From: "E.J. Totty", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>If people really want their handguns back, (me included), then the self
>defence argument is a non starter.
>If the arguments for sporting shooting arent effective, the right to carry
>for self defence is never going to materialise.
---snip---
>I think it was Jonathan who rightly pointed this out elsewhere. Each branch
>of shooting has its supporter, and damn the rest of the shooting world.
>I am sure there are people here who couldnt give a damn about deer stalkers.
>I equally couldnt give a damn about the self defence argument. I would
>support target shooters, but would never support those who want to own fully
>auto's.
>See?
>
>IG
>--
>Well, I support all of them. The self-defence argument does work,
>it has to be framed correctly and in the context of this country
>and it's anti-gun attitude, which is why I wrote the paper on the
>website.
>
>Steve.
Steve, & IG,
IG, if I were to take your particular argument, and apply
it across the board to every right -- that you happen to have left to
practice -- of the people of the UK, there would none left.
That you, or anyone else, has the temerity to explicate the
very idea of rights, and then turn right around and hurl epithets
upon what happens to be the most dear of them all: the right to
defend one's life, I can only wonder. Self-defence is not a one hour
a day task. It is 24 hours long -- or what passes for a complete cycle
of diurnal period. Last I heard, cops are still human, are of finite
quantity, must still occupy space and time, and cannot perform
superhuman feats. Therefore, if a person feels the need to possess a
firearm or other implement of defence, just who the hell are you to
determine whether they shall live or die, or even suffer NEEDLESSLY
at the hands of another, merely because someone like yourself gets
a bad feeling about them being able to affirmatively defend themselves?
I don't care how good your courts are, what laws assist the
citizen, or how much help they can get after the fact -- if they are still
alive. What matters is that someone was MADE to suffer at the hands
of someone else NEEDLESSLY, simply because they were deprived by
your supremely wonderful government of the right to seek the best
method available for self-defence: a firearm. Criminals do not argue
with lethal force, unless they are fools.
In my book, one less fool, equals one less court case, one
less mouth to feed, one less repeat offender, and one less worry -- period.
And that goes for that 'loveable little rogue' who was snuffed
out by Mr. Martin.
It matters not that there will be people who will misuse
firearms. You seem to be of the errant mind that just because there
are people who will misuse firearms that they must be regulated into
damn near oblivion. Well, what about everything else that causes death?
I don't see you wanting to regulate water, or bicycles, or
automobiles to the extent that firearms are. Where is your great wisdom
there?
Seems to me that there is a very great amount of hypocrisy
concerning a projectile tool. Just what, I'd like to ask, is so darn MORE
heinous about a firearms wound as compared to all other deadly wounds?
Is death by firearm any worse than by knife? Or by baseball bat?
And, damnit, you still haven't answered the question: If people
in your nation DID INDEED pack firearms for self defence before they
were regulated to hell and back, then how in the name of the Queen, can
you be so duplicitous about modern day citizens?
Oh, and one last thing (as if you needed more): I see absolutely
nothing wrong or bad, with carrying a knife, or three, and a firearm or
firearms upon one's person as a means of self-defence.
You say that you find it interesting that someone does, and
that you feel that if someone did, that you would not want to live in such
a place.
Well, aren't you the lucky one?
Just so happens that a lot of people here in the US do just that.
If merry old England (and the rest of the UK) are such havens
of peace, tranquility and non-criminality, then why the mention of them
with great frequency on just this list alone?
Could it be that there are more than a few serpents in paradise?
Like maybe, that you have an infestation that could well be
remedied by the judicious use of citizen packed firearms.
Oh, I know, you can sit back and laugh in merriment about all
the crime here in the US, and comment endlessly about all the very loose
firearms laws and the reports that you read about with great frequency
about all those 'high noon' fire fights on main street USA every day.
Of course, it never occurred to you to consider that every report
of firearms MISUSE is reported at least TWENTY times more than proper use.
That's right, IG, you read that correctly. Every act of misuse is
reported at least 20 times, over a period of days, sometimes weeks, to give
the impression that there is more taking place than really is.
And certainly, it also never occurred to you to extrapolate the
number of reported attacks on citizens in the UK, to the number of
UNREPORTED acts here in the USA, as a result of citizens here carrying a
firearm for protection.
And lest I forget to also mention the rather inconsistent position
that you hold regarding the misuse of firearms, what about places like
Washington, D.C., which having the highest murder rate in the US, has the
highest rate of murder and injury committed with firearms, but NONE of
the bordering states come close by so much as a country mile with the
same statistics? And, they do not have the same stringent laws as DC.
What about the state of Vermont, which has no law on citizens
carrying firearms -- open or concealed? The crime rate for that state is
third from the bottom, and has a crime rate -- per capita -- LOWER than the
UK? Yet, right next door, are the states of Massachusetts an New York, that
do regulate the hell out of firearms, and their crime rates jump through
the veritable roof. Why do you suppose that is?
Do the math, IG, then come back and tell us that you still have
that same smug attitude.
The essence of all law is power. In your case, it is being used
as a means to lord it over the citizens. More power equals more control.
The more the citizen has to beg, the more likely he will assume
the subservient mind.
--
=*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*=
=*= Liberty: Live it . . . or lose it. =*=
=*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*=
ET
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
