SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: greenspirit who wrote (43836)4/24/1999 8:40:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 67261
 
What I said, Michael of a thousand smileys, is that nothing is going to be done, so it's pointless to talk about it. I'm glad you like having 38k gun deaths a year, that can somehow be blamed on Clinton or liberals or whatever. I think it sucks.

In case you haven't figured it out by now, people are always going to get pissed off and angry with other people. If there's not a gun handy, it usually doesn't come to much. Maybe they yell at each other, maybe they actually start hitting, but it's pretty hard to kill somebody without a good tool handy.

Or maybe the holy Republican moral reformationists will make us all better people if we just give them the chance. You believe that one Michael?



To: greenspirit who wrote (43836)4/25/1999 2:51:00 PM
From: halfscot  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 67261
 
I agree Michael. All regulations and laws have done is keep guns out of law abiding citizen's hands. Yes, there are cases of easy to get guns leading to easy deaths in the heat of passion, but, like automobile deaths, plane crashes,....fire, we have to weigh the utility afforded to us vs the bad that can come from its use negatively. A little reported fact when the ban on assault rifles was implemented: more people were killed by baseball bats than by assault rifles the year before the ban. A handgun's primary utility is to defend oneself against the sociopathically violent and criminal elements who would gladly take our life and property with no compunction otherwise. I, for one, don't want to face a violent criminal, even if he has no gun, with only a knife or baseball bat or, worse yet, my hands. I figure he has much more experience dealing with this kind of defense and in using violence against normative society.

A recent book, More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws (Studies in Law and Economics) by John Lott (A professor of Economics), points out many, many facts, the basic tenets of which are undisputed by even the most fervent anti-gun activists, that shatter the most popular myths of the anti-gun crowd. It's mainly about how the concealed carry permits given to law-abiding citizens have greatly curtailed crime wherever implemented with none of the predicted 'shootouts on every street corner' as predicted by the anti-gun crowd. In every case crime has dropped dramatically while crime in areas with the most legislation against the citizenry having guns has risen just as dramatically. The author had no agenda when he started writing this book. He didn't really know what to expect-he just wanted to conduct a scholarly work on this subject since one hasn't been done before in a scientific manner. The outcome has been predictable with liberals though. It's the facts that bother them the most. You know how facts are to liberals don't you? Like kryptonite to Superman is a good analogy.

halfscot