From: Joe E. Dees (joedees@bellsouth.net)
Date: Wed Mar 15 2000 - 16:59:06 MST
Date sent: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 14:42:52 -0800
From: James Swayze <swayzej@earthlink.net>
To: extropians@extropy.com
Subject: Re: [GUNS] Re: g*n c*ntr*l
Send reply to: extropians@extropy.com
> Ok, I've kept silent long enough. CAVEAT, Brian the following is not directed at
> you. I believe you only relayed information so I'm not criticizing you or your
> opinion, I don't even know them. The comments below are for everyone.
>
> Brian D Williams wrote:
> >
> > Ineligible Persons:
> >
> > The following classes of people are ineligible to possess, receive,
> > ship, or transport firearms or ammunition.
> >
> > -- Those persons dishonorably discharged from the military
> >
>
> This is soo wrong. There are a number of reasons one can get dishonorably
> discharged from the military that have nothing to do with whether you are good
> enough for gun ownership.
>
> Warning upcoming rant below:
>
> I am truly surprised at all the rhetoric here. Let me explain. I gathered from
> all the Objectivist leanings here that personal liberty would be high on this
> lists list. Now I consider myself a moderate liberal but in some ways I would be
> more Libertarian than those of you claiming to be. Let me explain.
>
> No one, no government, no man, no woman, no not even a deity has the right to
> tell me I cannot protect myself or my loved ones in like kind to what ever
> threatens me or my own. If those threatening me or my own happen to have guns or
> knives or baseball bats or whatever, then I have the right to have the same or
> better to protect my life and that of my loved ones. Who gave me that right? I
> DID! How's that for personal liberty?!
>
> Quote statistics and theory till you are blue in the face, it means nothing.
> What does mean something, no what means EVERYTHING is MY life and the lives of
> those I love. I mean get real people. We are supposed to be Life Extensionists!
> How extended will your life be if some low life, that has no respect for his/her
> own life much less yours, decides to forcefully take something from you and caps
> you so you cannot identify or for simply the thrill? It happens, it's not just a
> hollywood cliché.
>
> Of course I want something done to keep guns out of the criminals and other
> TRULY "ineligibles" hands. However, let's get real again. What good is an
> unloaded gun when the creep breaking your door down was at least clever enough
> to load his/hers before getting anywhere near you? Absolutely none, might as
> well not have it to begin with. Ever hear of the Darwin awards? That's what I'd
> give anyone that actually did put their bullets out of reach when it really
> counts.
>
> One last thing. In an ideal world there would be no guns. Actually that's
> trivial. In an ideal world their would be no NEED of guns or anything else for
> self defense. We don't live in that world yet. Remove all the guns and their
> manufacturers somehow magically today and by tomorrow there'd be millions of
> them owned by guess who? That's right every miscreant, every lowlife, every
> psycho with even half a brain would have a home made, yes crude but effective,
> garage model and be knocking your door down because you likely will not have
> stooped as low.
>
> Ok, done ranting. No need to plonk. I've said all I will say. I won't even
> respond to whatever objections you all may find against my logic. I believe if
> you reduce it to what's really important, your own and your loved ones precious
> and maybe even immortal lives--if we here have our fondest wishes come true, and
> then just use your imagination--dare to picture the worst actually happening to
> you yes even to you and yours, then you will have to agree that NO ONE has the
> right to FORCE you to be vulnerable.
>
Not even armed lowlifes - which is why I want them disarmed.
>
> James
> --
> "Quod de futuris non est determinata omnino veritas"
> NOSTRADAMUS 15TH Century
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:27:25 MST