🚀 go-pugleaf

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <DJoAw6.20t@freenet.carleton.ca> Colin R. Leech 
(ag414@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:

> Barry Glasgow (glasgow@bnr.ca) writes:
> > You talk about firearms as if they have a mind of their own
> > and that, if you ban them, they will go away 

> If they were banned, there would be fewer of them - hence less chance of
> one being used.

Another example of treating the symptom instead of the disease. If we
followed such logic for anything that might be MISused, there would be
nothing left to use. One doesn't stop crime and violence by restricting the
responsible activities of non-criminals.

> > and that if they did go away, nothing would replace them.

> A knife is a *lot* different from a gun. If you can't understand that,
> then there's not much point continuing this debate.

A knife is certainly more intimidating, at times. A knife is certainly more
difficult to defend against, since it can cause damage from many more angles
than a firearm.

In any case, your statement presumes that firearms will be replaced, which,
in the case of criminal use, won't happen.

- -- 
               SysOp, CUE Here BBS  (403) 465-7715
               Roger_Walker@CUEHere.Edmonton.AB.CA

    PGP Public Key from:  Roger_Walker_PGP@CUEHere.Edmonton.AB.CA


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBMNjMtKZ872JZyB+1AQFYrQf/U2qXdFGrCPBJ9Ksg4vHBGtko83cx1QmA
blIJu1VGDIj6wskTIuHMTcQ+HzxW+TSnkCPqDokV1c5lTa+tCPwcXcqtegl260hb
/uZP9l2pBxHPkIvIswFqpH/+x7KA5XMqC1/bot2fbOTVKUljgqK94y376Hb77ArN
kYBQrojqPZAKhYhQ1oobmUbhDEp+0U9+XT6JXf+9vJm5dIIyqaee3ooyt2K8TA72
DMcdAH8uF5y9B/edHrRFqyncoYZaQhyvOtQjHAI8zkOZEM6MqjL3YVnhfi4NG5cO
UAQ1H0OyQOZ6aaFzu6TkeOAUhiy8fv/cRDtvEw53NEERkjv+EJAicQ==
=8kPN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----