----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 8:18 AM Subject: Re: Most Dangerous States
> In a message dated 8/11/2003 1:14:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > That would only hold true if the criminals were aware of who did and who did > > not own guns ahead of time. > > I think the gist of the argument is that legal gun ownership deters crime in > > general and there are stats that support this. > > > > But nothing is ever going to grind crime to a halt. > > > > I think this type of discussion tends to get people thinking about the > > extremes as opposed to the general tenor of the realities of life. > > > > There are many many millions of guns in the US, yet only a few thousand or > > so deaths in a given year. A small percentage of deaths by > > any cause. > > Its a mountain made out of a molehill. > > Except the mountain is usually not fatal and the molehill is fatal. Detering >crime is good but the cost may overwhelm the benefit if even a statistically >small number of innocent individuals (in particular the owner or a family >member is killed). After all the death rate in the mole hill is %100. If we had >effective gun control then the death rate would go down for both the >criminals and the victims. Then why not have mandatory swimming lessons for everyone? (I think you know what comes next. I'm gonna pull a Dan!) You are mangling the metaphor. The molehill is not 100% fatal. Many people are shot each year and survive. And that's what I meant about people only seeing the extremes of the debate. xponent Aiming For Objectivity Maru rob _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
