Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!mordor!sri-spam!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!RED.RUTGERS.EDU!MCGREW
From: MCGREW@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Newsgroups: mod.politics
Subject: Re: Bias & Guns
Message-ID: <12236095470.58.MCGREW@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Wed, 3-Sep-86 19:59:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: RED.12236095470.58.MCGREW
Posted: Wed Sep  3 19:59:54 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 4-Sep-86 03:49:54 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: MCGREW@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 92
Approved: poli-sci@red.rutgers.edu


To: KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU

    Last I heard, about equally many people thought newspapers had a
    conservative bias as thought newspapers had a liberal bias.

... That's not what I heard.  I've heard the conservatives say
that newspapers are to liberal, and the radical-left say that
newspapers aren't liberal enough...

    Do all political opinions get expressed?  In print they do.  On
    TV, they don't.

I'd say they do; I'd say that the liberals get more time, but that's
about all. 

    I think there is an ENORMOUS difference between ALLOWING people
    who wish to have guns to purchase them and simply GIVING guns to
    anyone, much less "everyone".

... and I think that that still isn't part of the point...

     Getting back to the point, ALLOWING people to have guns IS
    dangerous.  Look at what happened in Oklahoma last week (and note
    that NONE of the generally proposed gun control laws would have
    prevented it!  Something I haven't heard of ANY newspaper or radio
    or TV station mentioning).

... since that's obvious, I shouldn't think they'd have to.  They said
the guns were National Guard guns, and that's enough.  Isn't this the
flip side of letting people do what they want, and think what they
want?  

    Cars are even more dangerous.  Letting people have GOVERNMENTS may
    the the most dangerous risk of all!

... and certainly letting governments have cars is the worst thing on
earth! :-)  I'm still sticking to my point of guns being a dangerous
thing in the hands of silly people.  I don't think that comparing
guns, which are a method of livelyhood and transport to 'normal folks'
and guns, which aren't (let's not digress into cops and the army,
please) is going to win you any points.  I'd suggest you find another
allegory.

   They should not, and are not, allowed to use those dangerous things
   to harm others.

... did I lose something, or are you advocating guns that aren't
dangerous?  What's the point of having a non-harmful gun?

     Is THIS a good reason to adopt a totalitarian system?  (etc)

Whoa!  Since when did I advocate anything like that?  I won't defend
something I didn't say, sorry.  (Back in the bad old days, they used
to call this a 'straw man'.)

     During the revolutionary war, the US government fought the
     British govenment and won.  THAT is our interpretation.

... I beleive you'll find that that's the British interpretation as
well...  

   If the US government (had lost) ... We would instead say that a
   bunch of poorly dressed rebels illegally tried to usurp the
   legitimate authority of the British Empire, and the ringleaders
   were captured and executed, putting an end to the treasonous
   insurrection.

... oh?  Well, I'd say that is not always the interpretation.  I
suspect that the rebels would be viewed as patriots trying to fight
for freedom.  Many people down south still respect the rebels of the
American Civil War, many people respect the American Indian for his
fight, the Philippine rebels of the 1900's are revered in the
Philippines.  They all lost.
  It depends on who writes the history and when.  I'll agree that some
histories simplify things to a ridiculous level, but I'd say that it
depends on who you read.  But I think we're digressing again...

     The use of guns does not NECESSARILY stop a government.  But the
     LACK of them certainly means the government will NOT be stopped.
     To stop a government, guns are NECESSARY but not necessarily
     SUFFICIENT.

... I'd be interested in seeing your explaination of the success of
India's non-cooperation campaign against the British, which used
economic non-profitability to force the English out.  How many guns
are necessary amongst the American people to keep the government in
line?

Charles
-------
-------