Re: Guns [was Re: property Rights]

Joe E. Dees (
Thu, 27 May 1999 13:40:40 -0500

Date sent:      	Thu, 27 May 1999 11:46:23 -0400
From:           	"Michael S. Lorrey" <>
Subject:        	Re: Guns [was Re: property Rights]
Send reply to:

> Craig Dibble wrote:
> > 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.
> Failure to resolve this on the side of freedom will result in the publicly
> accepted implication of acceptance of the views of the pro-political slavery
> side.
More name-calling and sloganeering in the absence of logic. Just like the Red Guards.
> > 2) Have you pro gun activists got any idea how completley mad you sound to
> > non Americans?
> Yes, I am sure that slaves are quite bewildered when confronted with
> discussions on true freedom.
A stupid comparison, but one that anti-abortionists and gun nuts love, just like the Nazi comparison. They forget that during antebellum times, abortion was not even a mastered surgical procedure, guns were a lot less efficient killers than they are now, and were held by all slaveowners, and that slavery is and shall ever be henceforth forbidden by our constitution, and that gun ownership mushroomed under the Reich, while the penalty for abortion was changed by them from a paltry 40 marks to six years imprisonment. The other side of the death camp coin was the Lebensborns, where women were forcibly bred to SS officers selected for their Aryan characteristics; the children were adopted out to "good" Nazi families and raised to fight, produce and reproduce for the State.
> > 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.
> For any discussion to move forward, it first must begin somewhere. In order for
> all to move forward together, you must all know and agree exactly where all are
> starting from. That some people cannot or will not read plain English due to
> their own agenda or meme infections is the sole reason why this discussion
> cannot progress. That Mr. Dees continues to spout his rude and insulting rants
> that are in contradiction to the libertarian/extropian spirit of Unlimited
> Individual Freedom
I both read and refute the arse-dribble that Lock-N-Load Lorrey writes. The First Freedom is that of LIFE, which a bullet to the head or heart irretrievably abridges.
> > 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.
> The times ahead promise to be very, very dynamic, and full of risk. The power
> that computers provide can be used to either greatly free us or greatly enslave
> us. Those with extropian values who refuse to be political or support those that
> are political are IMHO being extremely stupid, and might as well physically bury
> their heads in the sand. Those that do not take active measures to empower
> themselves to resist attempts at their enslavement will wind up enslaved.
> "People get the government they deserve". You might as well start practicing the
> mantra,"resistance is futile" now....
After Uploading, Mike's doppelganger will be asserting private property rights over selected files and functions, and fighting for the right of every Uploadian to store concealed viruses with which to obliterate other Uploadians.
> Mike Lorrey