From: kimf@ogicse.ogi.edu (Kim Flowers)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Protest Vote '92  (Was: Don't waste your vote on Bush or Clinton)
Date: 6 Oct 92 18:21:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.43716
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute (formerly OGC), Beaverton, OR

In article <1992Oct6.125947.8998@eskimo.celestial.com> wix@eskimo.celestial.com (Dennis Wicks) writes:
>In article <1992Oct06.021322.20515@gibdo.engr.washington.edu> slh@gibdo.engr.washington.edu () writes:
>>In article <43674@ogicse.ogi.edu> kimf@ogicse.ogi.edu (Kim Flowers) writes:
>>>
>>>Therefore we should stop trying to ban guns, and ban gun manufacturing!
>>>It's a little easier to find a gun factory than a gun.
>>>
>>	In all countries?
>That was my thought exactly!  Criminals will get their tools anywhere
>they can, because they are _criminals!_  If necessary, they will _make_
>them.  Ask any one who has worked in a prison how easy it is to make a
>gun that is effective at killing people.
>
>The above "solution" is a fairly typical statement from those that are
>so sure that _their_ solution is the only _correct_ solution, that they 
>will go to _any_ extreme to get it implemented.  Re: All the ineffective
>_crime_prevention_ laws and programs in existence.  Most notably the
>"War" on Drugs.

While it it possible for anyone to make a firearm that is effective at
killing people, without industrial support it is more difficult to make
weapons that are AS effective at killing people, and in the same
quantities that are being produced legally now.

Also (for the same reason that some people want to ban all guns), no
one would have a legitimate reason for holding a firearm, and
possession of one would automatically make them a "criminal". This
would make it a bit easier for the authorities to determine whether
someone had a legitimate reason for holding a firearm or not. (I
won't go into whether it's any of the "authorities" business).

It is not necessary to achieve a total elimination of all firearms in
order to have an effect, just make it harder to get them. While some
people would go to any lengths to get a firearm, many would probably be
satisfied with clubs or knifes (especially if they knew that it
wouldn't be likely that an opponent would have a firearm).

As for importing guns from other countries, it's my opinion (this is
without proof, feel free to show me I'm wrong) that the majority of
firearms are manufactured in industrialized countries like the United
States, and of the civilized countries with large enough industrial
bases, the United States has a much more liberal attitude about
distributing these weapons to the general populace. Even Third World
countries that are awash in military equipment usually received them
from a "civilized" country.

I don't know how to do it, but if you could convince most of such
"civilized" countries to ban the manufacture of firearms, then the
probability that any given individual is likely to get shot by a
firearm would be greatly reduced. (Note: I'm not saying it would be 0,
just greatly reduced).

I don't, however, consider this sequence of events to be very likely
and am hardly making any future plans with this outcome in mind.
*sigh*

K. Dorian Flowers
kimf@cse.ogi.edu
Newsgroups: pnw.general