('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)
>Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2000 14:06:45 -0400
>From: "Michael S. Lorrey" <retroman@turbont.net>
>To: extropians@extropy.com
>Subject: Re: Smart Guns
>Reply-To: extropians@extropy.com
>
>Technotranscendence wrote:
>>
>> On Friday, April 07, 2000 11:01 PM Joe Dees joedees@addall.com wrote:
>> > Smart guns will no doubt be a great deal easier to create than smart
>> (as in responsible) gun owners, >but we can only do what we can via
>> mandatory safety training to engender responsibility in those who
>> >purchase them.
>>
>> I've got an idea! Let's have another useless debate on the Extropy list!
>> That way we'll all bullshit for several weeks about this, insult each other,
>> and no one's opinion will change one iota at the end.
>>
>> Sound like a great idea?
>>
>
>Daniel, we've been have a fine, civilized discussion about smart guns
>for the past week, without even Joes Dees messing things up, and I
>notice that even he is discussing politely, which give him a few points
>upward in my book, if he keeps it up he'll even come out of my trash
>can, which I will welcome.
>
>I'd like to make a proposal that might change the course of the
>discussion:
>
>I would argue that the best way to decrease gun abuse would be to
>re-invigorate people's sense of citizenship. I recall that the civics
>course in high school was a rather lamely taught course that dealt only
>in rote facts, didn't deal with discussion, development of policy,
>etc... I would propose that civics courses be moved up to junior and/or
>senior year, and passing with a grade of C+ or higher be mandatory in
>order to register to vote, buy a gun, etc., that the curriculum be set
>as a nationwide standard for national citizenship issues, and statewide
>to deal with state issues. THis makes the democracy a bit of a
>meritocracy, but I don't see that as a bad thing.
>
>Doing this, you will get more teens thinking seriously about these
>things just as they are about to assume the actual responsibilities of
>citizenship, and they will be acting as examples for their younger
>peers.
>
I have an idea of my own; those who wish to buy guns who prove themselves too dense to lock them up when kids are in the house forfeit their right to keep and bear. We are losing twelve kids a day (and no, Mike, this is not your favorite under-25 fiction, but under 16 - source, ABC news (World News Yonight, just on today)) to accidental shootings by either themselves or other kids. That's waaay too many (4380 per year) when simple precautions by responsible adults (including the denial of gun possession to the irresponsible adults) could drastically reduce this number. Safety courses should include how to child-proof one's weapons (by trigger locks, or locking up the guns and/or ammo, or some other way), and be required, with a test to be passed, prior to purchase. I'm sure the NRA would love to conduct such courses for a modest fee, but keeping their cold-dead-fingers propaganda and overt membership solicitations out of them and presenting just the facts, ma'am might be a!
little tough for them.
------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:28 MDT