From: chuckh@apex.com (Chuck Huffington)
Subject: Re: Travelling armed
Keywords: Guns laws crime murder waiting periods 
Organization: Apex Computer Company
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 16:03:46 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.043429.15821@eskimo.celestial.com> kurt@eskimo.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum) writes:
>OK, WODDers, what's wrong with these arguments?  Why must our freedoms,
>lives and livelihoods continue to be sacrificed for your insane desire
>to keep people from being high or from partaking of pleasure in other ways?
>
>You get rid of the elements of crime and high-stakes risk associated with
>drugs and a *lot* of problems go away.  Sure, a few people will ingest
>drugs and then go and operate heavy machinery, just like they do right now.
>There might be even a temporary overshoot in the accident rate.  That would
>*still* be less than the ongoing murder rate with drugs illegal.  You also
>free up the resources tied up in *nonproductive* enterprises like jails and
>associated jobs (which otherwise create a vested interest in drugs remaining
>illegal, but contribute nothing else to economic productivity) to be used
>hopefully to aid economic recovery.  Moreover, some of those drugs (hemp,
>in particular) are generally useful plants, with a wide variety of desirable
>properties and by-products.

Do you really believe that the people making the huge profits selling illegal
drugs will just go away?  If the government is selling legal drugs
I would expect the gangs to sell something "better".  You don't want that
govt shit, this stuffs a lot better.

>Well, people *could* just tough it out and endure the waiting period.
>Aren't all of you gun nuts a little macho anyway :) ?
>I think the purpose of the waiting period is to find out if you are/were
>a saucer abductee, hear voices, or if you have had a set of mysterious gun
>accidents.  The thing is, if you do it *now*, and do the wait, then, after
>it's over, and you pass muster, you will have a weapon available for whatever
>you decide to do with it.  I personally think that a minimal demonstration
>of competence is called for;  I think that a person could iterate on
>competence testing until they got tired of it or passed.  Perhaps training
>in schools?  Part of PE?

Mandatory firearms instruction in the schools is a great idea.
Try to implement it.

If the true pupose of waiting periods is a background check, why
didn't the Brady Bill mandate background checks.  It didn't.
But it did allow a police chief to ash-can forms and block purchases
forever.  Nice hidden agenda.
>
>Perhaps the right to bear a handgun might be a matter to be put before the
>electorate: shall Jo Doaks be permitted to carry concealed handweapons? --
>where Jo Doaks would "run" (i. e. conduct a campaign, as it were, to convince
>the populace that they should carry a weapon) for the "privelege".
>Or it might be an adult rite of passage, a la Heinlein's stories.

Perhaps free speech should be the same.

>Hmmm...You weren't just thinking you could pull up to GunsToGo in your
>Bigfoot and snarf a pair of AK47's and a case of banana clips, did you?

Why not?  Doesn't matter, Washington doesn't allow full-autos.
Or did you mean AK47 look-alikes.  You can buy them.