Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site spar.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!decwrl!spar!baba
From: baba@spar.UUCP (Baba ROM DOS)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.flame,net.legal
Subject: Re: Personal Defenses
Message-ID: <211@spar.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 26-Apr-85 00:41:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: spar.211
Posted: Fri Apr 26 00:41:17 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 28-Apr-85 23:34:48 EDT
References: <1518@decwrl.UUCP> <420@utai.UUCP> <539@ihu1h.UUCP> <188@spar.UUCP> <118@kontron.UUCP>
Organization: Schlumberger Palo Alto Research, CA
Lines: 27
Xref: watmath net.politics:8734 net.flame:9584 net.legal:1623

>>> I think the point of whether it is good or not good to carry personal
>>> defense weapons (unconcealed) is moot when compared with the fact that if I
>>> WANT to and am not violating someone else's personal rights, I should be
>>> able to. I think that says it all.
>>> 					Jay Mitchell
>> 
>> The trouble is that some people feel they have a personal right not to
>> be faced with an implicit threat of armed force.
>> 
>> 					Baba
> 
> Some people feel they have a personal right not be faced by homosexuals. 
> Some people feel they have a personal right to not live in the same society
> with atheists.  Baba seems to have the Moral Majority mentality, the view
> that non-aggressive actions are an appropriate area for intervention by 
> others.
>
> Clayton Cramer

Are trying to say that homosexuals and atheists are public safety hazards,
or are you suffering from feelings of sexual or religious persecution?
Regulating the bearing of arms in public places has more to do with
preventing accidents and fatal emotional outbursts than with enforcing
anyone's standard of morality.  What people do with consenting firearms
in the privacy of their homes and churches is their own business.

						Baba