Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!hoptoad!amdahl!tron
From: tron@amdahl.UUCP
Newsgroups: alt.flame
Subject: Re: Replying to Gun Nuts Propaganda (was COMPUTER USER...)
Message-ID: <16689@amdahl.amdahl.com>
Date: Wed, 21-Oct-87 09:32:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: amdahl.16689
Posted: Wed Oct 21 09:32:02 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Oct-87 10:20:11 EDT
References: <7428@reed.UUCP> <21198@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <826@pbhyc.UUCP> <246@coldbeer.UUCP> <2193@pbhyf.UUCP>
Reply-To: tron@uts.amdahl.com (Ronald S. Karr)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Amdahl Coup, UTS Products Hen house
Lines: 41

For some strange reason, I just waded through eight or ten articles
debating whether or not access to guns should be restricted.  With
few exceptions, I found the arguments FOR restrictions well written,
reasonably balanced (for net articles) between factual content and
opinions.  With no exceptions I found the articles AGAINST gun
control abrasive, low in factual content, and entirely non-compelling.
Some of the "against" articles also had some definite racist overtones.

Miscellaneous comments by myself:

1.  Our paid "well-regulated militia" is probably better suited to
    handling conventional or terrorist attacks than bands of
    urbanites weilding handguns.  For non-conventional, non-terrorist
    attacks, this discussion is not useful.  The historical reason
    for the 2nd ammendment is thus not valid.

2.  I would like to hear a rational counter-argument from an opponent
    of gun control to the argument that a large supply of readily
    available firearms increases the likelihood of accidents,
    domestic murders and suicides.  Citing the 2nd ammendment or the
    statement:  "If guns were outlawed then only outlaws would have
    guns," or: "guns don't kill people, people kill people," are not
    sufficient counter-arguments to this issue.

3.  Judging from several comments by others in this discussion, England
    is probably a bit too "gung-ho" about football (soccer).


Have fun.

	tron	|-<=>-|		ARPAnet:  amdahl!tron@Sun.COM
      tron@uts.amdahl.com	UUCPnet:  {hplabs,sun,uunet}!amdahl!tron

PS:  Actually, I don't think I have ever heard a compelling argument
     AGAINST gun control.

PPS:  I suppose that in reading alt.flame I "get what I deserve" as far
      as disappointment in the arguments on any side of a debate.
-- 
[views above shouldn't be viewed as Amdahl views, or as views from Amdahl, or
 as Amdahl views views, or as views by Mr. Amdahl, or as views from his house]