From: PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 16:26:36 GMT

In article <9301041935.22@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:

>In article <16B4AEE80.PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu> PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:
>>>In article <1hvjpgINN1o3@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavare) writes:
>>>>In article <9212311212.23@rmkhome.UUCP>, rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>>>My wife is stalled on her permit because all of the people she's known
>>>>for any length of time in the area are anti-gun.
>>>
>>>That's life.
>>
>>       That's amusing.
>
>I may have a strange sense of humor, but I find it amusing that someone
>who wants to buy a gun has friends that are all anti-gun.

       This is even more amusing.  "You don't get to have a gun because you
occupy one end of the bell curve."

       So, you get to own a gun if, 1) You can convince a psychologist you 
have a "healthy" family relationship, 2) You can convince a psychologist 
you have a "healthy" community relationship, and 3) You're lucky.

       Cool.

>>>This is assuming that anyone who steps up to the counter to buy a
>>>gun has innocent intentions.
>>
>>        This is the only proper assumption.  The government is not
>>*allowed* to decide you are a criminal unless *they* can produce
>>proof.  That's why *they* have to prove you guilty in a court of
>>law, not you who has to prove yourself innocent.  That's why *they*
>>have to have a sufficient amount of evidence to even bring you to
>>trial.  It invites the sort of government abuse our Constitution was
>>written to prevent if they are allowed to label you a criminal unless
>>you prove otherwise, or until they get around to checking you out.
>
>When you apply for a gun permit, you are neither on trial nor under
>arrest.  

       Legal fiction, land.  Like "arresting" houses.  We're not 
going to call this a trial, but you'll be punished if found "guilty" 
so we don't have to deal with little unconvenient things like rights.       

>It is a case of determining if the prospective gun purchaser
>is a criminal or not, something which the gun store owner can't do.
>And it probably, in this litigous society, protects the gun store
>owner and the manufacturer from being sued in some cases.

       Wait a minute.  You're suggesting, seriously, that gun permits are to 
prevent lawsuits against *gun store owners*!?

       Simply, straightforward, instant check (criminal record) systems have 
been proposed that do not require subjective criteria.  My suggestion is to 
let the store owner decide whether or not to check up on you, if it's his 
neck we seem to be concerned with.  Any reputable gun dealer (and the BATF 
knows who you are) would rather pay to work with such a system than risk 
such devestating lawsuits.

>>        Some are.  Some aren't.  Most probably aren't.
>
>And the fact is that they are allowed to under Arizona law.

        Then make sure parents know who's responsible for the kid if 
something happens.  I can't help you if you aren't prepared to hold people 
resopnsible for their actions, which is a far sight better than pretending 
people can convince some agent of the state they won't commit a certain act.

>>       It may have been somewhere.  But summary confiscation, of any
>>property, doesn't seem to make the news very often.  It's fairly common
>>to confiscate weapons and not return them even if there are no charges
>>filed or the person is acquitted.
>
>I have no knowledge of that.

        Then I believe you've been oblivious to it.  I ran out of HD space 
and put my files onto disk, but I'll see if I can dig something out.

>>       A $200 dollar gun is a one time investment.  And it's taking
>>a gamble to assume all a mugger wants is your wallet.
>
>And it's a gamble to assume that you can pull out a gun and fire before
>the mugger, who already has his gun pointed at you.

        Assuming the mugger has a gun, and not, say a knife.  And for some 
people you don't even have to be armed to present a significant threat to 
their life.  Unless you'd like to argue that my mother, with her bad back 
and walker can successfully fight hand-to-hand with a mugger or rapist.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Veal               University of Tennessee Div. of Cont. Education
                         Information Services Group
PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  (Mail to VEAL@utkvm1.utk.edu will bounce.)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns