed with a serious mental or emotional illness]
> > should [be allowed to choose to] have a gun.
> >
> > Can we all agree with that?
> >
>
> No. I would want them to demonstrate that they know how to handle the gun
Ok why not.
> and
> have them pledge to keep it safely locked up except when being used for
> hunting, target practice, etc.
So the only people you want carrying guns is criminals? You want everyone
else, every law abiding citizen to be at the mercy of gun toting criminals?
> I would also require them to purchase
> insurance
> against any misuse of the gun - by them or by anyone else. And I would
> increase
> the penalties for misuse of guns, even accidental. You have to have
> insurance to
> operate a car, and a license - surely we can and should require no less for
>
> guns.
Please! Insurence is a scam. It's simply a way for people in power to take
money from other people. Don't get me started on insurence. They are running
good doctors out of buisness, steeling from every motorist......*sigh*
I would agree with non profit insurence. where no one can be turned down for
any reason -no fault- flat fee. But not what we have now. It's rediculous.
They take more from you in 2 years than what the polocy is even worth, and
they make so many clauses and rules that they never end up paying you anyway.
I had a perfectly good 1981 Fiat Turbo Special Eddition worth 16k. I had full
insurence (over 1k a year) did everything I could to take care of the car,
keep it legal, and pristeen. An guy in a Honda Civic ran a stopsign and
totaled it. I got 2k only. They wouldn't even let me keep the car. They gave
me 2k, fixed it up, and sold it for 16k. And the law backed them up on it
every step of the way. If that isn't THEFT then I don't know what is.
My friend is a doctor he had a patient (who was terminal anyway and he was
tring only to prolong the patience life) die on him in the OR.
The family suied for mal-practice and LOST. But never mind that they lost,
the insurence doubled. The next year his office partner had the same thing
happen, once again the insurence went up by more than double. So in 2 years
they pay more than 4 times the insurence. My friend quit and is no-longer a
doctor becouse to afford it he would have to take more patience than he
thinks 1 doctor can (or should) handle. His ex partner now refuses to operate
on anyone except those he is certain will survive the operation, even when
the patient will die without the operation.
Many middle class people would love to own a high end sportscar. It isn't
that they can not afford to BUY the car, it't that (becouse if insurence
etc.) they can no afford to OWN the car. The Elite see to it that they stay
eliete?
Many middle class families in California would like to buy a home (not a
condo, a _home_). It's not that they can't afford the home, it's that they
can not afford the ~insurence~ they are required -by law- to have on the
home. So insted they are forced to own a townhome or condo.
Besides which insurence company is going to insure gun ownership? It's not
going to happen, and if it does, the cost would be preventative.
Another case of the elite resuving all power for themseleves?
=====
_________________________________________________
Jan William Coffey
_________________________________________________
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
