Re: Brin on privacy

Michael Lorrey (
Sat, 21 Dec 1996 14:51:55 -0500

Max M wrote:
> ----------
> > From: Michael Lorrey <>
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: Brin on privacy
> > Date: 21. december 1996 01:37
> >
> > John K Clark wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi David:
> > >
> > > > Sun Dec 15
> > > >They'll [power centers] still screw us if they ever
> get the
> > > >chance. Your complacency seems strange, given your
> > > >prescription for paranoid encryption.
> > >
> > > Power exists in society (fortunately, I'd hate to live in a powerless
> world)
> > > and like matter, energy, information, and everything else in the
> Universe,
> > > it is not distributed evenly; after all, we've known for more than a
> century
> > > that the aether does not exist. Raging against power centers is like
> raging
> > > against electromagnetism.
> > >
> > > >Bullshit. Kazynski would use PGP if he could.
> > >
> >
> > As would be his right until the moment he actually commits a crime that
> > violates another's individual rights. Guns don't kill people, people
> > kill people.
> How come then that you in the states have twice the amount of gunshot
> killings, then we do here in Denmark where privately owned guns are
> illegal?

Sure killing with a gun in hand is easier for a person. However you are
not considering the significant differences in the way criminals are
treated in our two countries. Our country puts them in jail for a few
years where they either rape or get raped on a constant basis, are never
taught any usefull skills, and are never given any psychological help.
They are turned loose into a society that has ZERO rehab systems in
place, etc etc etc.

Additionally, countries like Denmark are made up of people who
historically have been so satisfied with the feudal, then socialistic
governments controlling them that they never thought much about being
ticked off enough to be criminals. The misfits all got shipped here,
where they breed more misfits. In fuedal systems, it was commonly
accepted that the common people have no right to bear arms, that that
right solely belongs to the aristocracy in arms.

Show me one case where a gun killed someone all by itself and I'll
concede the argument. (sorry, I've argued this one so many times, its
easy to win)

It also may be argued that the US is engaged in a low intensity civil
war against its citizens on several fronts, so is not to be compared to
countries in a current state of peace. The fronts include producers,
users and consumers of various substances the feds have determined
citizens are not responsible enough to handle themselves, as well as a
large sector of the African AMerican community, and a large part of the
rural citizenry who are fed up with the federal governments abrogation
of the Constitution. If individuals did not have the right to bear arms,
they would be victimized by those forces vying for power.

It is also known that 90% of the gun related violence occuring in the US
is committed with illegally obtained guns (except for that commited by
the government against its citizens), so the last vestiges of your
argument are blown away. If we had no illegal gun associated violence,
our murder rate would be 1/5 of yours, and similarly, if we banned guns,
we would only drop the gun related murder rate by 10%, so the legality
of right to bear arms is of little impact on crime rates....


Michael Lorrey --------------------------------------------------------- President Northstar Technologies Agent Inventor of the Lorrey Drive --------------------------------------------------------- Inventor, Webmaster, Ski Guide, Entrepreneur, Artist, Outdoorsman, Libertarian, Certified Genius.