Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!zben
From: zben@umcp-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Handguns (and other controlled dangerous substances)
Message-ID: <2394@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 3-Sep-83 18:15:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.2394
Posted: Sat Sep  3 18:15:27 1983
Date-Received: Mon, 5-Sep-83 04:16:06 EDT
Organization: Univ. of Maryland, Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 19


 It seems we are back to the same old question again.  To wit, suppose
we have a stimulus S and a population P.  Application of S to P divides
P into two subpopulations P+ and P-, where P+ is the subpopulation that
can responsibly "handle" S, and P- is the subpopulation that cannot and
is presumably damaged by S.  Now the $( 2^6 * 10^3 ) question:

 How much should we infringe upon the human rights of P+ in order to
protect P-?

 If you think about it, you will realize this question applies to guns,
legalized prostitution, legalized gambling, and all "recreational drugs".
I am from the superconservative school that says the government has its
hands in too many pies already.  I do NOT want them to protect me.  As
a matter of basic human rights I should be able to shoot up crankcase
oil if it suits my fancy!

Ben (makes Reagan look like a communist) Cranston
(...UMCP-CS!ZBEN or ZBEN@UMD2.ARPA)