From: hamm@weejordy.physics.mun.ca (Craig Hamm)
Subject: Re: Justifications for owning guns?
Organization: Ocean Sciences Centre
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 02:51:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.005223.29989@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca>, masonp@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Peter Mason) writes:
|> 
|> >|> We do have a problem with the US being armed to the teeth.  The 'stolen'
|> >|> guns here couldn't be stolen when there are none around to take.
|> >|> 
|> >	Yeah, but 'none to take' in the US will NEVER be possible.
|> 
|> So pessimistic...

	Why are you spelling 'realistic' that way?

|> >	Your vegitarian choice is a different issue.
|> 
|> That's vegetarian :-)

	(Damn, I knew that!)  =8 o

|> 
|> >|> >i don't think out-right bans on anything is going to change anything.
|> >|> 
|> >|> It would definitely change things.  It would lower the number of people
|> >|> killed in crime and violent acts.  The question is, however, 
|> >|> 'is it worth having our rights infringed upond to do so?' 
|> >|> >
|> >
|> >	It wouln't change as much as your utopian mind would like to believe.
|> 
|> I didn't say it would eliminate the problem.  

	OK, fair.
|> 
|> >	The people who do nasty mean things with guns, are mean and nasty
|> >	people.  If they want guns, they will get them from underground
|> >	suppliers.  
|> 
|> And it will cost them lots of money and be more difficult than it is now.
|> Result: fewer people have guns, few people killed.

	Unless they get more efficient!
|> 
|> >       This will support more organised crime.  It will also
|> >	make guns more 'valuble' because they will be 'rare'.
|> 
|> So there are fewer guns out there, but they are valuable.  So the fewer
|> people being killed have the consolation of knowing that they were done
|> in by something that was worth a lot of money.  

	Excuse me, just explain how the dead person will know the bad guy didn't
	get the gun at 'Target Store' (ha ha ha, puns! I kill me) on sale?

|> And the people not killed
|> by some hood or angry aquaintence with a 
|> 
|> >       People will want guns.  People will kill with or wothout guns.
|> 
|> Some people will.  I'm not arguing that.
|> 
|> >|> 
|> >|> And for those people who believe that "guns don't kill people, people kill
|> >|> people", go to your bookstore and look up some anti-gun material.  Some people
|> >|> are always going to kill, but with guns, it happens more often.  It's the
|> >|> ease with which one can kill with a gun that is the biggest problem.
|> >|> Again, fewer guns=fewer intentional deaths.  This is a fact. 
|> >|> 
|> >
|> >	Well, state the sources.  What books, authors?  Where did they
|> >	get the stats?  I'm not against you, I just want more FACTS.
|> >
|> 
|> Okay, most of these sorts of books are American of course.  One in particular
|> that I thought was good (some of them are a bit naive) was called _The Right
|> to Bear Arms_ (I think).  The statistics cited were mainly regional comparisons,
|> as well as country comparisons.  These of course have societal bias.  But they
|> are so overwhelming that they have some credence.  The author also references
|> psychologial studies and profiles that stress that SOME people would not kill
|> if it weren't so easy.  "It's harder to kill someone up close when you can see
|> their eyes" type argument.  Again, there are statistics to support the claim
|> and they aren't trivial numbers.  It's similar to the argument that fewer
|> people would eat beef if they actually  had to kill the cow themselves....
|> 
|> oops. there i go again :-)

	-10 points


|> Somewhat unrelated, but ironic point:  as an unarmed person in our society, you are
|> safer than an armed person in the US.
|> 
|> Scary.

	YEP.  Fully believable. 

	Now, despite my replies and posts, you should know that being a resident
	of Newfoundland has given me the opportunity to see a police force that
	does not bear sidearms (i.e. no handguns on every cop).  The guns are
	in the trunks of squad cars, and special squads etc.  They are putting
	up a fight to carry sidearms.  The RNC (Royal Nfld Constabulary) 
	has not given in yet.  My PERSONAL opinion is that they should NOT
	be able to carry sidearms.  As soon as they do, some crooks will start
	to arm, as they will know instantly what they might have to contend
	with.  It happens in Halifax.  I've seen newscasts over the years
	where bank robbers and burglars have fired arms.  Cops in Hfx have
	shot weapons in public areas. Yikes. (rare though, thank god).

	Craig

-- 
  
    Craig Hamm, Memorial University, | I don't think the letters which appear
    Newfoundland                     | on your letters page are genuine. I 
    DoD #1500,                       | think you just make them all up.  In
    81 Maxim 650                     | fact you probably made this one up
    ------------                     | too.  -J. Clark, Rotherham (Viz comics)

Newsgroups: can.general,soc.culture.canada