Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!gargoyle!shallit From: shallit@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP (Jeff Shallit) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Gun Control...again Message-ID: <349@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> Date: Thu, 28-Feb-85 00:50:48 EST Article-I.D.: gargoyle.349 Posted: Thu Feb 28 00:50:48 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 1-Mar-85 08:06:13 EST References: <> Reply-To: shallit@gargoyle.UUCP (Jeff ) Organization: U. Chicago - Computer Science Lines: 29 Summary: davidl@tekig5.UUCP (David Levadie) writes: >... Why should I submit to the SLIGHTEST inconvenience >because some two-bit jerk has a macho complex about guns and therefore >abuses them? WHY??? WHY??? Nobody on this braindamaged net will even >DISCUSS that question, even though SEVERAL people have asked it. It >must be just too mentally taxing to contemplate - it's easier to just >go about blathering statistics, and arguing fruitlessly about whether >or not "guns cause crime", etc., etc, etc... I can think of at least two reasons why. First, a considerable number of handguns later used in crimes have been stolen from otherwise "responsible" owners. In fact, Professor Mark Moore of Harvard University has estimated that as many as 225,000 handguns are stolen *each year*. A 1979 study by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms found that 50% of criminally used firearms were stolen. In fact, the odds that a handgun will be used to deter an intruder are *lower* than the odds that the handgun will be stolen. The second reason should be even more obvious. Your *individual* rights extend only to where they begin to infringe on others. If society determines that handguns are a societal menace, then your individual right to own one must be subjugated for the general good. Note that I am not necessarily concluding that handguns must be confiscated; but many dangerous materials and devices are regulated, and handguns should be among them. Jeff Shallit