🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3at4t5$7h5@utdallas.edu>,  <jspence@utdallas.edu> wrote:
>You are wrong again Ray. I do know my history and the foundations of 
>American government. I also am aware of many current facts (whatever 
>facts you may speak of). I read much political philosophy and I am aware 
>of political and social realities.

I'd suggest doing some more reading, then.  Start with Jeffrey Snyder's
"A Nation of Cowards" which was published in Public Interest magazine.
Atlantic Monthly had a good article on the gun debate during the past year
as well.  Even ABC's Turning Point recently had a program which presented
a more rational and realistic picture of guns in our society.
I'd be happy to email you the Snyder essay to read.  As for current
facts, please present them with sources.   The best work on the gun
debate is Point Blank by Gary Kleck, who is a Florida criminologist,
a Democrat, and an ACLU member.  He has no affiliation with either side of
the debate, neither the NRA  nor HCI.  I would strongly recommended
reading this book so that you might be better able to support your own
position -- rather than using the open-ended vague statements above.
Your political and social realities are probably not the same as mine.

>As to guns and their uses, I see no use for them at all.

I'm sure there are many rape victims who would disagree with you that
firearms have "no uses".  Although the idea of using martial arts or
non-lethal weapons is appealing, many individuals (especially those who
are elderly, of smaller physical stature, or have specific physical
limitations) are at a significant disadvantage against a large violent
attacker.  If non-lethal weapons and martial arts were completely
effective, the police wouldn't carry guns.  

>my arrogance: so be it. Holding and shooting a gun is just like alcohol 
>and drugs, something we could use a lot less of. Too many damn guns. Guns 
>for children, guns to protect the home, guns to kill people.

Have you ever held and shot a gun - or are you basing your entire opinion
on what you've seen on the TV news and Rambo movies?  Did you know that
in Travis County (according to a recently released Health Dept Study)
we averaged 80 gun-related deaths a year - over half of them suicides.
This in a county with an estimated 100,000+ guns in civilian hands.
If guns were "only for killing people" it seems like the murder rate
would be a lot higher.  The stats from my own community show that 99%+
of the guns are not involved in violence.  

>gun for but to kill something. Bullshit on that target stuff, most people 
>shoot at silhouttes of people. White people shoot at Blacks and Hispanics 
>at the target ranges. They are just feeding their addiction of hate.

You don't have a clue about that "target stuff".  This year I've shot in
competitions all over the US in matches that use square and round steel
plates as targets, as well as paper targets with round scoring rings and
yes, targets shaped like humans.  I'd be happy to introduce you to
shooters from any race, religious belief, sex, and sexual orientation that
you would like to meet.  Just because you've seen gun-owners portrayed as
racist rednecks on TV doesn't mean that it's the truth.  If you're
offended by the use of humanoid targets in shooting are you also offended
by boxing, fencing, judo, or any other 'combat sport'?  Do you also hate
people who train in martial arts because they are learning to kill with
their bare hands?   

If you're going to have an opinion, and post it to the net, it should
be based on something besides fear, ignorance, and bigotry...

Karl
rehn@arlut.utexas.edu