From: mark@unicorn.com
Date: Tue May 25 1999 - 06:05:32 MDT
Joe E. Dees [joedees@bellsouth.net] wrote:
>Mindfully reacting to the misuse of hardware by calling for laws
>restricting access to the hardware by those who are most likely to
>misuse it (violent criminals, spouse abusers, the insane, children,
>etc.) is both rational and supported by any faculty of reason
>deserving of the name.
Yet it won't work. Even the Dumbocrats have admitted that their new laws
would have done nothing to stop the school shootings. The list of laws the
killers at Littleton broke is two or three pages long: why would another
one make any difference?
>You either know, or should, that the effects of
>such measures can only be determined in practice.
Indeed; DC has pretty much banned gun ownership for decades now, and has
one of the highest murder rates in the world. Numerous countries have
banned guns 'to reduce crime'... it's never worked. Why should this time
be any different?
>BTW, how dare you presume to arrogate yourself
>the "moral responsibility" for the consequenses of an anonymous
>other's death?
Joe, you're an utter fucking hypocrite. You're arguing for laws to disarm
people, many of whom will be killed as a consequence, and you complain
that we're causing anonymous people's deaths.
>But not compared to the massacres which are now routinely
>perpetrated in our schools by those to whom we look to carry the
>future.
Which must contribute a whole... oh... maybe 0.1% to the US murder rate.
>I'm a military vet, a hunter, and
>own five guns of my own, yet the idea of these kids killing each
>other like they are in some crazed puter game is incomprehensible
>to me.
No, you *REFUSE* to comprehend it. The answer is simple: the government
youth concentration camps are utterly fucked up, and life there for smart
kids is hell. The government has chosen to disarm teachers, so the kids
know that if they go in shooting they'll have no resistance, and the media
love to splash reports of these crimes over the front pages, so they'll
get lots of publicity. Hey, you're a smart kid, you've been shit on all
your life by stupid assholes, now you have a chance to get even and get
famous. Why not?
Only to those who prefer to push their own agenda rather than solve the
real problems find this incomprehensible. If you still do, how about you
go and read: http://slashdot.org/articles/99/04/25/1438249.shtml.
Oh, and BTW, since the media outrage against the Littleton shootings,
there have been another four or five around the world. Why aren't you
campaigning to ban media reporting, since the latest shootings almost
certainly wouldn't have happened were it not for the sensationalist
news reports?
After pointing out that he would kill those who opposed his laws, Joe
said:
>The insane among us are those who, for whatever sick or
>profitteering reason, not only refuse to close the loopholes which
>lead to such weapons possession, but who continue to either
>stand idly by or applaud as the gun industry, to support its future
>position in the marketplace, sells maiming, paralysis, coma and
>death to our children via the same shamelessly cynical product
>placement ad campaigns we see employed to push tobacco.
Joe also said, in an earlier message:
>The very same tactic the Inquisitionists, Nazis and antiabortionists
>use: First demonize those who disagree with you, call them villains
>and consciousless subhumans; then you can feel righteous pride
>when you kill them, rather than guilt or shame.
Pot. Kettle. Black. Feeling that righteous pride yet, Joe?
The defence rests.
Mark
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:48 MST