Subject:
|
Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 Jan 2001 01:35:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
865 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> Think about this for a moment:
> 1) Are all walls the same?
> 2) Are all washing machines the same?
> 3) What angle will a bullet hit a wall at?
> 4) What angle will a bullet hit a washing machine at?
>
> I concede that a bullet may well go through a wall and a WM. But, I also
> argue that it may not go through a wall (my own are 200-300mm sandstone) or
> a WM.
Call the question.
Are we arguing ballistics, or discussing the role of a well regulated
militia in a free society? (or even in Canada, not quite free at this time)
I'm confused.
For the record, I concede that there is a non zero probability that a bullet
fired may go in ANY direction after impacting ANY thing. That includes
directly back at the shooter after hitting a feather pillow, and that
includes going straight through a 3M thick stone fireplace. Both of those
are highly (ridiculously?) unlikely but cannot be ruled out.
So what?
That is, what is your point exactly?
Discussing all this ballistics stuff is at best mildly amusing, but totally
beside the point, IMHO.
I for one *accept the risk* from this and from all sorts of other unintended
consequences of having and using this and various other tools. The tool
benefits are too large to turn aside from them. That risk trade off applies
to all classes of tools. I make that trade off every time I get in an
automobile, which tool is more likely to kill me than my gun (since I've
owned my first gun I've had precisely 0 gun related accidents or near
accidents but have been involved in several accidents and near accidents
with automobiles, at least one of which could have killed me with no
trouble) (1)(2)
Further, force projection devices are in a special category for reasons I've
already discussed... and I don't judge them merely by their utility vs.
probability of harm, like I do paring knives, high tension lines, cleaning
solvents and unicycles, to name a few other tools. They get a pass even if
they are dangerous. No need to be a darn fool around them, of course, but
they are not subject to the same calculus as pitchforks (even LEGO ones).
1 - Highly unscientific, no statistical validity as a predictor, but I can
name off three LUGNETters who have been in car accidents, none of them their
fault, just since LUGNet started. Maybe it's a right wing conspiracy to keep
them quiet, but to my knowledge no LUGNetter has been involved in a gun
accident. What's that you say? Apples and oranges comparision? So are most
of the other statistics quoted so far.
2- BTW none of the accidents and near misses I've been in have been my
fault, except for one near miss in which I was being a darn fool, using my
cell while driving and paying too much attention to the call and not enough
to the road. I almost rear ended someone, had to swerve around them.
Thank goodness no one was in the shoulder. Thank goodness the shoulder was
paved and it was a dry sunny day, or I would have lost control. As it was I
had to fight for several hundred meters to regain control of the Stratus.
Thank goodness I was in the Stratus, I would have rolled the Durango for
sure since I was 45 degrees from direction of travel decelerating from 60
MPH several times trying to recover and the Durango has grippy tires.
But I ain't giving up driving and I ain't giving up cell phones (although I
am trying to swear off using them at the same time... it's very hard for a
road warrior like me to give up calling ahead to see if my flight is on
time!)... too useful. Still, I have to try to be more careful with cars, I
do like to go fast.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
| (...) No, not really. I think that your average Lego fan is of above average inteligence, and is more likely to follow through in actually being reasonably careful to unload the gun before trying to clean it :) It is also possible/probable that of (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
| (...) Thanks Larry....agree with most of your post except... (...) Yes, you are correct. However, I must point out that we're probably the most free non-free nation in the world. For all intents and purposes we consider ourselves free: ... God keep (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
| (...) My point is that, even when well trained (and I doubt you are), when a person fires a gun the bullet can end up almost anywhere. (...) In your opionion. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
| (...) Think about this for a moment: 1) Are all walls the same? 2) Are all washing machines the same? 3) What angle will a bullet hit a wall at? 4) What angle will a bullet hit a washing machine at? I concede that a bullet may well go through a wall (...) (24 years ago, 9-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
188 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
|
|
|
|
