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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (146021)	4/23/2002 12:30:49 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575424

No, men can be involved but I think women should have the lead. What is wrong with that? And I think measured intelligence should be a criterion. So who does THAT leave?

To: TimF who wrote (146021)	4/23/2002 4:32:45 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575424

I do have a high opinion of you and we've discussed the gun control issue before......based on the evidence, I don't believe we are talking about a constitutional right. I don't expect you to agree with my opinions against gun control but you can disagree without thinking the other person's opinions or arguments are "low". I find statements like "your defense of guns is really beneath who you are" strange. Tim, that statement may seem strange to you but I suspect someone with similar views on guns would not find it strange. I think defending the right to own guns in this society when they cause so much damage is nearly as offensive as suggesting a pimp should hit his 'ho to keep her in line. That does not mean the two are analogous......however, its the way I view it; its my bias. Guns cause senseless harm to people, often killing them in the process. I consider any argument that defends there usage beyond recreational hunting to be stupid. That's like me defending the usage of scorpions as pets......and scorpions don't kill as many people as guns do. Many gun accidents are accidents that happen to recreational hunters or people who are shot by them, or people who shoot themselves or others with guns that belong to hunters. If accidents are a reason to ban guns why not ban recreational hunting as well (and cars and maybe swiminng pools) I understand the argument.......and with cars and pools we keep coming up with new safety legislation, improved protection devises, and restrictions on who can and can not drive or when a pool can or can not be used. All I am asking is that the same be done with guns.......enough so that there is a significant reduction in gun deaths and injuries much like there has been with cars. Scorpions are a lot more dangerous because they can attack people on their own. Scorpions cause less problems because you don't have a couple of hundred million of them in peoples houses. My point exactly...........we should not allow so many guns in our society. I think if we keep the ratio at the same level as the number of scorpions in houses we will be doing fine. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Why, and how would a ban work? No, men can be involved but I think women should have the lead. What is wrong with that? What's wrong with that is it effectively disenfranchises half of the population. I didn't say they could not participate; I said they should not take the lead. Even if you start with your assumption that an unborn child is really just a clump of cells then it shouldn't be an issue of women to decide, it should be an issue for each individual woman to decide, other women should have no more input then other men. And that assumes you start out with the assumption then a fetus is a clump of cells with no more significance then a tadpole. Okay, fine........the individual woman then. If you start out with neither the pro-life or the pro-choice assumptions then you are dealing with a controversial political and philisophical issue on which everyone should have a chance to have their voice heard. How do you start out without those assumptions? They are factored in already. ted