Answers given to questions asked. Don't catch me on a bad day.
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 20:07:23 +0100 (BST)
From: John Pate
Subject: Re: Dunblane Page
On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, GS wrote:
I'm contacting you regarding the recent multiple victim shootings that have occurred in the USA and Germany.
I've written extensively about this topic on my website. They're being publicized right now because:
Whilst I fully support the re-introduction of the right to bear arms in
Bzzzt. Lose all your points, do not pass "go" do not collect £200. It's not a "re-introduction." The right to bear arms pre-dated government, it's an inherent human right ever since we were smart enough to figure out howto make pointy sticks, harden the ends in a fire, and use them to chase the sabre-tooth tigers away. If you think the government "gives" you rights then you don't actually believe in them - if that's true, if the government decides you're a menace to the purity of the Reich and you need to be gassed and cremated then what are you gonna say about it? Either you have rights or you don't, the government has nothing to do with that. What governments do is deny people their rights. That's what "our" government is doing illegally (unconstitutionally) right now over RKBA.
the UK and always will do, I'm concerned that incidents like these will make it much harder to promote our cause.
Crazy people going around shooting people is a reason I want a gun, not a reason that I should give up on them.
Many people here wrongly think that more guns means more crime and these opinions have proven to difficult for me to challenge, especially when you consider how ignorant some people are in this country.
Fact is, the average person is as dumb as a bag of hammers and 50% of people are even dumber than that. Then they're ignorant on top of that. All you can do is speak the truth and bear honourable witness. It's casting pearls before swine most of the time but that is the way of the world. Go read Rudyard Kipling's poem, "If."
My question to you is this - How could we reduce or minimise the number of so-called "gun massacres" that may occur if guns were far more widely available than they are today ?
Why do you have to prevent something that "may" happen? It may be that an asteroid will hit the planet and wipe out life on Earth. I don't lose sleep over that, even though it has happened before and will happen again.
Do we just accept these shootings as one of the costs associated with the freedom of gun ownership,
Guns save lives too. The cost-benefit analysis is extremely complex. By saying this you've bought into the victim disarmament mindset.
In the final analysis it's a human right that should not be denied. Claiming necessity "for the public good" to deny people their rights is how tyrants operate.
[The victim disarmers] said blood would run in the streets due to CCW laws in the States. The reverse happened. The victim disarmament crowd are now having to "explain" why the drops in violent crime and homicide are due to something else other than CCW. And you've bought into that mindset. Gun deaths, according to your logic, could potentially be prevented if the law-abiding were somehow restricted by the law. Further, you're saying without guns the substitution of method, e.g. fire/arson or IED would be a better thing than having someone attempting to shoot people. Bollocks.
or do we look at improving mental health care as a possible solution ?
Have a Ministry of Pre-Crime and imprison people for what they might do? No thanks, it's called "prior restraint" and it's unethical and immoral. Apart from that, it simply doesn't work. What restrains violent criminals and the deranged is somebody shooting them dead when they reveal themselves for what they truly are. You need more guns, not less, to be sure that will happen.
I just wanted your thoughts on this subject.
You need to do some more thinking and reading. You're being confused by the victim disarmament propaganda. You can't argue this through until you've got it straight in your own head.
Think for yourself, the truth is out there.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|message from the cookie daemon|
What do you mean ask the general public? Look
what we end up
with - Hitler was democratically elected.
John Pate <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Edinburgh, Scotland (home PC)
Disclaimer: I've probably changed my opinions by the time you read this