From: maillet@tls-cs.cert.fr (Luc Maillet)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.french
Subject: Re: Guns, and the necessity to trust our governement.
Keywords: guns and surrealism
Date: 20 Aug 92 06:55:51 GMT
Organization: CERT Toulouse Dept of Computer Science, FRANCE

In article <1992Aug19.040953.5908@athena.mit.edu>, sybok@athena.mit.edu (The Rifleman) writes:
|> 
|> Bullshit.  Half the homes in the US have guns in them.  Guerrilla warfare,
|> whereby armed citizens snipe government troops from buildings, sabotage
|> their equipment, shoot at tank crews, kill government leaders, and so
|> forth, is a very effective strategy.  The Afgan rebels didn't have the
|> sophisticated machinery of the Soviets, and yet their effort made a
|> difference.

  Yes, of course. And the US also has the dubious honor of having the highest
killing ratio (in targets/inhabitant) of all the industrial countries. Now
let's talk about civil peace...

|> What about a few million AR-15 military-style semi-autos?  The NRA
|> supports private ownership of these weapons precisely because the 
|> Second Amendment IS ABOUT defense against tyranny

  Wonderful. Now the cops aren't only undermanned, they are also underarmed.
The entire law enforcement community is acquiring heavier weaponry JUST TO
KEEP WITH EVERYBODY ELSE! It's madness IMO.

|> HA HA!!!  According to independent researcher Gary Kleck, one million
|> crimes per year in the US are repelled by firearms.  You only need
|> look at the LA riots and see store owners defending themselves and their
|> businesses to see the value of firearms in defense of life, liberty, and
|> property.

  Don't forget: if you have no weapon, the criminal has a knive, or perhaps a
pistol. If you have a pistol or a rifle, the criminal will have a fully
functional SMG, and so on. It's always easier for criminals to acquire heavier
weaponry than it is for the ordinary citizen - except in westerns. Getting
armed is just asking for an arm race.

|> >A gun, like tobacco, is a government approved good which, when used as
|> >directed, causes death.
|> 
|> And I WELCOME and APPROVE DEATH--DEATH FOR CRIMINALS WHO ATTACK
|> LAW ABIDING CITIZENS--OLD MEN AND YOUNG WOMEN--WITH KNIVES AND BRUTE
|> STRENGTH . . . DEATH FOR TYRANTS LIKE ADOLF HITLER AND HIS FASCIST
|> OLIGARCHY OF GENOCIDE. 
|> 
|> And indeed, I WOULD RISK MY LIFE FOR THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS,
|> .  .  . THE RIGHT TO BE FREE.

  It's not your decision. The only difference between animal and man is society
and its laws. Not law of the strongest: law to protect the weak. Asking for
the right to carry and use weapons is just going back to the Law of the 
strongest. I just hate the thought of it.

|> I don't see rampant crime in Switzerland or Israel, both of which allow
|> their citizens to exercise the right to keep and bear arms.

  But I do in the USA, where the same tolerane exists... which speaks for
itself about respective citizen responsibility and self-control... And don't
forget that in both countries you cite, there is a really efficient police
force (for Israel) or a even more efficient social conscience (for Switzer-
-land). Try to teach one of these to the USA, then let the people get armed...
but not the other way round.

						Z.