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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (14074)	12/9/1997 12:50:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

>why I pointedly ask people whether they believe hand grenades and assault rifles should be legal (you will notice no one has ever responded to my question).> But I did. Twice. Once with a direct comment, once by posting a url containing material which treated of the scope of "arms". What exactly is an "assault weapon"? I'd make a lousy diplomat. I don't buy into the "repeat often" method used at negotiating tables. When I answer a point and the answer is ignored, I tire. >two of the points you may be missing of mine are that (1) most of the guns used in crimes are stolen from law-abiding gun owners, and (2) statistically it is more likely that your gun will be used against you than that you will be able to defend yourself with it. So I guess I am questioning the usefulness of guns on a more primal level than you may think. < I answered both points previously. 1) I cannot support the idea of punishing the victim harder than the real criminal. There is something basically wrong going on (what is a matter for beer talk) when we seriously examine such measures. 2)I would need to see this figure backed up by a disinterested source. Not the Violence Policy Center, not the AMA or CDC, not the NRA even. Re your nine points (of gun control): the only one I vigorously oppose is point eight. Define a military-type weapon! Worldwide, armies use almost every type of handgun, rifle and shotgun imaginable. So this needs more definition. Merely banning all, say, semi-auto firearms would be bad law. Trigger locks. I presume there would be an exception for concealed-carry apps. I further presume that the newly-weeded ranks of remaining gun owners would see concealed carry made available. I think we've come to a place where the smartest (imho) thing to do is to mutually agree that we have strongly-held and currently conflicting beliefs on how to deal with societal violence and/or gun issues. I won't say" You're full of...bad ideas". I hope you'll keep an open place in your position to the idea that Guns and Social Trouble aren't the same thing. With your permission I'll leave the podium. Alex