Sorry Laird, but I don't buy that ... I didn't say "ban" - just better controlled access.
Agreed, a nutcase will use whetever weapon is to hand, during such an episode. A multi-shot semi-automatic pistol is a lot deadlier, at range and harder to overpower in the hands of an assailant, than a blade, or a bottle, or sticks and stones, blackmail, whatever. Personally I believe with any "weapon" the onus should be to justify need, not a matter of right, except by exception. The right to bear arms in self-defence, (or just in case we need to forcibly overthrow our government) surely needs some evidence of need. Ian On 4/19/07, Laird Bedore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Ron, > > I don't think there's any amount of preventative action that will 'cure' > any society from the occasional 'extremely divergent' doing something > awful like the VT shootings. When someone is sufficiently far enough off > the track, it doesn't matter what weapons are available - they will use > whatever they can get their hands on. If we banned all guns, we'd see a > machete attack. If we banned all blades, we'd see a spear or other such > pointy-stick attack. If we banned all sticks, we'd still see someone > poking everyones' eyes out with their fingers. We can limit the tools > all we like, but the underlying impetus remains, undeterred in its > course of action. Outreach programs help, though I doubt they can ever > be perfect. There's no telling how many similar events have not occurred > thanks to the intervention of such programs. It's unfortunate we can so > easily count the failures but not the successes. > > Keep in mind the same divergent seedlings that lead some people to > violence also lead others to inspiration or invention. The dynamic urge > to stray from the norms is a necessary trait of our humanity, though > extremes such as this do not always lead to good endings. > > Back to the gun ban idea, what of consequence? If our reaction is to ban > guns, do we not trade a degree of biological safety for reduced social > (and arguably intellectual) freedoms? One of the most pivotal > cornerstones of American government is the right of the people to > overthrow its government if it becomes irreparably corrupt. By banning > the tools necessary, we concede this right and thus reduce the > intellectual oversight we have placed upon our social institution. The > standard 'slippery slope' argument follows ad nauseum. > > -Laird > > > [Ron] > > Would tougher gun control laws or banning guns all together stopped this > > sort of violence? > > > > Would outreach programs stopped this sort of violence? > > > > Or is it a question of a "crazy straw" gene and just try not be in these > > peoples way > > When they go off? > > 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/ > > > > 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/ > 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/
