[Woods] "I can't think of a single benefit that would arise from my arming my home with surface to air missile batteries and a few tomahawk launchers. I trust our military to protect us from threats of that caliber."
Here's "ONE time" you said it Arlo. Still confused by your own writing? [Arlo] Kindly point out to me where in the above it mentions that I'd support allowing civilians to own nuclear weapons. [Woods] By saying you "trust our military to protect us... that caliber." I take it to mean people, in your assertions, can have matching caliber to strike back and protect. [Arlo] Do you? Did I say that or is that your own invention? When did I ever say civilians should have "matching caliber"? Not once. Indeed, this very sentence says the exact opposite. [Arlo had said] Thus, in my view, tanks, missiles, flamethrowers, grenades, atomic bombs, sidewinders, tomahawks, battleships, bazookas, Abrams, etc. would all be reserved for the military. Is that clear enough for you? [Woods] Very clear. You are allowing our neighbors to have nuclear and other high grade weapons. You said right here. In your writing. What aren't you getting? [Arlo] Ohhh.. I see. Clever. You are reducing "the military" to "our neighbors". By allowing the military use of tomahawks, you (mis)interpret this as allowing our neighbors the use of tomahawks. And then by this make the assumption that you should be able to own one as well. These weapons are dangerous, and need to be regulated. But they are necessary for our protection. And so we've, as a society, set up a volunteer force that would be given the responsibility of access and use of the weapons when it is necessary to protect the rest of us. They do not "own" these weapons, and the regulations make it impossible for any one soldier to joyride in his Abrams down the streets of Denver. They are tightly controlled and regulated even within the confines of our military. If you feel threatened that our volunteer army has access to these weapons but you do not, Woods, then please join the army. If you are paranoid about the military turning against us, then by all means be a moral force within the military. [Woods] So you are allowing some people to have these weapons and other people to not. Odd. And what laws are people allowed to listen to and others not? [Arlo] I am allowing a regulated military access and use of these weapons. I am disallowing non-military civilians from access and use of these weapons. The "some people" we entrust with these weapons is done so with great responsibility. If you wish to be one of these "some people", then by all means join the military and serve and protect. [Woods] What weapons my neighbors can have, I can have. Simple. This is about morals. [Arlo] And since the US Military has nuclear weapons (I assume the root of your argument is that the "military" are "your neighbors", no?), you feel you should be able to own one well? Since the US Military has Abrams tanks, sidewinder missiles and F16s, you feel you should be able to have them as well? Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
