🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <CzHoHu.EyG@zadall.com>, mel@zadall.com (Melanie Arabsky) says:
>
>I happen to agree that its easier to kill with a gun that without one.
>I have been faced with the situation of having to kill injured animals,
>and I could not do it 'with my bare hands' (e.g. break neck, I
>certainly would not have been able to cut its throat or anything
>similarly gruesome).  I suppose that is a personal failing.  However,
>I am sure I would have been able to do it (or at least attempt it) with 
>a gun (although it certainly would have been overkill!).  Its use 
>removes you from living creature, creates somewhat of a barrier between 
>you and 'death',  at least *before* you pull the trigger - afterward, 
>I don't imagine there is much difference.  But afterward can be too late!
>
>This is what worries me most about guns - their impartiality.  I
>admit, I am not experienced with guns outside of paintball, gallery
>shooting at the fair, and water pistols.  But I can feel the
>difference it would make, in me at least, if it came to my 'capability
>to kill' (*not* DESIRE to kill, but capability).  I *know* there would
>be a difference.
>
>Does no one else see this???  I can't believe I am the only person who
>feels this way.
>
>-- 
>Melanie Arabsky, Zadall Systems Group - Burnaby, BC      mel@zadall.com

Melanie, I see no difference, because it is the intent that counts.  Just 
because I can punch holes in a paper target at 100 yards does not mean
that I can take a life indiscriminatly. 

You talk about toy guns and suggest that this would make it easier to kill?
This bears the same relationship as rubber knifes have to stabbing someone.
Easy in play, but I've never met anyone that didn't know that guns and knifes
can kill. 

Your conclusion is wrong.  

Ron Vick