Subject:
|
Re: New Web Page
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 May 1999 13:30:29 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
698 times
|
| |
|
|
I should probably stay out of this but...
Note that I don't personally own a gun.
Richard Dee wrote:
> In light of the events at Columbine, would you (plural, all
> Americans, anyone in general, and perhaps proponents of some
> political philosophies), still support gun ownership? Would
> it still be the contention that any one of the lives of the
> 15 that died would be insignificant, when weighed against the
> symbolic notion of freedom that the pro-gun people imply gun
> ownership to represent?
The availability of guns is a factor in the recent school tragedies, but
most of the tragedies would probably still have happened in some way
(though probably with fewer casualties) without guns. The major
contributing problems I see:
- the promotion of violence in media
- more importantly, the promotion of instant gratification
- the fact that all too often marginalized kids are ignored and told to
"take it like a man"
- lack of parental involvement
> Would pro-gun people still argue that "keeping the government
> in check," to be one of the tenets and responsibilities of
> gun ownership? Do people really think that the military
> would sit by and allow a dictatorship to evolve and rule?
> Do people actually believe the oft-repeated notion that
> people kill people, not guns?
As some one else mentioned, the military is usually the power behind
oppresive governments.
Also, as one who grew up in Lexington and Concord MA, and is therefore
much more educated about the start of our country than most Americans,
all I can say is that I really understand just why we give the right to
bear arms to individuals. I am not against reasonable laws which make a
real attempt to reduce the flow of guns to criminals (such as back
ground checks, being illegal for a convicted felon to own a gun, waiting
periods, etc).
> Will people keep voting for legislation that makes it easier
> to acquire weaponry? Will *any* legislation passed in relation
> to gun ownership continue to fail the innocent?
What legislation has been proposed lately which would make it easier to
acquire arms?
> Do people really, truly fear, or believe, that there is a gun-
> toting maniac around every corner? Or that their mild-mannered,
> harmless neighbour will snap, necessitating them to heavily
> arm themselves to protect against such a possibility?
No, but as many have mentioned, the criminal element doesn't live around
the corner (or at least not in the neighborhoods I live in, inner city
neighborhoods are another story), but they come where the wealth is.
> Or will there continue to be a mini-, localised arms race,
> and more innocents dying because no politician has the
> stomach to do anything about it.
>
> Think about it. By doing nothing for so many years, the problem
> has only gotten worse, and much harder to do anything about it.
> What real need has anyone to possess a gun. What real justification?
> When was the Constitution written, 1789? 210 years ago! What
> was life like then? Then, you could argue that justification
> existed. "Hostile" natives, the need to hunt for much of the
> food to be consumed, etc. ("Hostile" natives. Hmmmmm, a group
> of people, though not recognised as being part of the nation,
> excersising their democratic rights, both in what would later
> be defined in international law, and what would then have been
> their constitutional rights, to protect their homes, culture,
> and way of life, from what was then a far more hostile and
> powerful foe. Sound familiar? A nation being invaded for nothing
> more than profit, or to conduct "ethnic cleansing." Oh the irony,
> when the US government should decide to send in Apache helicoptors,
> to protect the Kosovans. Sending in a piece of military hardware
> to protect a group of people from "ethnic cleansing," named after
> a group of people "ethnically cleansed" by the owners' recent
> ancestors!) Back to the story.....
By your reasoning, no current government has any standing whatsoever to
fight for the rights of oppressed peoples, I guess we should have let
europe fall to Germany...
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: New Web Page
|
| (...) Maybe (...) How so? This is the only one that I don't 'get' right off. (...) I really think these last two bullets are right on. Everything else stems from these, and I really think that the second to last is derivative of the last. Parents (...) (25 years ago, 13-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: New Web Page
|
| Hi-- Frank, I hope you'll forgive my answering the previous post through yours. (...) Neither do I, Frank. But the *right* to own one is vital in the United States, and for more reason than weapons--it's a symbolic iteration of the democratic ideal (...) (25 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: New Web Page
|
| On Wed, 12 May 1999 00:32:49 GMT, Larry Pieniazek uttered the following profundities... (...) No comments on education. I am not of schooling age, nor have children, or likely to in the near future. (When considering flameage in your replies, (...) (25 years ago, 12-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
298 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
