To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 13038
13037  |  13039
Subject: 
Re: The *militia* saved flight 93 from a worse fate...
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 21 Sep 2001 19:24:24 GMT
Viewed: 
233 times
  
Hello Larry,

... however they did this without guns. So how does the firearms discussion
get into this article?

Not following you there. The author was making a point about who the militia
was, a point that many (with their prattle about the militia being
exclusively the National Guard) miss, or worse, deliberately distort.

Well, it seems I need to elaborate on this, then.

First, the article states:

Ask yourself every time you hear a proposal for increased "security": Would
have in any way have averted the disaster that actually happened? Will it
avert a future suicide attack on the public by other new and different means?

This is the right question to ask, and it is EXACTLY why I am so critical
towards military action.

A few paragraphs further down, you can read in the article:

Rather than provide for training and encouraging persons to be able to defend
themselves ‹ and to exercise their training responsibly ‹ powerful lobbying
groups have and will continue to advocate passivity and disarmament. The
vociferous anti-self-defense, anti-gun crusaders of the past decades will not
give up now.

Now, this really contradicts any of the claims previously made. Wearing guns
does NOT help against any of the types of terror we have seen so far, nor
can I imagine it will prevent terrorists from inventing new diabolic ways of
killing people. Ready availablility of arms, with no questions asked, MAY
make it easier for terrorists, but then, they have always and everywhere
known where to get arms.

Moreover, equalizing an anti-gun attitude with a passive anti-self-defense
one is at least questionable. The terms "vociferous" and "crusade", IMO,
apply a lot more to the pro-gun than to the anti-gun fraction, BTW.

So, yes, I do think there is a hidden agenda with this article. You could
also call this pandering, but I certainly don't want to kick off another
discussion about what this term means ;-)

Greetings

Horst



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: The *militia* saved flight 93 from a worse fate...
 
(...) Not following you there. The author was making a point about who the militia was, a point that many (with their prattle about the militia being exclusively the National Guard) miss, or worse, deliberately distort. (23 years ago, 21-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

26 Messages in This Thread:










Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR