From: Dana Hedberg (dah@signalinteractive.com)
Date: Tue Mar 14 2000 - 11:54:41 MST
Zero Powers wrote:
>
> >From: Anton Sherwood <bronto@pobox.com>
> >
> >Okay, I confess, every time I take public transport and have a gun with
> >me, I imagine what I might do if that creep from the Long Island
> >Railroad were to appear. And sometimes I fantasize about getting the
> >drop on Gianluigi Ferri, who shot eight people in the building where I
> >now work (a year before I started there). Guess that makes me one sick
> >fuck, eh?
>
> *You* might say that. I must confess that every time I take public
> transport I imagine what I nice way to travel it would be if I didn't have
> to worry about somebody sitting next to me with a cannon in his pocket
> fantasizing about the _Dirty Harry_ movie he watched last night.
>
> -Zero
>
The issue here is not the presence of the gun but rather one of poor
impulse control. If I'm in an environment where I feel that people are
likely to act on their fanciful ruminations about "Dirty Harry", the
presence of a gun is a somewhat secondary concern. Unfortunately, this
kind of environment exists in just about any public place. I try to
minimize contact with the more dubious environments, but I also don't
let it rule my life.
In this debate, people who are against guns (or are for stricter gun
laws/enforcement, etc.) I think are missing a vital point. They want
blanket "punishments" for the actions a limited few. As well, it seems
they can't see the forest for the trees. They continually point to the
weapon as the problem. Some go a bit further and say it's access to the
weapon, or accountability of the people/dealers/NRA/parents that give
them access to weapons. In actuality it's the mentality/psychological
make-up of the person that uses a gun (or any weapon for that matter) to
be destructive against another person(s). Oh, to be sure, there are
people who ask the question why. But the answer is either too complex or
too frightening to understand that very little is done on this front.
Too many people are willing to pronounce guns as evil and ignore the
fact that there was a person behind that weapon using it for ill. There
was a person with a *reason* for using that weapon the way they did.
That is where the issue lies.
On a side note, a possible solution for children (say under seven or
eight; someone whose reasons are fathomable, it's just that they don't
understand consequences yet) having an improbable time of using a gun
would be to increase the force required to pull the trigger. Something
an adult could easily manage, but would give small fingers no chance at
pulling the trigger. Safeties are the first line of defense, and a
non-hair-trigger mechanism would be a good back up.
-Dana
-- ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* First freedom from, then freedom to.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:27:23 MST