Re: [GUNS] Re: Better people

From: EWyatt794@aol.com
Date: Wed Jun 09 1999 - 18:42:18 MDT


In a message dated 6/9/99 8:39:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
joedees@bellsouth.net writes:

<< > > > a peaceful person needs to be free to work to support his life, and
he needs
> > > to be free to fight to defend it.
> >
> > No one needs to have weapons to kill people at a distance. The only
> > reason to have them is to protect yourself from people who have them.
> > Argh, shit, I'm being sucked into this stupid argument again!
>
> Its a matter of you refusing to acknowledge your own blind spots. Who
protects you
> from the government? From the criminals who do not obey your laws against
gun
> ownership? Get a new newscaster yet?
>
 "Clem, get yer squirrel gun an' let's overthrow the gummint!"
 Sheesh! Every time someone puts this specious reasoning forth, it
 sounds more ridiculous (and don't bring the Swiss up; the main
 reason the Reich didn't invade them was that the Swiss were hiding
 their billions in stolen gold for them). >>

I missed the specious reasoning. I thought "Who watches the watchers?" was
still quite a conundrum for any "-archy" or "-cracy" theory. Could you please
show us why it isn't? (or what the real specious reasoning was, if I've
misunderstood)

William



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:05 MST