From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<9212301448.43@rmkhome.UUCP>
	<1992Dec31.011711.24829@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
	<9212311212.23@rmkhome.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 21:18:48 GMT

<In article <9212311212.23@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
<
<   >Disarming most people is, at best, complete waste of time.  How many
<   >people who we don't want carrying obey this law?  None?  Then why are
<   >we threatening other people with jail?

<   The police would like to know who has guns.

	The police would like to know a lot of things; that's
	why we have a Constitution that was designed to limit
	the powers of the government.

[text deleted]

<   >>>There is experience with "anyone who wants can carry legally"; it is
<   >>>significantly better than the experience with "only criminals and
<   >>>people with politcal pull carry", which what you get with
<   >>>discretionary permit systems, like the one Rich finds so "good".
<   >>
<   >>Is it?
<   >
<   >Yes.  As Kelly points out, even MA police will grudgingly admit that
<   >guns are useful for self-defense.  (Note that the statistics had to
<   >become overwhelming before they did, and as soon as the heat drops,
<   >they'll go back to their old "we'll protect you".)  Since rapists
<   >don't restrict themselves to people the police favor ....

<   >A number of states have decided to issue permits to most anyone who
<   >applies.  They haven't had the horrible experience that Kelly assumes.
<   >Are Bay Staters different?

<   In Arizona, I believe, there is now a move to restrict the current laws
<   that allow children to carry concealed weapons, as many parents are
<   concerned that it has become fashionable for junior high students to
<   carry concealed weapons.

	So what? Florida, Georgia, Oregon, Washington, Idaho and
	Vermont all issue concealed carry permits to pretty much
	anyone (actually, Vermont has no permits; the state
	constitution allows concealed carry by anyone who does not
	have criminal intent). The experience in those states suggests
	very strongly that Kelly is wrong.

<   >>If you honestly think that the state of California should issue each
<   >>citizen of the state a handgun, and let them do with it as they will,
<   >>fine.  I'll stay in Massachusetts.
,   >
<   >Strawman.  I didn't propose letting anyone "do ... as they will".  I
<   >said that few will do anything wrong, and the ones who will do
<   >something wrong don't obey the carry law anyay.  Since all we can do
<   >about them is deal with the wrong they do, why are we hosing people
<   >who aren't doing wrong?

<   What percentage of California residents over 18 carry legally licensed
<   handguns?  

	Strawman yet again; the current Kalifornia permit system
	is purely discretionary. 

<You're speculating.

	Kelly is the one who is speculating; he proclaims that
	if "anyone" is allowed to carry, "Beruit" would be the
	result.

	I guess that Vermont is "Beruit"?

<   >BTW - MA's permit system and "mandatory jail time for unlicensed
<   >carry" is one of the great gun control failures.  It doesn't restrict
<   >anyone worth restricting and merely provides an excuse for a lot of
<   >illegal searches.

<   It is a failure, but I don't know that there is a high rate of illegal
<   searches.

	If it is a failure, why is Kelly defending it?