"Reasonable"?  

I have to hear your definition of reasonable.  Does it extend to 1 in 
10?  

What if all guns are banned but one make and model.  After a long 
period to allow for mechanical failure of guns currently in civilian 
hands, only this gun is used to kill police officers and the ratio is 
now 9 in 10 (there still remain knifes, baseball bats and other means 
for the rest).  Should we ban that gun too?

In your view of reasonable, there exists no idea of rights at all.  I 
don't have a right to a firearm of any kind, so long as there are 
criminal elements who will misuse them.

Phil Lee

> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> 
> 
> The main thing about the VPC result is that they counted as "AW" many 
guns that they
> want to be on the list, but are unlikely to ever be put there.
> 
> A more subtle complaint is that they counted _only_ what they 
considered "AW"s as a
> part of the whole.  It is entirely possible that "4 out of 10" are 
committed with a
> .38 revolver -- with the implication that "more police officers lives 
would be saved"
> if revolvers were banned.  But that result exposes the silliness of 
their underlying
> premise.
> 
>   --jcr
> 
> 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. An effort 
to diminish or reduce officers killed in the line of duty would receive 
justifiable support. A reasonable adjunct to efforts to ban Acme abc 
weapons would be to include similar/identical weapons which is what the 
assault weapons ban was intended to accomplish. 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Always mystify, mislead, and surprise the enemy ... and when 
you ... overcome him never let up in the pursuit ... for an army 
... hotly pursued, becomes panic-stricken, and can then be 
destroyed by half their number. ... never fight against heavy odds, 
if ... you can hurl your own force on only ... the weakest part, of 
your enemy and crush it. Such tactics will win every time, and a small 
army may thus destroy a large one in detail ...  
--- Gen. T. J. Jackson, CSA
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to