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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Win Smith who wrote (5896)	2/15/2001 1:13:35 PM
From: Bald Eagle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I'll propose the argument for carrying concealed weapons. Criminals are much less likely to try to rob or rape somebody if there is a strong possibility that person is carrying a concealed weapon. Where I usually live (Louisiana), you can carry a concealed weapon with a permit. To get the permit you have to go through some training and also not be a convicted felon. I have been told that there is a correlation between southern politeness and concealed weapons. Coming from England, I wasn't raised to call people sir and ma'am, but down in the south USA, it's the thing to do. I have been told it is because in the days when lots of people carried concealed weapons it paid to be polite to everyone!

To: Win Smith who wrote (5896)	2/16/2001 5:42:06 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 82486

Given what's considered "reasonable" search and seizure in the war on drugs, the "well regulated militia" part of the Second Amendment would seem to cover a lot. It would if the 2nd amendment said "the rights of militia members to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed" or if it said "the rights of the various states to organize and arm a militia shall not be infringed", but it doesn't it says "the rights of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed. People get mad all the time, for a lot of silly reasons. Usually, it doesn't matter much, even if it comes to blows. Somebody's got a gun handy, though, things can take a fatal turn all too easily. There are almost as many guns in the US as people. The number of killings where people just lose it for some silly reason and start shooting is very small. It is exceeded by the number of uses of guns for self-defense. Note use of a gun for self defense does not just count people shooting criminals but also cases where a crime is deterred by someone with a gun without a shot being fired. Even the possibility that someone might have a gun can have a strong deterrent effect. It's a public health problem, guns kill about as many people as cars do I don't think it is fair or accurate to lump gun violence in with normal public health problems. Guns don't go around shooting people by themselves. Somebody decides to shoot someone. It is a crime problem not a gun problem. Guns kill less people then cars even though there are more guns then cars in the US. Tim