🚀 go-pugleaf

Tom G <tomg@bnr.ca> wrote:
> rnichols@bnr.ca (Robin Nichols) writes:
>> 
>> I've been trying to say this the past couple of days ...
>> anti-gunners will come up with any "example" to try and
>> make their point.  Anything.  Even though it can be beaten
>> down in a New York minute.  Most of us "gun-lovers" are open
>> to change, but not total banishment or restriction.  That's 
>> all they will accept however.
>
>What a stereotype.  You don't really believe this I am sure.
>
>What if one says that all pro-gunners only want TOTALLY unrestricted,
>undocumented access ALL TYPES of guns?  This is about an equal statement
>to yours.
>
>No anti-gunner with common sense honestly believes that you can get rid
>of guns over night.  Many just want restrictions.  Many want to
>pursue the goal of significant control to varying degrees.

Well, Tom, here's the problem.

Most anti-gunners don't want gun control for the sake of gun control...
they want gun control for a *purpose*. Specifically, most of them
believe it would reduce crime... despite all available evidence. We
pro-gunners know differently, and patiently try to explain why gun
control is something most criminals favor, and why gun control would
not reduce crime. Unfortunately, the anti-gunners invariably don't
listen, and eventually throw up their hands and say, "Why are you making
such a fuss? It's only a *few* little controls we want, nothing too
inconveniencing." And they pass what they want.

But then a funny thing happens. See, we pro-gunners are *right*, and
lo and behold, the modest gun controls fail to reduce crime. In fact,
usually the opposite effect happens... crime goes *up*. Rather than
make the connection between the increased gun control and the increased
crime, the anti-gunners conclude that the recently-passed gun control
legislation wasn't *enough*, and that tighter controls are needed. "We
just want a few restrictions" quickly becomes "We just want a few *more*
restrictions", which quickly becomes "We need to get rid of all the
guns!"

*This* is why we're leery when people want "just a few modest controls".
As I said in a previous post... review the history of gun control in
New York, Illinois, and Great Britain. You'll see what I mean.

-- 
__/\__  Jonathan S. Haas          | Jake liked his women the way he liked
\    /  positron@neosoft.com      | his kiwi fruit: sweet yet tart, firm-
/_  _\  Finger for PGP 2.3 key    | fleshed yet yielding to the touch, and
  \/    Don't Tread On Me         | covered with short brown fuzzy hair.