From: anon.39@pax.tpa.com.au
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: I will only threaten the proven guilty.
Date: 13 Jan 1993 08:27:48 +1030
Organization: PAX - Public Access Unix (Adelaide,South Australia) - Anonymous Service
Reply-To: anon.39@pax.tpa.com.au
NNTP-Posting-Host: flash.pax.tpa.com.au


Hi guys.  I used to be anon.526, now I'm not.  I will respond briefly
and generally to some of the numerous responses I got:

o Am I a radical pacifist declare that I will give another person
nearly limitless benifit of the doubt before using a gun?

In a way, yes.  I recognize that we live in a peaceful society.
I would not point a gun at another human being unless he or she
were guilty of the intent to harm me or my family or a third party.
And in a peaceful soceity, everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
That is what I mean by "nearly limitless benefit of the doubt".

Is it radical to assume that a man is guilty of evil action or 
intent until proven guilty?  When it was first written into our
Constitution it was certainly viewed that way by many.  It's
right for our government and it's right for me.

"Innocent until proven guilty" only presupposes a state of peace.  When
the government is at war, it is forced to the lesser evil of killing
"the enemy" to save society, and if my daily life was in a state of
siege I might use a gun more readily.  But I don't live under siege.  I
am not a desperate person.

o Am I a vegan or what?

I have nothing against killing plants or animals.  Endangered species
are an exception, cute furry things are not.

o Do I ever put myself or others at mortal risk?

I live to minimize that risk.  I would never trade everyone else's safety
for mine.  I would never threaten a child with my car to avoid an accident
that might hurt me, and I would never threaten a child with a gun just
because the child may or may not hurt me.

o Is it hypocritical to let the police do the "dirty work" of stopping
criminals?

I don't call the police in the hope that they will beat up some suspect
I name.  The advantage of calling the police is that restraining the
dangerous will become a reasoned group decision for which "innocent
until proven guilty" is mandated by law.  Rather than having a trigger
finger be the judge and lead jurors, each in its own chamber, there
will be a real judge and a real jury.

Besides, I have never seen a "pro-gun" advocate of compassion towards
criminals.

o So what if Christian Brando was convicted?

So he went to prison and life will be hell form him for a long time.
His attempt at self-defense was a terrible pyrrhic victory.  That, IMO,
is the main drawback of using a gun for self-defense.

o There is no risk of a homicide conviction when no shots are fired.

Pointing a loaded gun at someone else, when it is not legally warranted
as an act of self-defense, is a violent felony by itself and you can go
to prison for it.  If you point a gun at an assumed prowler in your
yard and it turns out to be the neighbor's kids playing, your program
of self-defense may well be a miserable failure.

o How come I don't have any statistics?

Because I am not giving advice.  If I were to advise all of you here
that self-defense with a gun risks a deserved prison sentence, then it
would be incumbent upon me to back it up with some "data".  But your
risk of going to prison is not my concern here.  Obviously most of 
you think you can bear the risk.  Unless your program of self-defense
is an intolerable risk to society, it's your business, even if it
might be foolish for you personally.

On the other hand, I have never seen any statistics to demonstrate that
my doctrine of non-confrontation results in a shorter life expectancy
or higher burglary insurance, only statistics about those isolated
experiences involving face-to-face confrontations with violent strangers.

However, many people here have advised Rich Kelly that defending
yourself with a gun is a good idea, and they have not addressed, with
or without statistics, the possibility of making a criminal error when
doing so.  Statitics were instead given on other, and in my
mind, ultimately irrelevant, points.


--
** Anonymity & Privacy by PAX - Public Access Unix (Adelaide,South Australia) **

anon.admin@pax.tpa.com.au (a human)   anon.info@pax.tpa.com.au    (for help)
anon.ping@pax.tpa.com.au  (get alias) anon.key@pax.tpa.com.au     (register key)
anon.###@pax.tpa.com.au   (reply)     anon.post.grp@pax.tpa.com.au (post to grp)
anon.list@pax.tpa.com.au  (to mailing list about anonymous mailers)
anon.subscribe@pax.tpa.com.au         anon.unsubscribe@pax.tpa.com.au

For dialup Unix access phone +61-8-235-9010 - online registration.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns