From: Joshua Clingenpeel (Josh.Clingenpeel@wwu.edu)
Date: Fri May 28 1999 - 15:47:51 MDT
Sorry, different definition of Fascist, or at least a different
understanding. Someone who seeks to gain power over others with brute
force. I could change my definition to include ultra-nationalists, but then
I wouldn't be able to use it so much ;)
I've already posted concerning 18th century warfare, and I do believe it's
sad that combat has lost its gentlemanly qualities, if you can say that with
a straight face.
>I will repeat what I have said before: Gun owners are demonstrated to be
far
>more peaceful, non-confrontational, and less likely to commit violent
crimes
>than non-gun owners. That is far more civilized than the spasms of street
>violence and government opression we have seen from the likes of gun
>controllers.
I'm actually curious as to where you get your information. If someone has
the ability to use violent force, they are going to be less violent? I
don't see how this is logical. The spasms of street violence we're caused
by non-gun owners? It seems as though they would have to own guns first...
Gun controllers was also misunderstood. What I intended from that statement
was that we should practice conscientious control, so that some day there
are no more guns. My cynical nature tells me this is impossible, so I think
I'll drop out of this argument now, and will just read the posts and hope
for enlightenment. But please send all those statistics about non-violent
gun-owners through...
Josh
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael S. Lorrey [mailto:mike@lorrey.com]
Sent: Friday, May 28, 1999 2:35 PM
To: extropians@extropy.com
Subject: Re: Security [was Guns]
Joshua Clingenpeel wrote:
> Bad news, Brian. Second Amendment was written during a time when people
> carried flint-lock muzzle-loaders, when they were concerned with British
> troops crashing down the front door, when armed combat was an honorable
> affair.
Wrongo. Many of the signors of the Decl. of Ind. owned their own cannon.
Armed
combat and even duelling was an honorable affair, but the fact they are not
now
says volumes to the degeneracy of the value of honor in society than to the
currency of the concept of self defense.
> Unfortunately, the Second Amendment is one of the only Amendments
> to the Constitution that has not properly stood the tests of time. It is
> reasonable for a person to keep a gun in their home, but realize that
there
> has been a surge of lawsuits involving would-be burglars suing home-owners
> for damage inflicted upon them by firearms and knives. There are now
legal
> precedents making it difficult for home-owners to maintain their right to
> use their guns in the privacy of their own home.
The only precedents which have withstood court tests are those where a
homeowner
shot a criminal in the back as they were leaving the domicile. And those
were in
states that don't respect much of the Constitution anymore anyways.
> The important thing to remember is that gun safety and gun control are
> important; people should educate their children to respect and understand
> guns, and efforts should be made to make it difficult to own a gun. I
> personally have no problem with people owning firearms, keeping them in
> their homes. But as soon as you hit the streets packing heat, you're a
> potential threat to everyone around you. The NRA's spokesmen and their
> red-in-the-face, pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-fingers attitude is frightening,
> fascist, and indicative of barbarism. Personal security aside, you just
> want to feel big and powerful.
One warning: Don't ever accuse me of fascism. The definition of fascism is
as
follows:
from Encyclopedia.com:
"philosophy of government that glorifies the nation-state at the expense
of the individual... Fascism generally gains support by promising social
justice to discontented elements of the working and middle classes, and
social order to powerful financial interests."
This describes the gun controllers FAR more than anyone who has ever
promoted
gun rights.
I will repeat what I have said before: Gun owners are demonstrated to be far
more peaceful, non-confrontational, and less likely to commit violent crimes
than non-gun owners. That is far more civilized than the spasms of street
violence and government opression we have seen from the likes of gun
controllers.
Mike Lorrey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:51 MST