On 10-Dec-04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: r>>> Aren't cops people?
s>> In this context, no - they're govt agents. r> You're mythologizing gov't so much, you actually view it as composed of r> nonhumans. I believe that you're missing the fact that the right to keep and bear arms was originally seen as a deterrent to a country where only govt agents had arms. Allowing more current and retired govt agents to be armed, with no commensurate arming of the common folk, swings the equation further towards the police state side. r>>> How do you figure, when it's about OFF DUTY & RETIRED officers? It's r>>> about their personal use of guns, not the job. s>> Their only qualification is they are or were govt agents. r> But that could be enough to get such a measure enacted. To what end? Are retired govt agents clamoring now to extend this "privilege" to us common people? Don't hold your breath. _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
