> > The act of aiming the weapon has crossed the line into demonstrating intent
to kill and taking action on that intent. > I must take exception to this. The act of aiming indicates a _readiness_ to _stop_. It's not 'kill', 'murder', or even 'intent' to do either of these things. The _intent_ is to _stop_, _if_necessary!_ Unfortunately death is a common, and unavoidable, outcome. Equally, or perhaps even more, likely is that the perpetrator will depart before stopping him forcefully becomes necessary. That's the ideal outcome. If a laser dot enhances this outcome, and/or makes the effectiveness of the stop more likely, then I'm all for them. The same tool _can_ be used for murder. But it's far more likely to be used to feed your family, or for a heck of a nice outing with your family. Same as a car... I resent legislatures, and partisans, trying to redefine the situation to their advantage. Talk about a straw man argument. "Tell me sir, have you stopped beating your wife?" -- Jim _______________________________________ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
