🚀 go-pugleaf

In reaction to Prof. Denning:

Your motives are very good, as far as I can see. However, I want to remind you
that the crime rate in Nazi Germany was very low. And that people still think
the nazi's did a great job in restructuring the economy (mainly by forcing
companies to invest every penny of profit above 6% in the industry and
disabling workers to fight for their rights).

These good things don't make the total good. And I think that your mentioning
of the kidnaping and the terrorists examples are dangerous. By mentioning such
extreme cases, you divert the discussion with strong feelings of disgust on
particular (and not common) cases. I think the nazis would have been able to
think of such examples with ease.

These kind of arguments are used in the abortion debate, the firearms debate
etc. Please refrain from such tactics.

Note, I do not compare you to a nazi at all. You have strong good moral
motives, I think. But you are maybe an example of people who are easily led by
such feelings. More a "Gretchen" than a nazi. Not guilty, but gullible.

I share your motives. However, I am afraid what happens to society if we
implement onesided views too much. It's not the choice for pure freedom vs the
choice for pure safety. It's something in between. And that means you can
neither have pure safety (and the kidnaping and terrorist things will remain)
nor pure freedom (like the freedom to be your own judge and shoot that
neighbour).

To get completely rid of the atrocities you mention, more will be needed than
gentle intrusion by the government, if it can be done at all. And that is why
your argument is dangerous.


-- 
wierda@ltb.bso.nl (Gerben Wierda)     ||    #include <std/disclaimer.h>. Support
NeXTmail: gerben@rna.indiv.nluug.nl   ||    the League for Programming Freedom!
    "If you don't know where you are going, any road will take you there."
    (From the Talmud(?), rephrased in) Lewis Carroll, "Alice in Wonderland".