Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that..... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pezz who wrote (5706)	3/8/2000 1:14:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6418

Only an idiot thinks that a fully developed human infant immediately prior to birth is a "bag of cells"........

To: pezz who wrote (5706)	3/8/2000 2:24:00 PM
From: lorrie coey	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6418

>>'...this is how reasonable compromise is spelled.'<< This is how "sitting duck" is spelled: 'trigger lock'... and I never said anything about 'quick draw'. Why should I have to compromise my own safety, security and comfort because some x/con drug addict failed to protect his own, [and someone elses], flesh and blood...? I feel like Jesus already... I follow the rules. I don't even have a child in my household...yet I would now be legally responsible for becoming and required, [is it by 'society' or is it by the 'state'?], to become part of a 'solution' to somebody elses problem?! That's as wrong as the simpsonoj verdict. >>'You surely have the right to terminate what's inside your own body...'<< And I surely have the right to bear arms. This is about a lot more than 'children shooting children'. Where's the Outrage when it happens in the inner city, every day...? This is about using the emotional affect of children killing each other to regulate firearm ownership...one step at a time...until the right to KaBA is no longer a constitutional right. >>'Society has the right to regulate what it considers dangerous.'<< Oh, really...!? You mean the state has the 'right' to regulate... All this protective regulation...That must be why it's such a safe 'society'...! I think we ought to begin to license, and further regulate Parenting to insure against irresponsible individuals perpetuating poor gene pools, or other haphazard miscreation. Proclivities for Booze and cravings for Base Hits, [and what the heck, throw in criminal records for violent crime convictions], would preclude one from being licensed and registered to reproduce. >>'Why should guns have special status?'<< They don't. Firearms are registered...and I am in favor of requiring concealed weapon permits for those who apply to carry. Perhaps the 'TriggerLox' requirement could apply to those gun owners who have children in their households...to the exclusion of others... You know, check the relational data bases...we're all on the record... Part of the PCP... The Parenting Certification Program.

To: pezz who wrote (5706)	3/8/2000 5:04:00 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6418

Hmmm...the "pezz" fool-proof trigger lock has some intriguing possibilities. We could require young girls to wear "chastity" belts with these locks installed. Boys, too! It couldn't hurt and it would cut down on those "awful bags of cells" that annoy society, (well not pezz-people). pezz, himself, I hear, has volunteered to be a local chastity belt inspector at his local grade school. Put a "pezz lock" on your kitchen drawers (knives) and indeed, another safe use would be on the children's rooms and windows and they won't worry you by sneaking out at night (oops!, fires!...well, no worry, we have our "pezz fire alarm to warn us in time). One of my favorite uses would be the extra large "Texas Boot" anti-theft device by "pezz" to keep you car safe. Cast iron, at about 80# it's not for your average "little old lady" but it will fit in your trunk. Hey, this is kinda fun. If I knew pezz just wanted to have fun, we coulda started off absurd and found our way to ludicrous in no time. Have a safe day, and I really mean it.

To: pezz who wrote (5706)	3/11/2000 1:57:00 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6418

Gun safety locks to be given out..free ocregister.com Same column.. Marketing of fetal tissue investigated

To: pezz who wrote (5706)	3/11/2000 7:53:00 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Respond to of 6418

As I'm sure you know more relatives, friends, and children are killed with home fire arms than are intruders. Of the total of 690 murders committed in Detroit in 1972, 243 (47.8%) involved unrelated acquaintances, 138 (27.2%) involved strangers, and 125 (25%) involved relatives. Of this last category, 32 (4.6%) involved blood relatives, and 80 (11.6%) were spouses (36 women killed by their husbands, and 44 men killed by their wives). The percentage of Chicago"s murders involving relatives in 1972 was very similar (25.2%), though by the 1990-95 period the percentage of murders involving relatives had fallen to 12.6% (7.2% involving spouses.) Murderers and victims: relationship and characteristics Relationship Family 18% (even family can be intruder) Acquaintance (friend and nonfriend) 40% (possible intruder) Stranger 13% (possible intruder) Unknown 30% (possible intruder) note: Nonfriend acquaintances include drug pushers and buyers, gang members, prostitutes and their clients, bar customers, gamblers, cab drivers killed by their customers, neighbors, other nonfriend acquaintances and friends. The total equals more than 100% because of rounding. The average age of victims was 33; that of offenders was 30. Source: U.S Dept of Justice, FBI staff, Uniform Crime Reports,( Washington, DC: U.S. Govt. Printing Office, 1992) "Fifteen national polls, including ...Gallup and Peter Hart Research Associates, imply that there are 760,000 to 3.6 million defensive uses of guns per year. Yet even if these estimates are wrong by a very large factor, they still suggest that defensive gun use is extremely common. More Guns, Less Crime by John Lott the claim is made again In the United States, firearms are used to commit a majority of all homicides (1), guns in the home increase the risk of homicide almost 3-fold, (2) and the risk of suicide almost 5-fold (3). Most of the risk is related to handguns. Public health measures, especially those that place significant and unpopular restrictions on personal freedom, must be strongly supported by specific data. These data presented here do not demonstrate that the handguns in which this law proposes to ban, which include legally purchased and licensed handguns ? are the handguns responsible for increasing the risk of homicide and suicide. The lack of such evidence leaves open the possibility that banning handguns might only disarm law-abiding citizens who are unlikely to commit homicide and leave intact the black-market supply of handguns to criminals. Improved data collection are critical in producing effective gun-control legislation. Staurt Weisberg New Media Editor "Possibly the best known paper was done by Arthur Kellerman...to show that keeping a gun in the home was strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of homicide. The data for this test consists of a "case sample" (444 homicides that occurred in the victim's homes in three counties) and a "control group" (388 "matched" individuals who lived near the deceased and were the same age and race as well as the same age range.) After information was obtained from relatives of the homicide victim or the control subjects regarding such things as whether they owned a gun or had a drug or alcohol problem, these authors attempted to see if the probability of a homicide was correlated with the ownership of a gun. There are many problems with Kellerman et al.'s paper that undercut the misleading impression that victims were killed by the gun in the home. For example, they fail to report that in only 8 of these 444 homicide cases could it be established that the "gun involved had been kept in the home" More important, the question posed by the authors cannot be tested properly using their chosen methodology because of the endogeneity problem discussed earlier with respect to cross-sectional data." More Guns, Less Crime by John Lott