WEAPONS: More Non-Lethal Weapons (was Re: Cryonics propaganda...)

From: mark@unicorn.com
Date: Thu Jun 03 1999 - 07:48:10 MDT


dwayne [dwayne@pobox.com] wrote:
>Not that I am overly squeamish about killing people, I just think that
>as a mark of self-respect you should minimise the harm you cause
>wherever possible.

With the possible exception of Joe, I think everyone in this discussion
would agree with that. It's the people who disagree (i.e. violent
criminals) who we're worried about.

>I'd rather a population heavily armed with tazers, say, than machine
>pistols.

Even if that resulted in higher crime rates because crooks who wouldn't
shoot their victims with machine pistols before robbing/raping/whatever
would happily stun them with tazers? Even if people who would have walked
away from a fight if armed with machine pistols start having tazer shootouts
in the street? Even if people start tazering others and then bashing their
brains out? Even if crooks who would have surrendered peacefully if their
only other choice was to machinegun a cop will happily have a tazer
shootout, knowing that it won't kill them?

Non-lethal weapons create many, many new problems of their own.

    Mark



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:57 MST