Re: Non-lethal protective technologies?

Joe E. Dees (
Wed, 2 Jun 1999 13:49:06 -0500

Date sent:      	Wed, 02 Jun 1999 09:53:46 -0400
From:           	"Michael S. Lorrey" <>
Subject:        	Re: Non-lethal protective technologies?
Send reply to:

> Chuck Kuecker wrote:
> > At 05:03 AM 6/2/99 -0700, wrote:
> > >
> > >And when they stun you from cover a hundred yards away without warning? Or
> > >are you going to run around stunning anyone who looks like they might even
> > >be thinking of stunning you?
> > >
> >
> > Generalization time: why not prevent anyone from Joe Dee's prohibited list
> > from having ANY form of weapon in public - violation to result in at least
> > a mental evaluation, at worst removal from society?
> But WHAT is a weapon? One who seeks the proper training can themselves be
> considered a lethal weapon, and how do you disarm such people who consequently
> wind up on that list of Joe's? Do you surgically remove a black belt's arms and
> feet while he is going through a divorce, and hope you can get them back on
> later? Do you do the same when such a person is prescribed mood altering drugs
> by their doctor, or if they are imprisoned? Just glancing around my office, I
> can spot at least half a dozen innocuous items that I could use to maim or kill
> someone with. Do we all get prescribed rubber rooms from birth to death? Things
> are getting absurd in how safe people want their lives to be. Makes me wonder if
> immortality is worth it.
My position is still valid as far as it goes (firearms). Black belts are not efficient long-distance mass killers unless they are armed with the facilitating firearms. I am willing to extend the application of my prohibited purchase list to any weapon capable of long-distance mass homicide, but I know of few besides guns which are currently in common public possession.
> Mike Lorrey