At 08:10 PM 1/20/01 +0100, denis wrote:
>One day, in a thousand years, we might find that the only way to live
>properly is to enclose oneself in a robotic outfit some 3 meters tall and 3
>meters in diameter, with the robot's external sensors attached directly to
>one's spinal cord. No need to move the body - move the robot. Thus, you are
>protected against virtually anything modulo an atomic bomb.
>
>Don't see it happening anytime soon, though...
This would result in isolating people from one another. It might be useful
for exploration of hostile environments, or fire-fighting...I don't see
anyone wanting to live this way full-time.
>I think you're stretching it a bit. Speaking for myself, I would be very
>interested in ENABLING the average person to any kind of self-defense that
>is not likely to be used for aggressive purposes. But firearms aren't a
>defense mechanism, they're an attack weapon.
People keep doing this! Guns are neutral devices. You can use them to
attack or defend, to hurt or to help. Like any other tool, they can be abused.
Perhaps in the future there will be self-defense mechanisms available that
will prevent attack without harming the attacker. At present, a handicapped
person or a weak person is better served by either a sidearm or a bodyguard.
Chicago, for instance, has outlawed guns, knives, brass knuckles, personal
defense sprays, "tasers" and all other means of equalizing the relative
strengths of attacker and victim. Of course, only the victim will heed
these laws. Every day i read of fresh attacks, rapes, robberies, and
murders using these devices in offensive mode. Successful defenses using
any such device are rarely reported, not in the least because admitting to
use of defensive aids is likely to get you arrested and thrown into a jail
full of the very creeps you sought to defend against.
It might not be a "conspiracy", but it sure is a disturbing trend.
Chuck Kuecker
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:21 MDT