Re: A fine reason to ban weapons
 

Risk v Reward.

Of the items mentioned only one has as its purpose the killing of others.

In this case we have a person who is employed in the corrections department. Presumably has above average knowledge of guns, some level of training, etc.

Re: A fine reason to ban weapons
 

I buy guns to target shoot and rare/old ones to display on my wall as collection items. None were built to kill people. Thats as dumb as saying a knife is built to stab people, and its a fine reason to ban knives when someone gets stabbed.

Re: A fine reason to ban weapons
 

You can't argue with left-wing authoritarians who know what's best for you. They are the worst of all.

I leave you with this quote:
[ QUOTE ]
... a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - c.s. lewis

[/ QUOTE ]

natedogg

Re: A fine reason to ban weapons
 

[ QUOTE ]


... a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - c.s. lewis


[/ QUOTE ]


The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to moralists. That is why they invented Hell.

-Bertrand Russell, Sceptical Essays (1928).


The intellectual dishonesty of abhorring many freedoms that they personally disagree with is a continual theme among many that post on this forum.

-Zeno

Re: A fine reason to ban weapons
 

But, wait a second.

You say risk v reward is the reason.

Compared to other things mentioned by etgryphon, the risk is lower than that of many more commonly used items.

You are implying that the reward of guns is the ability to kill people. I think that is a very shortsighted and kneejerk view of firearms, both historically and practically. I'm no member of the NRA, but firearms are nothing more than a tool of man, used in defense and provision since their inception. I have owned a gun for more than 10 years, and have killed no one with it, nor have I injured anyone with it.

No one would ever argue that an eight-year-old should be left alone with a loaded gun. But, what tool would be good to leave with an eight-year-old? You're telling me you'd leave a saw or a power drill with her? Come on, AC...open your mind a bit on this one.

Re: A fine reason to ban weapons
 

[ QUOTE ]
You can't argue with left-wing authoritarians who know what's best for you. They are the worst of all.



[/ QUOTE ]

The worst of all are the sheep who mindlessly follow them.

I still vividly remember an incident in the 2000 elections, when Gore and WhatsHisName were wildly indignant about sex and violence in video games, pop music, etc, and calling for Congressional oversight.

I think it was CNN that was doing Mom in the Mall interviews. One Mini-van Mom said that she firmly agreed with Gore on this, because someone had to take responsibility for screening the games and music and stuff that her children bought.

If I had been there, I would have been sorely tempted to slap her upside the head, and say you're damn right lady, and that someone is you.

Re: A fine reason to ban weapons
 

In our society today the risk/reward for consumer goods is managed by the tort laws. When a fuel tank explodes in a car there is a lawsuit because of the injury.

We have reached the point with guns that there is no management of the risk/rewards for the gun industry. If the gun industry does not want child locks (it may add a few dollars to the cost) the NRA and the gun nuts trot out their mis-interpretation of the second amendment and the pols fall into place.

As there is no sanity in the pro-gun camp, the only sane position is to be against gun ownership.

Fortunately, I don't know a single person who owns a weapon. And most of them are highly intelligent people. There is simply no reason for a normal person to own a gun (and yes, IMO, that includes hunting animals, or displaying on a wall).

Re: A fine reason to ban weapons
 

You may wish to pass along the quote (and it is a fine one) to Bush and to those who support going into Iraq to "liberate" the Iraqi.

It is not applicable to my position. You may wish to understand why.

Re: A fine reason to ban weapons
 

[ QUOTE ]
The intellectual dishonesty of abhorring many freedoms that they personally disagree with is a continual theme among many that post on this forum

[/ QUOTE ]

If there is something you "personally disagree" with do you be quiet or speak up? Specially as the freedom to own weapons is an invented freedom (kind of like the invented right of abortion)

I expected NateDogg's mischaracterization but not yours. However ....

Re: A fine reason to ban weapons
 

[ QUOTE ]
There is simply no reason for a normal person to own a gun

[/ QUOTE ]

Home defense.