On 2/12/04 11:32 AM, "Mike Russell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> To the general public, indeed I would say to most people, if the statement 4
> of 10 of weapons used to kill officers in the line of duty
> were the "Acme abc" model firearm, then it would be reasonable, not silly, for
> citizens to make an effort to ban Acme abc model.
It's not obvious to me why this should be so. If 4 out of 10 firearms used
to fill police officers were Brand X, but Brand X firearms also represented
40% of the overall firearms market, one could not reasonably conclude that
there was anything particular about Brand X that made it specially suited to
the purpose of killing police officers. It would be rather like saying that
Fords are the vehicles in which 40% of traffic deaths occur, therefore
reasonable people should support banning Fords, even though that brand
accounts for 40% of car sales (and therefore aren't presumably any more
dangerous than other brands).
Can you explain why you reached the conclusion that you did with zero
consideration of whether the type of gun in question was used
*disproportionately* to its prevalence?
--
Bob Woolley
St. Paul, MN
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Being a Baptist won't keep you from sinning, but it'll sure
as hell keep you from enjoying it."
-- Jimmy Dean
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof
