Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site rabbit.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!eagle!allegra!alice!rabbit!jj
From: jj@rabbit.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Re: RE: Handguns for Criminals ONLY! - (nf)
Message-ID: <2065@rabbit.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 14-Oct-83 13:09:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: rabbit.2065
Posted: Fri Oct 14 13:09:38 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 16-Oct-83 06:19:36 EDT
References: <3189@uiucdcs.UUCP>, <518@alberta.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 49


	
	No, of course he doesn't.  This question is silly.
	-----------------------
	   That's just the point... The Soviets killed for the same reason
	as he said he was willing to kill but although he is willing to 
	justify the act when HE does it, he isn't willing to justify the
	act when SOMEONE ELSE does it.
	
	   If you can justify shooting the toaster stealer <on principle>
	then how can't you the soviet actions in a similar situation?
	
	   Stephen Samuel
	    (alberta!stephen)

I guess that some people don't see any difference between a person who
entered a home for the express purpose of committing a crime,
and of people who were UNWITTING passengers on a jet that may or
may not have been off course deliberately.  It's easy to justify not
shooting the latter, while it's harder to justify NOT shooting the former
(or using non-deadly force if the situation permits).

I think the real problem here is that it's hard for a person with one
set of ideals and opinions to admit (or to indeed even believe) that a 
person with a more practical set of ideals, etc, is capable of reasonable
thought.  In fact, given the debate in net.followup (and net.flame, where
all this emotional bullcrap belongs), I think it's safe to say that
the presumption is made that any person who disagrees with the writer
is incapable of reason. 
 ****This same assumption clearly pervades the standard ugly American 
 attitude toward the USSR, Central America, hippies, rednecks, conservatives, 
 liberals, and life in general.****
Perhaps on a net that consists strictly of educated professionals we
could all assume that the opposition consists of more than purveyors of
unreasoning rhetoric.  <Please note that this assumption would mean that you,
the writer, should abandon your own unreasoning rhetoric.  ?Perhaps
that is asking too much?>

Please move the emotionally loaded handgun stuff back to net.flame,
where emotion and rage are SUPPOSED to run rampant.  I'll be there.
Perhaps the discussion of handgun regulation belongs in net.politics,
but the way that it's being discussed (at least to date) belongs strictly
in net.flame, not net.followup, net.politics, or net.anything_else.
Let's save the rest of the net for useful (and WORK RELATED) functions.
-- 
 O   o   From the pyrolagnic keyboard of
   ~              rabbit!jj
 -v-v-
 \^_^/