Re: Guns [was Re: property Rights]

Craig Dibble (
Thu, 27 May 1999 04:09:12 +0100

A couple of points I'd like to raise here:

  1. What possible extropian/ transhumanist merit can this pointless slanging match have? It seems to be being conducted between sides who are *Never* going to find a common ground and who are getting more abusive as the thread continues.
  2. Have you pro gun activists got any idea how completley mad you sound to non Americans?

I'm probably going to provoke more rancid vitriol and get shot down in flames for saying this, but just because something is written in your precious constitution or your bill of rights does not mean that it is the be all and end all, that it is simply the only thought worth entertaining and no alternatives shall be brooked. If this were the case, can you explain to me exactly why there are so many, or indeed *any* ammendments to your constitution? I can think of one answer to this: Because it is imperfect. It was a hashed up solution to the problems of the time and no clear thought was given to its long term consequences. As such, situations have arisen which the constitution was never designed to contend with and it has had to be modified. It is in no way set in stone. Times change, and laws must change with them. To advocate extropian beliefs on the one hand, and dogmatic adherence to a quite clearly imperfect constitution on the other hand seems somewhat at odds to me. But excuse me if I am stepping on your constitutionally protected toes here, I mean no harm, I'm just curious as to how you can rationalize this.

As for the merit of this discussion on the list, is it something along the lines of:

*I'm looking to the future, but I'll shoot you if you get in my way.

Or maybe:

*Well, shucks ma, the end times are a-comin', let's arm ourselves to the
teeth and head for the hills.

Not very extropian admittedly, but as far as I can see, neither is this thread.

Craig Dibble.

A concerned non-American (non gun owner).