From: ljb@parkcity.dr.att.com (BLO54620-BonhamLJ(DR2194)240)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Libertarians, guns, etc.
Date: 29 Sep 92 20:55:35 GMT

Unread news in misc.writing                               57 articles +    0 oldIn article <1760@rwing.UUCP>, pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep20.200735.7839@mtu.edu> cescript@mtu.edu (Charles Scripter) writes:
|> >In article <1992Sep20.181935.26300@news.stolaf.edu>,
|> >adams@mari.acc-admin.stolaf.edu (Brynach ap Adda) writes:
|> >
|> >> In article <1992Sep14.185345.7746@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
|> >> >In article <1992Sep14.010444.11220@news.stolaf.edu> adams@mari.acc-admin.stolaf.edu (Brynach ap Adda) writes:
|> >> >>But I'm not going let my desire ... possess weapons designed to kill people
|> >> >
|> >> >I used to study weapon design.  I wonder what weapons are being discussed
|> >> >here.  (Hint - guns don't qualify.)
|> >> 
|> >> Now this is patently absurd. Think: why were handguns invented when
|> >> a long gun would be just as lethal, indeed more so and at longer range?
|> >> They were made to be concealable, so they could be pulled out and
|> >> used *on other human beings* with little warning.
|> 
|> I was under the belief that sidearms (handguns) were designed to equip
|> folks whose role is primarily non combative with a defensive tool which
|> would not encumber their hands, etc and interfere with their primary
|> task.  The long gun being more powerful, it is preferable for one whose
|
  Yes, very correct.  But to elaborate.  The handgun was initially intended for
Cavalry forces as a response to the growing use of Musketeer Infantry in the
1600's.  As time went by armies found the pistol useful for officers (good
addition to the sword), artillery crews and engineers.


> task is primarily combative.  That is why the sidearm is the policeman's
|> PRIMARY weapon, its always with the officer, available for defense, etc.
|> 
|> When the officer is entering a scene KNOWN to have a high liklihood
|> of combat, the long gun is usually taken from the car and put into
|> use, instead of the handgun.  I heard one comment that to knowingly
|> take a handgun into a combat situation instead of a rifle was akin to
|> taking a boy to do a man's work.
|> 
|> The idea a handgun is intended to surprise someone in order to murder
|> that person is patently false.  One could say the same of a rifle, used
|> at long range, and make no more sense.  The only way the element of
|> surprise would be of use with a handgun would be to gain control of
|> a situation where one is being assaulted by some thug.  Another reason
|> for a concealable weapon is to not distress others - its an item
|> kept under clothes like one usually keeps certain parts of their
|> anatomy under covering clothes, in order to not upset others.
|> 
|> > other good points deleted...
|> 
|> -- 
|> pat@rwing.uucp                                  (Pat Myrto),  Seattle, WA
|>                       If all else fails, try:
|>          ...!uunet!{pilchuck, polari}!rwing!pat
|> WISDOM:    "Travelling unarmed is like boating without a life jacket" 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns