🚀 go-pugleaf

>>jstrickl@cs.sfu.ca (James Strickland) writes:
>>> In article <qgiuVc3w165w@aroga.wimsey.com>,
>>> Jim Pook <pook@aroga.wimsey.com> wrote:
>>>>I think I could come up with some good rules for gun owners. For
>>>>instance, I would do away with silly laws that restrict
semi-automatic
>>>>centerfire rifles, magazine size limits, etc.
>>>
>>> Why are these laws silly?  What do you use these weapons for?  What
>>> "right" is being infringed upon by these limits?  What about the
right
>>> of others to safety?
>>
>>  We use them for recreational shooting.  What's the difference to you
if
>>we pump bullets into our targets one at a time or in groups? ...
>
>None at all.

  Then what is your objection to semi-automatic rifles?  To the size of
the magazines that these guns are *designed* to accommodate?

  What does 'the right of others to safety' have to do with my choice
of firearm?  Am *I* somehow the threat that you see here...or is it
my guns?


>>(oh, that's right: you don't think "shooting is a sport", do you?)
>
>Whether I think it is a sport or not is irrelevant.  If you enjoy it,
>fine.


  You expressed the idea that it was not.  Millions of other people
disagree...so yes, it is irrelevant.  But nonetheless you *did* say that,
and tells me right away that you're biased against shooters; how much
weight should I lend your opinions if I know that you don't understand
the subject (or our motivations)?  The fact is that sport and
recreational
shooting is just as valid a use for firearms as hunting or
self-defense...
and all the prejudice in the world isn't going to change that, sorry.


>I think it's entirely reasonable to enforce strict controls on
>storage and ownership of dangerous weapons, however.


  So do I.  And that's exactly why we HAVE such controls...but is no
reason for uninformed, fear-motivated attacks on me or my hobby. Your
right to 'feel' safer ends when it infringes on my right to enjoy my
chosen recreation *in the absence of any actual evidence of danger to
you*.


>>  We aren't talking about FULLY automatic firearms...those are
>>prohibited weapons in Canada (shouldn't you already know this if
>>you're so willing to give us your 'opinions' on the subject?  Do you
>>have *any* idea what you're talking about here...or are you just
>>another fool motivated by the fear of something you don't
>>understand?).
>
>You may not be talking about them, but the original poster was (see
>underlined).  Perhaps it is you who should read carefully before
>posting.


  You're right...he *did* use the term 'fully-automatic'.  My mistake.

  But you're also correct that most of us (myself included) are talking
about SEMI-automatic firearms.  And it is these that the anti-gun forces
are trying to 'get rid of', despite the additional restrictions already
imposed on them for no other reason that their *appearance*.



>>  And the purpose of handgun hunting is the same as it is in the US,
>>and the same as bowhunting: the additional skill required makes it more
>>of a challenge, and thus more 'sporting' than simply picking off an
>>animal at long range with a telescopic sight.  Is that so hard to
>>understand...or are hunters Evil Bloodthirsty Killers in your eyes,
>>too?
>
>You're pulling out all the stereotypes today, aren't you?
>Is it possible for you to debate this without accusing me of ignorance,
>stupidity, or prejudice?


  Certainly.  I just assumed that since you had to ask such an obvious
question you couldn't be a hunter...and therefore were probably against
that, too; was I wrong in this assumption?  Do you think that hunting
should be banned?



>>  Because (as has been pointed out many times already) explosives can
>>be dangerous *in and of themselves*...and have no legitimate sporting,
>>                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>recreational or defensive uses.  People who do have a need for them do
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>possess them, but not in residential areas...what if there was a fire?
>>What if they exploded spontaneously (as they've been known to do)?
>>
>>  You guys need some newer, more *relevant* arguments...surely you can
>>do better than these same tired old excuses.
>
>Explosives don't explode unless they are set off for some reason
>(perhaps accidentally),


  WRONG.  Explosives can and do explode spontaneously, as I said above.


>just as guns don't fire unless they are set off for
>some reason (perhaps accidentally).  What is the difference?


  The difference is that a gun has to be loaded, cocked and have pressure
applied to the trigger (after it has been unlocked, reassembled or had
the other *safe storage* requirements bypassed).  It will then discharge
a single small lead projectile in whatever direction it is pointed.

  Explosives, on the other hand, will indiscriminately destroy everything
around them...a person, a room full of people or a *building* full of
people.


 (don't blame me: it was YOUR poorly conceived analogy in the first place
that attempted to compare explosives and guns, remember?)


>As for "no legitimate..."  Wow!  Are you telling me that because *you*
>cannot think of any legitimate uses, that therefore there must be none?


  No.  I said that there *are* legitimate uses for explosives...just
not in the home.


>I can imagine it being a lot more fun to blow something up than to
>"pump bullets" into it.  I can imagine competitive demolition as a
>sport. (Who can do the most accurate job of imploding a building?  Who
>can...) I can imagine waving an explosive around and shouting as being
>at least as effective as waving a gun around and shouting.  Or tossing a
>grenade at an intruder doing at least as good a job of killing him/her
>"in self defense" as a gun could.  I have now demonstrated legitimate
>sporting, recreational and defensive uses of explosives.  Now can you
>justify why *you* want to deny me access to explosives?


  <sigh>...


  Don't tell me...tell the government.  Present your case to them and
see if they agree with your 'sporting' use of explosives.  Tell them
how you think grenades are the ultimate 'self-defense' tool...

  (let me know how you make out, okay?)  ;)