What's "Alien" about this behaviour, Gabby? Human have practiced it since long before we were Sapiens. Every pre-modern species of human-kind has developed and carried weaponry, to the best of their technological ability. "Alien" is the supposition we would NOT need it.
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 9:00 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > Puh, Pat. You cannot deny your American upbringing. Me, myself and I - > full circle. Fear is for others. > > There are non-criminal people living today who really need guns. And > there are non-criminal people living on this beautiful planet who > really need cars. Let's start thinking what kinds of people these > could be. You might find it helpful to begin with finding potential > reasons for such alien behaviour. > > On 3 Feb., 14:11, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2 Feb, 17:24, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Chris, > > > > > I don't think it's about misperception. A car, a pool, a knife... each > of > > > these serve essential, non-violent, functions. A gun is designed to > kill; it > > > has no other purpose. If people want to shoot targets, use a gun that > shoots > > > an infrared beam at an electronic target, or play a video game. In > terms of > > > the theory, eliminating guns as a risk makes a lot of sense. > > > > > Eliminating cars has inherent functional problems for our society. > > > > Much the same ones as eliminating guns. The biggest one being that > > those who have them and want them simply WON'T be handing them over to > > anyone. This leaves ALL the guns in criminal hands. Personally, I'd > > rather have one myself, so the criminal doesn't ALWAYS have one up on > > me. It's obvious that we don't NEED guns or cars, as humans lived > > many millenia prior to their invention, but, as you say, eliminating > > things that people want is always tricky. > > > > > Ian > > > > > 2009/2/2 Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> > > > > > > In 'Freakonomics', Steven Levitt explored the remarkable phenomenon > of > > > > parental misperception of risk. He noted that a child was 11 times > more > > > > likely to die by swimming accident at a friend's house with a pool, > than by > > > > shooting accident at a friend's house with a gun, and yet parents as > a > > > > generality never restricted play due to the presence of a pool, but > would > > > > restrict play due to the presence of a gun. > > > > Statistically, I am far more likely to kill you with my: > > > > > > car > > > > knife > > > > baseball bat or other blunt trauma intrument > > > > alcohol > > > > > > than with my gun, yet your perception of personal risk is so skewed > that > > > > you literally feel your freedom is impinged upon merely by my > possession of > > > > this tool. That's a psychological phenomenon that is really > irrelevant to > > > > the greater conversation, and which probably deserves a thread unto > its > > > > own. > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Ian Pollard <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > > > >> Your posession of a firearm makes me less safe. Not being murdered > or hurt > > > >> is a pretty fundamental freedom; can we agree on that much? Now, am > I more > > > >> likely to be a victim of gun crime in a country with lots of guns or > a > > > >> country with very few? > > > > > >> (First person to mention Switzerland gets bitch-slapped.) > > > > > >> Ian- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
