From: wwarf@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Wayne J. Warf)
Subject: Re: Japanese exchange student killed in Louisiana...
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 18:44:51 GMT

In article <BxE08w.JyJ@ncifcrf.gov> masuda@fcs280b.ncifcrf.gov (Michiaki Masuda) writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.173514.8091@adobe.com> pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) writes:
>>In article <Bx9wsI.KFr@ncifcrf.gov> masuda@fcs280b.ncifcrf.gov (Michiaki Masuda) writes:
>>>   However, if your neighbors start to practice shooting in their
>>>back yard and might miss the target and shoot into your back yard, wouldn't
>>>you want them to stop it? Wouldn't you think that they should go to a
>>>shooting range to take the education first?
>
>>I would like to point out that you are trying to debate an imaginary scenario.
>>Imaginary in that no one has presented any evidence that this scenario
>>is in fact a problem.
>
>   I'm afraid that you jumped into a discussion between some other gentleman
>and me without understanding the point.
>
>   We were talking about a rationale or reasoning for enforcing something to 
>people and its possible association with a cultural difference. I used an 
>imaginary scenario because we were talking on a rather metaphysical
>basis. That could have been any other scenario. 
>   Apparently, another question of mine based on an imaginary scenario of a 
>hijacker was beyond your comprehension.
>
>>Saying that Peairs might have acted reasonably is not the same as blaming
>>Hattori any more than if Peairs had accidently run over Hattori because
>>Hattori jumped in front of a moving car.
>
>   Not quite a good analogy. If someone jumped in front of a moving a car
>when he/she knows the car will hit him/her, that would be a reckless or
>even stupid act. As far as I know, there is no proved evidence to
>show that this was the case with the Hattori incident.

He didn't write:"he/she knows the car will hit him/her," don't put
words on his screen. In fact, there is "no proved evidence" to show
*anything* about the incident. That's why there a juries in the 
United States, to evidence rather than hearsay or tortured hypothetical
argument and *then* issue a verdict.

>In article <1992Nov6.174806.8454@adobe.com> pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) writes:
>
>>The problem is all the measures you propose like registration and
>>licensing are very helpful for gun banners and are often proposed by
>>those who clearly are interested in immediately or ultimately banning
>>guns.
>
>   First of all, although I appreciate your giving me more credits than
>I deserve, I don't think that I am the one who proposed those you mentioned
>above. As I clearly sateted in another posting, I am currently agreeing with 
>those people who proposed and support those ideas.


So we gathered. Any other revelations? We can our own laws or not just
fine, thank you very much.


>   I'm not sure whether you intentionally omitted the "firearm education"
>from "all the measures," but I don't see any reason why the education lead 
>to banning guns. There are some posters who mentioned the possibility that 
>we can promote the education without going through the authoritarian 
>regulation. 

And we do, thank you, next point please.

>   Even if those measures could end up with helping gun banners under some
>circumstances, it is still possible to draw a line between the two opinions
>if the US government is still under the control of American citizens.

If you're discussing the Hattori incident, he was hit, you know, how
would target training have avoided that.



>>I'm sorry Hattori
>>got killed, but people get struck by lightning too. We don't refuse to
>>go outside just because someone else might get struck by lightning.
>
>   No, we don't because we invented a lightening rod. 8-)

Next electrical storm, go outside with your lightning rod and we'll 
take bets on how long you last.

>>Citizens able to defend themselves. Especially women and the elderly
>>who are often the victims of rape, assault, and robbery precisely
>>because the criminals think they can not defend themselves.
>
>   Do you propose a policy to distribute a free handgun to all the women and
>elderly who want to have one?

If you can't see the difference between not prohibiting and subsidizing,
you should probably stop here.

>>>   The education would be very helpful if it could let people, who own a
>>>firearm without criminal intention, know how to protect themselves 
>>>effectively and how not to hurt others or themselves mistakingly.  
>
>>Yes, it would. Why not make it mandatory in high school, like driver's
>>education?
>
>     Isn't (public) high school education rather vulnerable to the pressure
>from the government?

Yes, that why this is not the case.

>>>   As long as the wrong attitude, incorrect knowledge and inapropriate 
>>>handling skills are correctable by the education, I believe that it's better 
>>>than nothing.
>
>>Education can do little about attitude.
>
>     What made your attitude? Your genetic materials?
>>Half the households in the US have guns. Maybe you should consider that.
>
>    Not "maybe." Definitely, I should. So should other Japanese. 


Why should Japanese interfere with what goes on in American households.


>>>   Your guess is wrong. I respect those gun owners who are prepared to use
>>>their weapon properly.
>
>>But you insult and threaten me without even knowing if I own a gun, much
>>less if I can use it properly.
>
>    If my sarcasm for clarifying my point more effectively threatened you, I
>hereby apologize. However, I don't think that it was related to my knowledge
>on your possession or skill of a weapon or lack of it. In addition, I 
>don't think that I owe you an apology for any insult.

No comment.

>In article <1992Nov7.085201.2406@adobe.com> pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) writes:
>>In article <Bx9n3w.HGF@ncifcrf.gov> masuda@fcs280b.ncifcrf.gov (Michiaki Masuda) writes:
>>>   Have you got the result of "Average Asian vs. Average American" vote?
>>
>>If you think it is racist for an Asian to say that, you'd probably
>>think it sexist to say that men can't have babies too.
>
>    I wonder why you overreacted to a simple question that you can answer 
>by either "yes" or "no." It's a fact that you proposed taking a poll, isn't
>it? Do your words include anything that could make me think that you are a
>racist? 

Are you trying to say that all Asians are Americans?

>>>   Please, look at the subject title. As I understnad it, this thread should
>>>have a connection to the Hattori incident and is a place for talking about
>>>the tragedic death of the Japanese student and what we could and should
>>>do to avoid the next incident.
>
>>I thought we were talking about what we should and should not do to avoid
>>the next incident.
>
>   Trivial nit-picking. (FYI, should not do = should prevent ourselves from
>doing. Well, almost.)
>
>>I think some posters have been asserting Peaires was racist. Whether
>>he was or not (I have seen no evidence he was), I think the issue of
>>gun control and racism have a lot to do with each other.
>
>   Then, you might want to drop the racial propblem issue from this thread
>until you see some evidence.

Tu quoque!




-- 
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
 | Wayne J. Warf -- WWARF@ucs.indiana.edu -- I speak for myself only  |
 | Midterm Countdown-Bill and the Congress have to '94 to screw it up |
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan