From: VEAL@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: US as No. 1 (3 data books)
Date: 27 Jan 93 22:52:40 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education

[sci.econ deleted for newsgroups line.  The other groups are barely
involved, but I don't know where Mr. Munro is reading from.]

In article <4046@wyse.wyse.com> jmunro@wyse.wyse.com (Jim Munro x2497) writes:
>In article <C1IH0o.MJx@news.chalmers.se> d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell) writes:
>>
>>>Mandatory government/military service
>>
>>  It teaches people how to handle guns, and handle themselves around guns,
>>and is IMHO the single greatest factor in the difference in murder statistics.
>>
>
>If this were even remotely true, then those countries with no military service
>requirements would have much higher murder rates, right?    wrong!
>
>There are many social and historical factors which tend to make
>the US a more violence prone society. However, the sheer number and availability
>of guns has to be the single most important factor which corrolates with
>the high murder rate.

      Excellent deduction.  Unfortunately not quite as iron-clad as we might
like.

>You will note that almost no politician has the guts to stand up for real
>restrictions on guns.        

      I beg to differ, depending on what you consider "real" restrictions,
my favorites being Sen. Chafee and Rep. Owens.

>Right now there is renewed discussion on getting rid
>of assault rifles. So what. That will only mean that there will only be about
>ten thousand other types of firearms to purchase.

      True, but that still doesn't make it right.  :-)

>The gun lobby and its pawn, the NRA has successfully got the American poulation
>to believe that any restricion is bad and against the constitution.

       I'll buy the gun lobby being a pawn of the NRA, but not the other
way around.  If you don't believe, check the operating budgets of the
main (sports) section of the NRA versus the lobbying branch (NRA-ILA).
       And I generally find it entertaining to be told I've been duped by
an organization I neither belong to, nor get any information from, which
is portrayed like the ulimate evil of society in virtually every form of
national media (most of which refuse it's advertising and contribute to
pro-gun-control organizations).

>The constitution clearly talks about the right to bear 'arms'. The government has
>successfully banned all kinds of 'arms' including certain knives, blackjacks, etc..

       Then the government is wrong.  (Imagine that.)  Because the government
violates the Constitution doesn't change the Constitution.

>I say ban the manufacture, sale, and/or export of all firearms and 
>ammunition except for strictly military and controlled 'sporting' 
>purposes. Put the handgun makers out of business.

       First, you aren't going to put the handgun makers out of business.  
Just who exactly do you think *makes* the weapons the military uses?
       
       But I'm curious.  You say that 'arms' doesn't mean guns, since 
obviously knives are other weapons are not protected.  Just what does
it mean?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Veal Univ. of Tenn. Div. of Cont. Education Info. Services Group
PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  (Mail to VEAL@utkvm1.utk.edu will bounce.)
"For every action there is an equal, and opposite, government program"
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.canada