Michael M. Butler wrote:
> "Hardly"? I think you miss my point. I'll break it down: The "_*gun*_" (qua
> gun) issue is a non-issue to any set of people which is largely
> self-governing (no "Gummint"/minimal "Gummint"). Such people don't give a
> hoot whether another of their kind owns a gun, as long as they can/do too.
> Thus it is a _non-issue_ for them. Get me?
> I get tired of making this point, but it boils down to "it's not about gun
> control, it's about impulse control, stupid." :) High individual
> self-government->high impulse control->less fear of technology X-Y-Z in
> individual hands, as long as the said hands are also not cocksure or
> arrogant. Are we in agreement about this?
> Your "Hardly," as situated, appears to be a dismissal of my last sentence.
> I stand by it.
> What say you?
Yes I missed the point. Sorry. Gotcha now. I guess I thought that you meant that a society of self governed indivduals would have no need of guns.... which was kind of daft in my ears...