From: sybok@athena.mit.edu (The Rifleman)
Subject: Re: democratic platform
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 23:26:56 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.174742.4455@advtech.uswest.com> steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak) writes:
>> = (Phil Ngai) writes:
>>> = (Mark A Zabel) writes:
>>>> = ? (You'll have to ask Phil):
>
>>>>>    Firearms. We support a reasonable waiting period to permit
>>>>>background checks for purchases of handguns, as well as assault weapons
>
>>>It remains to be seen whether the limited restrictions mentioned in the
>>>platform above work.
>
>>Does this mean you have no problem with a mere 24-hour waiting period
>>before a woman could get an abortion?
>
>Apples and oranges being compared - and you know it full well, Ngai.
>
>Waiting periods for purchasing firearms can help spot those with criminal
>records or mental problems, people I hope you agree shouldn't have guns. 

Instant Check systems don't require any waiting period, yet Sarah Brady
and her Gun control nazis favor a waiting period *without* background
check (Brady Bill) over an instant check system (Staggers BIll).

>Anybody that is so in a hurry to get a gun that they can't wait seven 
>goddam days is the EXACT person you don't want buying a gun immediately.
THAT'S COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT!!!  First off, there are MANY circumstances
in which people have death threats made against them by former lovers or
acquaintances, and yet don't own a gun.  THESE PEOPLE NEED A GUN IMMEDIATELY.
There was one case where a lady tried to purchase a handgun after receiving
a death threat, couldn't because of the waiting period, and so bought
an illegal gun.  She used it less than 24 hours later in the self-defense
shooting of an attacker.  Besides, the right to keep and bear arms is
spelled out clearly in the BIll of Rights, while the "right to abortion"
is only a recently discovered right (1972).  If either of the two is
more sound on a Constitutional basis, it's the right to keep and bear arms.

>Forcing a woman to wait a "mere" 24 hours to get an abortion makes zero
>sense.  It's just something you control freaks are into.

Forcing a woman to wait a "mere" 24 hours to get a gun makes zero
sense.  Instant checks can be performed in minutes.  It's just something
leftist gun control freaks are into.

>She has done no wrong and is doing no wrong.  Who knows better than she
>if she wants an abortion?  Or gall bladder surgery?  Or a cap on her tooth?

She has done no wrong and is doing no wrong.  She merely wishes to
protect her life against the brute physical strength of a male who has
threatened her life and who she is helpless against without a firearm.
(Call 911 you say?  BULLSHIT.  In NUMEROUS cases, not the least of which
was the LA RIOT, the police have appeared too late to do anything but
clean up the mess after the crime.  According to accepted and documented
SC cases, the police have no legal obligation to protect specific individuals.)
>
>Maybe you could clarify this left-field comparison of yours.

Maybe you could clarify your left-field comparison.

 
     "Laws against the carrying of arms disarm only the law-abiding."
     
       "WHEN GUNS ARE ILLEGAL, ONLY THE GOVERNMENT WILL HAVE GUNS."

Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:115 talk.politics.misc:34916