Re: [GUNS] Re: Better people

dwayne (
Thu, 10 Jun 1999 18:11:00 +1000 wrote:
> dwayne [] wrote:
> >My neighbours don't have guns. No one I know has a gun. I live in a
> >country where guns are banned. I like it here. I think anyone who wants
> >to live in a country where everyone has guns is mad.
> Will you still feel the same way if that racist Australian political party
> get a majority, and hence control all the guns in government hands?

  1. They won't get a majority. They barely have a presence in parliament. I think they have 2 or 3 seats.
  2. Hey, the *current* government is anti-everything I do, so
  3. sure, of course I will

> >No one needs to have weapons to kill people at a distance. The only
> >reason to have them is to protect yourself from people who have them.
> So why is it that a large fraction (possibly the vast majority) of bullets
> are fired at little pieces of paper? I've shot an awful lot of them myself
> in the past, and precisely 0.00000000000% of them have been fired at another
> person. If the only reason to own a gun is to shoot people who try to shoot
> you, why are most guns used for target shooting or (in America) hunting?

So why do you guys froth on so much about self defense and this "preserving liberty" bullshit? If it's a sport thing, then sure, I think guns in and of themselves are great.

But when it comes to perforating the public, well, no, I think that is bad.

If "most guns used for target shooting or (in America) hunting?", then why has this come up in a thread about guns-as-lethal-offensive-weapons?


You guys just keep grasping at those straws...



"the cricher we kno as dwayne is only the projection
into our dimension of something much larger and