Re: capicity for violence = less violence? [was Re: Security]
Sat, 29 May 1999 21:48:46 EDT

In a message dated 5/29/99 5:18:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time, writes:

> > i have no problem with that, in theory... but shit. slopes are
> > slippery, and making laws forcing the goons to relinquish their weapons
> > requires, well, making laws, which means trusting politicians to
> > the fine ethical line that i think is being treaded here... basicly, i
> > with your goals but not your methods; i think ole crocker & lorray's
> > approach would be, functionally, the lonterm lesser of two evils.
> There is no other feasible method, and the only way to test mine is
> in practice. It is strange to find such a Luddite mentality towards
> experimentation, evolution, trial, error , refinement and repair on a
> purportedly futuristic list allegedly concerned with the improvement
> of the quality and circumstances of life.

your method, as i understand it, would be to amend the constitution so as to include a provision along the lines of "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, unless your a goon", (where "goon" = ppl who really really shouldnt have guns, ideally)... right?

	do you really think thats *feasible*? 
	as for the luddite comment: baaah humbug. does my thinking your 
proposal is not doable make me a luddite? yow. thats low. please...

being drawn by the irresistable lure of a trampoline (its been way too long), sayke