From: wwarf@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Wayne J. Warf)
Subject: Re: 2nd Ammendment
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 20:21:44 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.170211.18927@cbfsb.cb.att.com> colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten) writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.140706.23686@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, bobd@marune.acs.ohio-state.edu (Bob DeBula) writes:
>> In article <1992Nov6.041425.24217@cbfsb.cb.att.com> colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten) writes:
>> >
>> >Guns are a lot different from knives.  I can sit a block away with
>> >a knife and be considered a mild threat - but a gun makes me a 
>> >major threat.  I've had this argument before  "oh then let's ban
>> >steak knives" - tell that to the people in Killeen.  If that guy
>> >had a steak knife 90% of his victims might be alive.  Guns are
>> >a very different matter.
>> >
>> 
>> *Sigh*, if the folks in the restaurant had been able to carry
>> concealed, then most probably the incident in Killeen would never
>> have been on the national news in the first place. The unreasonable
>> restriction of their RKBA kept them from defending themselves
>> and others in this situation. This situation was more of
>> a defeat for the HCI crowd than the RKBA crowd if you think about
>> it a bit. I *know* there are a lot more folks in this forum who can/will
>> probably jump on this assertion of yours with additional
>> evidence/facts relating to that case. All of this has been rehashed
>> here in tpg *numerous* times.
>> 
>
>In the first place who said they couldn't "carry concealed" - they
>could apply for licenses and get the guns.  Hell, they sell them
>in department stores here in Georgia!  I've never argued for a total
>ban on guns, just a reasonable policy, and I'm arguing against people
>who say that because the RKBA is mentioned in the 2nd amendment that
>no laws limiting them can be passed.

Wrong! There is no license in Texas! A woman whose parents were
murdered in the incident testified before the Missouri legislature
<where carry is also illegal and there is no license> that she
had to leave her self-defense weapon in the car because of Texas law.
She could have *stopped* it *before* it became a massacre.
If you're ignorant of current law, please don't go proposing more.

>So let's look at Killeen, again. There are no laws restricting the
>right of honest, law-abiding citizens to buy weapons.  Or on anyone
>else since it is in infringement of our rights to even ask us who
>we are, or make us wait while they see if the id we have is real.
>So maybe 50% of the people in the restaurant in Killeen were sitting
>there comfortably with .38's on them.  And the guy walks in with
>a semi-automatic rifle.  Do you agree that a nut would be more likely to
>do just that - go for the big weapon.  So what would the people do -
>make it routine to carry semi-automatic's and then the guy walks in
>with a fully automatic Uzi or Mac-10.


But they didn't, that much we know. Let's turn your hypothetical around.
Say half of the people in the restaurant were sitting .38's and the
guy walks in with semi-automatic rifle and is immediately mowed down.
Toll: 1 dead homocidal maniac. 

If fact, there was an Israeli incident exactly along these lines.
3 terrorists were sitting in a restaurant and suddenly pulled 
fully automatic weapons, the other patrons were carrying concealed
weapons immediately put them on ice. Score: bad guys 0 good guys 3.



>This is what I'm trying to argue against - some kind of arms race
>on our streets where you can have any weapon you want, but can't
>send your kid to the burger king without an armed escort - lunchtime
>in Beirut.

Most of the Beirut-like towns such as New York City, DC, and Chicago
*prohibit* their citizens from owning guns by either outright bans
or requiring licenses that no one is given. The only arms race is
among the bad guys who don't get their guns legally or give a rat's
ass about the law. If you don't know or understand current law don't
pontificate.


>> You make the *very* common and faulty assumption that something can
>> be eliminated by legislating it away. This didn't work for
>> prohibition, isn't working for the war on drugs, and won't
>> work (doesn't work in places which have already legislated it
>> like DC, NYC, Chicago, etc.) for guns. All it does is create
>> a new criminal class from some formerly law abiding citizens
>> and make the rest *more* likely to become victims of the
>> WOD and the criminal class. You can bet that if it is profitable to 
>> bring illegal drugs into the country, it will be just as profitable to bring
>> illegal guns into the country. It would also be relatively easy
>> to set illegal manufacture of fully automatic submachine guns
>> domestically (much like the basement "labs" manufacture LSD,
>> PCPs, and the "crack" variant of cocaine).
>> 
>And yet we have laws against murder - even though we can't "legislate
>it away".  You also make the faulty argument that since something is
>going to happen anyway - we shouldn't control it.  I've heard so
>many arguments like "More people are killed by drunk drivers then by
>guns, so let's eliminate the laws on gun".  Should we then argue,
>more people are killed in car accidents then by drunk drivers, so let's
>make it legal to drive drunk?"  We could continue that idea until you
>reach the point where there are no laws since we're all going to die
>anyway.

If sad that you had to pervert the argument that much to produce
your desired result. We punish drunk drivers for their *ACTIONS*.
We don't punish car owners because they may become drunk drivers.
Punish the *MISUSE* of firearms, not their ownership.


>You mean more laws on guns, right?

You obviously have no idea of what current law is or how it works
or the difference between ownership of an object and misuse of
an object, don't presume to add to what you don't understand.




-- 
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
 | Wayne J. Warf -- WWARF@ucs.indiana.edu -- I speak for myself only  |
 | Midterm Countdown-Bill and the Congress have to '94 to screw it up |
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+