From: EWyatt794@aol.com Date sent: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 10:52:11 EDT Subject: [GUNS] Re: Better people To: email@example.com Send reply to: firstname.lastname@example.org
> In a message dated 6/8/99 2:02:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time, email@example.com
> << > Until we have acheived this, everyone should be able to protect
> themselves as they see fit.
> No, everyone should be able to protect themselves to an extent, and that
> extent needs to be agreed upon and decided. I don't think lethal
> technology is a good idea. You do. I fail to see how your opinion makes
> things suddenly objectively true, unless you are god or some other
> higher power. >>
> I fail to see how your opinion makes things suddenly objectively true. I fail
> to see how a democratic vote would make anyone's opinion suddenly and
> objectively true. And I don't believe in god(s).
> Life is individual. Death is individual. Noone has as much to lose from dying
> as the person who would be dead. Every person must be free to defend their
> life. If your neighbors possession of gun(s) bothers you, then perhaps you
> ought to *get over it*. I'm not willing to let myself be killed, stolen from,
> wounded, etc, because you feel unsafe due to my gun(s).
> However, once your neighbor starts shooting at you (or punching you, or
> something along those lines) then there is reason to discuss disarmament. But
> a peaceful person needs to be free to work to support his life, and he needs
> to be free to fight to defend it.
Agreed. I have no problem with sane and nonagressive adults keeping and bearing, either. But do you feel that the right of free and unfettered access to the means with which to quickly and efficiently commit long-range mass murder should be preserved for violent criminals, kids and the certifiably insane? Their possession of guns decreases your safety and that of your family and friends.