From: Jason Joel Thompson (jasonjthompson@home.com)
Date: Sat Sep 23 2000 - 15:57:14 MDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Lorrey" <retroman@turbont.net>
> > Or have I misinterpreted you?
>
> Very much so, though I think its more a matter of your comprehension.
>
He (Hal) is not misinterpreting you-- he's simply drawing a different
conclusion from the agreed upon premise: if you intend to carry a weapon,
you should be prepared to kill another human being.
The question he's raising is simple: does the preparation necessary to kill
another human being, alter one's attitude towards humans in general-- and if
so, are there negative side effects to such preparation that might interfere
with one's attitude towards people in general?
I think the answer is clearly yes, but the significance of any such
alteration must be judged on a case by case basis. How significantly does
possession of, and willingness to use, a firearm reduce your net chance of
death, from all possible causes? Do you 'care' if your attitude towards
people is altered?
I'm going to quote a few passages from you Mike:
> They are sick people that cannot be reasoned with,
> cannot be reconciled with, who have no pity, no mercy, no compassion. If
they
> don't value your life, then they obviously don't value their own.
This is, to my mind, an example of what Hal is talking about. Is it true,
in actuality, that all people you encounter with whom you are required to
employ deadly force (robber, thug, murderer, etc, you can make your own
list) -cannot- be reasoned with, -cannot- be reconciled with, have -no-
pity, mercy or compassion and fail to value their own lives?
Of course not. They are, in fact, complex human beings, driven by unseen
motives, and often susceptible to all sorts of persuasion.
Your decision to treat them as described above is, in fact, part of your
mindset-- something I suspect makes you more effective in just such a
situation.
So we're clear here, I actually don't mind that-- I appreciate that you have
made a decision to empower yourself over those who might seek to harm you,
and I respect that.
> People who are 'trusting,
> open, and accepting of the human limitations and weaknesses' of murderers
are
> no longer people (as far as the murderer is concerned, they are just prey,
and
> then they are dead
Again, you are stripping someone of their humanity-- which is the exact
"distancing and depersonalizing," to which Hal was referring.
Again, I'm not really judging this attitude-- but I don't think it's wrong
to consider the consequences of your mindset-- and to ask whether, on an
individual level, those consequences are acceptable.
My actual chance of losing my life in a violent confrontation that could
have otherwise been prevented had I been armed and prepared to use deadly
force is quite slim-- but if I lived elsewhere, or had a different
occupation, or had family members in situations of realistic harm, I would
be prepared to take the necessary steps to protect our lives/interests.
It would not make me happy to have to prepare to kill someone else, however.
There would be real consequences to such a decision.
--
::jason.joel.thompson::
::founder::
www.wildghost.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:31:08 MST