Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mit-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!mit-vax!csdf
From: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: rape and firearms
Message-ID: <419@mit-vax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 19-Jul-85 03:12:40 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-vax.419
Posted: Fri Jul 19 03:12:40 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 21-Jul-85 01:08:51 EDT
References: <568@ttidcc.UUCP>
Reply-To: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 33

In article <568@ttidcc.UUCP> regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) writes:
>Charlie, you better come up with some support for this claim if you don't
>want to be entirely discredited for the rest of your natural life.

Ms. Regard (May I call you Adrienne?), I have lost all credibility at
this point (especially with regard to firearms) so I really can't go
wrong now.  

>PLENTY of non-violent people purchase firearms, and for a variety of reasons.
>I am one.  My father is one.  My ex-boss is one.  Shall I canvass everybody
>I know with respect to gun-purchase and records of violence?  No, I'll leave
>the exercise to you, the claimant.  Think you can handle it without blowing
>it?

Buying a firearm with the intent of shooting someone is NOT a pacifist
act. I don't care what your dad says. Non-violent people, and I do not
use the term as loosely as you, do not consider shooting other people,
even if they're rapists. All right -- flame me to death.

>(p.s., re the actual topic of rape and firearms -- seems to me teargas is
>a slightly better idea.  Non-lethal [in case it gets turned against you] but
>highly unpleasant [presuming you get the chance to use it against him] and
>works at close quarters, on all parts of the body, 'wicked' by clothing if
>necessary.)

Hear, hear!

-- 
Charles Forsythe
CSDF@MIT-VAX
"Don't get bogged down with details, just eat
     the stupid peice of paper."
        -Rev. Wang Zeep