From: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Newsgroups: ba.politics,ca.politics
Subject: Re: Carjackers/Citizens/Life/Guns/Bernhard Goetz
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:38:48 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

Bruce Overby writes:
>>While I disagree completely with Clayton on, er,  the other subject he's
>>kept going in this group for over a year now, I feel that he's right on
>>the money in this case.
>
>Right on the money about what? Correct me if I'm misrepresenting
>here, but you, in reading Clayton's post, understood that his
>points were:
>
>- Current laws on firearm possession are too restrictive.
>- Heroes who save the lives of carjacking victims reduce crime.
>- An older victim who repelled younger criminals should be applauded.
>
>And yet, Clayton said *nothing* about firearm laws,

The issue he has posted about recently, with regard to firearms laws and
carjackings, is the California concealed carry permit law.  Currently,
unless you know somebody with influence in the police department, it is
virtually impossible for ordinary citizens (no matter how qualified) to
get such a permit.

It's very enlightening to hear a cop interviewed on TV saying that we
cannot protect ourselves, that it's best not to resist criminals, then
look down at his belt and see a pistol there...

>*nothing* about
>the life that was saved in San Diego, *nothing* about applauding
>the single older victim.

Maybe he should have included more details about the San Diego case.  He
did seem to be applauding the older guy who fought back against three
carjackers successfully.

>Instead, he recounted the stories in a
>sensationalist manner, with no interpretive comments (other than
>his usual swipe at the [liberal] media)

What's wrong with taking a swipe at the media, be it liberal or conservative,
when they show obvious bias?  Sure the more liberal media are biased against
legitimate gun ownership...it makes an interesting counterpoint to the
conservative sources who oppose abortion.  Both are idiotic, in my mind.
FYI:  I do identify myself as a liberal, am a registered Democrat and voted
for CLinton last month, even though his stance on guns is fucked up...there
was just too much at stake to leave Bush in power by making a third party
protest vote.  However, I also voted Libertarian in the Congressional races
because I think the Government (more than anything else) needs its leash
yanked good and hard, right now.

>and left it to the reader
>to join in the hysteria. Such a posting might encourage someone
>who is *not* qualified to repel a carjacker to attempt to do so,
>which could get someone hurt.

How does one become "qualified" to defend his/her life?  By serving with
the Navy SEALS?  By reaching 3rd dan in a martial art?  By winning a
pistol match?

I have done none of those things, yet I'm qualified to defend myself.  It's
all in the attitude, my man.  If an elderly woman decides that she will
NOT be a victim, then with some preplanning she has a chance to defeat
any attacker.

I realize that I've strayed a bit from responding to the exact questions
raised in your post but, while Clayton and I disagree vehemently on some
issues (but agree on gun-related issues), I have neither the time nor the
inclination to engage in Clayton-bashing.  There are just too many interesting
posts in alt.religion.santaism that I need to respond to.

Later,

  don