Re: META:Re: GUNS: Why here?

From: Corwyn J. Alambar (
Date: Tue Oct 31 2000 - 09:34:52 MST

> > > So far, no one has been able to point up a single proven instance of gun
> > > restrictions bringing a reduction in crime. There are incidents on record,
> >
> >I seem to dimly remember a period, where all the GUNS and GUNS and
> >GUNS were driving the list crazy, and a temporary moratorium was
> >ensued. I for one am sick and tired of these recurring discussions
> >which go exactly nowhere apart from eating up bandwidth, and would
> >like the ban to become permanent.
> Why are Europeans, especially from Germany so fond of banning speech?

Was this really called for? The point is valid. 95% of those who are
going to get this thread have already made up their minds, and won't change
them. Spending time in a moral morass where you won't ever develop a
unanimous feeling isn't the way to go forward - it's an arguement for the
status quo.

I was the one who initially asked the question, "why here?" and I think that
the answer is clear. It will accomplish nothing but generating a lot of heat
and no light.

And to those who cry "freedom of speech" I offer you this notion, given to me
by my atheist/skeptic ex-roommate, which sums up why the freedom of speech is
not absolute.


Almost every Western culture has this scourge known as the Jehova's Witnesses.
These people go door to door, peddling a meme that most people reject, and in
fact it becomes something of a joke in many places - how will you best offend/
drive off these peddlers of religion from your door?

What renders these people an idle curiosity and less of a direct threat or
major nuisance/irritant is that you have at any time the freedom to tell them
that you're not interested, that you've already made up your mind, and to go
home and leave you alone. Simply having the freedom to express yourself
does not mean you have the right to force your expression upon others. The
First Amendment (to the US Constitution) does not give you the right to
free time on all television networks so you can get your right to speak.

(end of point)

The point can be made that there was already a good place to take this
discussion (and a gentle nudge that it should be taken there) where those
who want to engage in it can speak to their heart's content. It seems there's
a lot of people here who seem to be done with this discussion, and would
like to see it go somewhere else to refine itself before it comes back.

I've spoken my own peace in this subject, and it seems that my personal
beleifs on it are very rare, to listen to people line up on either side
of the issue - I'm a moderate. Not wishy-washy, but not absolutist on
either side. So don't tell me "You're in favor of childkillers and drive-bys"
or "you're just one step shy of the Gestapo and would rather that people
not have a way to defend themselves". Both sides are allowed to hate me,
and they'll find I don't care. I'm not "undecided" - I refuse to play the
"My way or the highway" game.

Now, if this kind of fervor could be stirred up over the colonization of
space - THAT is something I would bite for. And it seems far more relevant
in the long run than the question of today's choice in slugthrowers.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:19 MDT