Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utai.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsri!utai!west
From: west@utai.UUCP (Thomas L. West)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.flame,net.legal
Subject: Re: Re: Personal Defense
Message-ID: <419@utai.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 10-Apr-85 20:46:39 EST
Article-I.D.: utai.419
Posted: Wed Apr 10 20:46:39 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 10-Apr-85 21:25:13 EST
References: <350@idis.UUCP> <497@abnji.UUCP> <572@ahuta.UUCP> <498@lll-crg.ARPA>
Reply-To: west@utai.UUCP (Thomas L. West)
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Lines: 23
Xref: utai net.politics:4761 net.flame:1739 net.legal:1022
Summary: 

Eugene D. Brooks III writes:
>I agree that the probability of good citizens getting hurt accidentally
>goes up by epsilon each time a good citizen carries a weapon.  You are
>missing an important factor that offsets this negative.  A good citizen
>carrying a weapon is in a position to help someone else being attacked.
>The probability of a well trained individual helping another is far greater
>than hurting someone by accident.

   Hold it right there.  Do you have *any* facts, figures, articles or
*anything* to back this up.  My strong guess is that you are 180 degrees
out, and that far more people are injured by "good citizens" than are
"saved" by other "good citizens" coming to their rescue.  All I ask for
is *one* figure.  (No, I don't know how you'd go about compiling it!)
However, a look at the papers in cities small enough to still be reporting
deaths should give an indication.  How many criminals were shot compared
to how many innocents (shot by innocents).
  Of course, if you *are* correct, this implies that without guns all over
the place, the US crime rate would be even *higher*.  I am not sure, 
but I have a feeling this *can't* be true.  I mean, the US is not at
war, is it?

   Tom West
ihnp4!utcsri!west