Article View: dc.talk.guns
Article #2157Re: gun-fetiscists dc.talk.guns, please
From: Doug Humphrey
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1993 18:28
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1993 18:28
48 lines
3280 bytes
3280 bytes
In article <1nrn6mINNbhr@sol.tis.com> mjr@tis.com (Marcus J Ranum) writes: >perez@mgr.hjf.org (Charles Perez) writes: > >>And, now, the age-old question: who shall protect us from our protectors? > > Protect yourself. Protecting yourself is not a matter of hardware, >it's a matter of will and resolve. If you've got those, then the tools, be >they knives, guns, or nukes, are just an implementation detail. > There's a very big difference between a revolutionary and a well >armed whiner. Most of the NRA-propaganda spouting dweebs I see are the >latter. There surely has to be a middle ground between a revolutionary and a well armed whiner ;-) I am not a revolutionary - I can't think of a given "revolution" that I am supporting or working toward, at least not in the sense that we are addressing here. I am not a well armed whiner - well armed, yes. Whiner, no. The middle ground that I seek, and that others may or may not, is the situation where I am given the rights to protect myself, and my loved ones and property. This implies, and I would make it explicit, that the tools to do so are available to me. I do not want to depend on the police for protection; if they are available to lend a hand in a given situation, that is great, and I certainly welcome the help. However, I do not want to have to count on that level of assistance in critical situations. Self defense is your right. If I misuse those tools, then punish me swiftly and with great severity, for the misuse of them is not part of the right to have them. If I am careless with them, and it causes injury to someone, then again punishment should be swift and sure. The whole point of wanting to have the tools is an exercise in being responsible; a failure of that attitude shows that one is not qualified to have the tools. I think there should be a middle ground on this argument, but right now both sides are polarized, standing at the far ends of the room throwing rotting fruit and press releases at each other. Before there can be compromise, there needs to be trust. I am not sure how to get there from here... Doug -- Doug Humphrey Express Access Public Access Internet Voice (301) 220-2020 doug@digex.com Dialup: (301) 220-0462 Login as "new" Email info@digex.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "I say it again, in the land of the free; use your freedom of choice." - DEVO
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1nt94eINN8ni@access.digex.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!digex.com!digex.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<1nmbdfINNj14@mojo.eng.umd.edu> <1993Mar12.010247.4652@apgea.army.mil> <C3sq4G.Epo@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil> <1nrn6mINNbhr@sol.tis.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 101049,78ab9087c515afbd X-Google-Attributes: gid101049,public X-Google-Thread: 10162c,78ab9087c515afbd X-Google-Attributes: gid10162c,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1993-03-13 10:36:42 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!digex.com!digex.com!not-for-mail From: dougnews@access.digex.com (Doug Humphrey) Newsgroups: dc.talk.guns,dc.general Subject: Re: gun-fetiscists dc.talk.guns, please Date: 13 Mar 1993 13:28:30 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications USA Lines: 48 Distribution: usa Message-ID: <1nt94eINN8ni@access.digex.com> References: <1nmbdfINNj14@mojo.eng.umd.edu> <1993Mar12.010247.4652@apgea.army.mil> <C3sq4G.Epo@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil> <1nrn6mINNbhr@sol.tis.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com