From: gurgle@netcom.com (Pete Gontier)
Subject: Re: Registering "Assault Keys"
Organization: cellular
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 04:41:48 GMT

pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto) writes:

>Kids have accidents with guns because they don't know that it could
>be poison to them, either.  Its just this curious metallic object...

We weren't discussing accidents. We were discussing Kid X shooting
Kid Y in some kind of 1) juvenile power game, or 2) cops 'n' robbers.

>And this is, of course, ignoring the fact that the only thing that
>is LOWER on the accidental death scale than guns for kids is poison
>gas...

I'm not sure what follows from this.

>As to glorifying guns on TV, how about putting all the energy you seem
>to want to apply to deny MY choice whether to own a gun or not to making
>the producers of those cartoons and movies clean up THEIR act?

Maybe I am. You have no way of knowing. In the meantime, you still
have to deal with my anti-gun arguments, because whatever my stance
is on this media glorification, it can't be inconsistent with this
argument. Apples and oranges.

>Would
>you be as cavalier about someone trying to deny YOUR choice on something
>you consider of signifigant importance to you (assuming the choice being
>foisted on you is not the one you would take). Since you don't care
>for guns, a ban on them will not affect you, at least in the short term,
>so you consider that an acceptable restriction,

The fact is that plenty of activities, substances, and what-have-you
are banned even though plenty of people don't do or use them. I don't
smoke pot. I don't break into other peoples' computers. I don't
expose myself to old ladies. Like shooting guns, I don't have any
urge to do any of those things. I don't see what that has to do with
whether I should be allowed to, though.

>but the TV producers
>cleaning up their act might remove some shows you enjoy, and that would
>be an inconvenience from your point of view?

...and I stopped beating my wife, let's see, about two weeks ago.
Really, you don't need to get so fired up that you have to put words
in my mouth.

>Or could it be that a ban
>on guns looks to be the quick fix, even though I have yet to see any
>evidence of its efficacy in reducing either homicide or other crimes of
>violence, or overall accidental deaths.

Quick, I dunno. Sure wouldn't hurt. Let's give it a try.

>If accidental death prevention
>is your goal, there are many things one could devote their energies to
>that would save a *LOT* more lives than going after guns.

How many calories do you suppose I'm burning by typing in these
messages? Perhaps I also get a kick out of expressing myself in
the English language -- how do you amortize? It's silly for you
to suggest that I don't devote my energies to preventing other
kinds of accidental death. Perhaps I do, perhaps I don't. It's
not relevant.

>Only problem
>with these are are that they are not considered fashionable, 'hip', or
>'cool' or whatever term is applcable these days.

I was the guy in high school who wore pink slacks and got beat up
by the football team. How concerned about 'hip' can I be?

>The *ONLY* difference between a gun of some type and another tool that
>can be used to cause death or bodily injury is that so much of our
>movie/TV fare glorifies solving ones problems with a bullet.

This leads into a whole other argument: what's the purpose of a
handgun? I say it was designed solely for killing people. Others
dredge up handgun hunter magazines. Who knows? But it's another
argument, so let's leave it alone for the moment.

>Please explain why
>*I* should be penalized for something some irresponsible producers seem
>to like to feed us for a non-stop diet, or that irresponsible (but
>oh-so-progressive) community 'leaders' could be taking to address the
>root CAUSES of urban violence (except that it would require recognizing
>some unpleasant truths, and a bit of effort)?  Better to blame some
>inantimate hardware...

It's true that addressing the underlying problems would be the more
elegant solution. But it'll never happen. All we can do at this point
is patch the system. This seems like a good patch to me.

>Of course, all this lacks the appeal of the 'magic bullet':  Just pass
>this one more 'reasonable' law, and all our problems will go away...

I understand that a ban on handguns would merely be a band-aid. That
doesn't change my preference.
-- 
 Pete Gontier // EC Technology // gurgle@netcom.com
Newsgroups: sci.crypt