IMHO, firstname.lastname@example.org (Harvey Newstrom) breathed some much-needed reason into the gun discussion we've been having here. His conclusions (it seems to me), which I heartily endorse, are that guns are tools and "are extropian" only to the extent that they are USED in a fashion that furthers the principles and values we share.
(I might quibble about Harvey's discussion of the "high" or "low" tech-ness of
"guns" in general: Within a particular engineering regime, "high tech" to me is simply the best possible solution to a particular engineering problem. Thus, given a praticular set of operational specifications, a darn good argument can be made that a S&W .44 revolver, employing a design little changed in 100 years, is "high tech.)
The gun discussion tends to come and go here in the context of discussions of individual liberty as a value in society. It IS a "hot button" issue for many libertarians in the U.S., so even relatively casual remarks can initiate a discussion of individual ownership and control of weapons. We've probably had quite enough gun talk here for a while, but I would urge my fellow gun-owners to consider how the issue is perceived by folks from outside the U.S., and to try to be diplomatic in their rhetoric: What may seem self-evident and basic to someone grounded in U.S. history and society can seem shocking and threatening to others.
Greg Burch <GBurch1@aol.com>----<email@example.com> Attorney ::: Director, Extropy Institute ::: Wilderness Guide http://users.aol.com/gburch1 -or- http://members.aol.com/gburch1 "Good ideas are not adopted automatically. They must be driven into practice with courageous impatience."