From: wombat@nfinit.enet.dec.com (Christopher M. Conway)
Subject: Re: the US elections...
Reply-To: wombat@nfinit.enet.dec.com
Organization: Prickly Wombat Enterprises
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:51:56 GMT


In article <1992Nov9.235916.21601@csus.edu>, altheimm@nextnet.csus.edu (Murray Altheim) writes:
- In article <2AFC2A45.1829@news.service.uci.edu>
-    cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
- >In article <1992Nov7.101343.29619@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>
-    billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
- >>cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
- >>: 
- >>: >1. Gun control. If you feel as I do that it's a bad idea, make a
- >>: >habit of contacting the White House...
- >>: 
- >>: I do not feel as you do.  Guns I have no problem with -- but there is no
- >>: reason in HELL why any sane individual should have an assault weapon, or
- >>
- >>Why not? A so called "assault weapon" is no different than any other
- >>firearm. It is no more accurate or lethal than any other.
- >
- >Are you serious?  Something capable of killing many hundreds of poeple
- >in seconds is equivalent to a revolver, which has to be reloaded after a
- >mere five or six shots and has to be shot individually for each round?
- >Do you class cherry bombs and H-weapons together, too?
- 
- Janis, 
- 
- You're falling prey to the standard response of the pro-gun forces here.
- 
And you both have fallen prey to the standard anti-gun argument.

The thing is, it's really quite simple. The second amendment is PRECISELY
ABOUT these MILITARY, highly effective weapons.

They are to PROTECT us FROM the government.

THAT'S why I want a weapon such as that. In fact, I'm not happy with merely
a semi-automatic assault rifle. I won't be happy until I have a .50 cal
gun in a pillbox, personally. (though I might trade off the extra protection
to get it in an AA mount for use on helicopters.)

And the people reading this group in particular should consider this. It is
far from being a remote possibility that the government WILL come after us.

Arguments about the things that deranged crazies do just doesn't cut it.

Deranged crazies worshipping "the devil" in "black masses" call themselves
witches and use the tools of our trade, including ritual, to harm people.
Are we then to outlaw ritual?

Here in Albuquerque, an unbalanced woman drove up onto a sidewalk,
intentionally hitting several people. Are we then to outlaw cars?

Many people have poisoned various over the counter drugs. Are we then to
outlaw them?

Many people do stupid things with herbal remedies and the like. Are we
then to outlaw them?

Guns are tools. Tools are, in themselves, neither good nor evil. They can,
like any other tool, starting at the inclined plane (knives, anyone) up
to the most complex tools today (what would happen if NASA started dropping
heat-shield protected containers of plutonium out of the space shuttle?)
be misused. Such misuse is not an argument for their banning.

I remember this subject came up a couple of months ago. I stayed out of
it, as it appeared that several relatively sane heads had convinced some
of the people here that there was merit in the 2nd amendment. It's clear
that that's not the case. I won't argue it anymore here, either, as
it's inappropriate. I'll be happy to discuss via email. If you want more
debate, take it to talk.politics.guns. If you want the last word here, post
away, you'll get it.

Incidentally, I'm also a little annoyed by the "we won" stuff about Clinton.
"We" who, paleface? Don't assume we're all Demoblicans here. I'd wager that
the political spectrum is as broad in this group as its spiritual spectrum
is. (And no, I'm not Republicrat either. I'm a Libertarian. I voted for
Andre Marrou. For what it's worth, I find Clinton a little less bad in
general than either Perot or Bush; but I still find him awful, and do not
consider his winning the election as ANY sort of victory for me.)

Gee, can you tell this pushed one of my buttons? B^{)>
--
In no way should any statement, question, or other transferral
of information in this post should be construed in any way
as being an official communication of Digital Equipment
Corporation.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher M. Conway		| U*ix and C Guru
wombat@nfinit.enet.dec.com      | Legalize Freedom!
wombat@juliet.ll.mit.edu        | Marrou/Lord in '92!
nfinit::wombat (DECnet internal)| (505)761-2413 DTN 552-2413
--------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.pagan