On Wed, May 13, 1998 at 01:40:10AM -0700, Paul Mullen wrote:
> (Isn't it interesting,
> though, how the same people who think a disarmed citizenry would be just
> swell still can't get enough violence in their entertainment. What
> strange web we do weave.)
I have considered that at considerable length myself, because it sure does
seem to be somewhat of a contradiction. After all, my video shelf has
its share of Willis and Stallone movies, and certainly none of those
can justify their presence by the claim that they are cinematic masterpieces.
So I've started cleaning off the shelf, because I don't consider violence
entertaining any more. I've seen too much in real life, and even the
gloss that Hollywood paints over it is no longer enough to cause me
to suspend my disbelief.
The point you raised above has been cause for considerable soul-searching
on my part for a long, long time.
> Rich Kulawiec, [EMAIL PROTECTED] mewed:
> >Charming. The good old fashioned independent American way to solve
> >all problems: get a gun.
>
> Not so charming: somehow believing that your safety and well-being are in
> any way someone else's responsibility (and trusting them to provide that
> security).
I agree. That's why I take responsibility for my own safety. And I get
practice in doing so on a regular basis: I'm a whitewater kayaker, and am
frequently a split-second decision away from serious injury or worse.
> Completely repellent: the incredibly ignorant notion that
> those who believe in every human's inalienable right to self-defense are
> all violent, hateful knuckle-dragging war-mongers just itching for a
> chance to wreak death and destruction on society at large.
I agree -- mostly. (It's a point of some philosophical debate.
If we grant that you have an inalienable right to self-defense, but then
pose the conundrum that the act of defending yourself will cause the
deaths of an innocent person...do we still consider that right inalienable?
How about 10,000 innocent persons? But while that's an interesting
topic for abstract debates, it's a circumstance that's highly unlikely
to arise in the real world. Which is why I mostly agree with you.)
I have no problem with people defending themselves (and theirs). I have
a major problem with people who are deluding themselves that they can
do it with gun -- a coward's weapon to begin with, and largely inneffective
for defense in the end. I certainly don't mean to do harm to anyone -- it's
anathema to me -- but I guarantee you that if I decided to make you a victim,
you'd never get your gun in your hand. You'd be far better off with a means
of self-defense that is always available and can't be taken from you
and used against you.
But those means take training and stamina and courage: they're not a
quick or easy fix. And it seems we Americans love the quick, easy fix --
a circumstance which puzzles me greatly, because it seems so divergent
from the way we once were.
---Rsk
Rich Kulawiec
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The Web Consultants Association : Register on our web site Now
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
If you lose the instructions All subscription/unsubscribing can be done
directly from our website for all our lists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
