Dang it Dave, I was going to try and stay out of the debate this year.
Believe me, I do respect your beliefs, I just hope you don't want to inflict
them on everyone else.
In a message dated 11/25/2002 10:19:38 PM Mountain Standard Time,
davriker@pacbell.net writes:
> 1. Guns are designed to kill. It's that simple.
I agree, and knives are designed to cut, and baseball bats to hit.
>
> 2. There is no such thing as a sporting gun. What kind of sport results
> in
> death?
Targets and Hunting...I know you disagree, but Olympic grade target
> shooters have to be good enough to control their breathing, and the best
> even squeeze the trigger between heartbeats. They shoot for the skill of
> hitting a paper target, and many never hunt anything.
> 3. Target practice isn't a sport either. It is killing practice. That's
> why many targets are the silhouette of a human. Like practicing your aim?
> Take up darts.
Oh yeah, lawn darts with your children?
>
> 4. Hunting isn't a sport. In a true sport there is an equal chance that
> either side can win or loose, and awake tomorrow to play again. Since the
> animal always looses, I doubt he would find the act of being hunted
> "sporting". Hunting for food also is not a reason to own a gun. Last
> time
> I was at the grocery store, there was no shortage of meat. If it were a
> good reason to own a gun, we should issue one gun to each homeless person
> so
> they could feed themselves. Hunting doesn't get you closer to nature, it
> kills a part of it. If you want to get closer to nature, take the scope,
> and leave the rifle at home. Get up close and yell "BANG" and watch Bambi
> run away. If you had a gun, you probably would have missed anyway. Same
> end result. If you miss walking away from the hunt with something to show
> for it, take a camera, and hang an 8x10 on the wall instead of a set of
> horns. Hunting as population management is flawed. Animals can be
> trapped,
> and euthanized humanely.
Written like someone who has never rolled out of a bedroll at 4 AM and
struggled into many layers of clothing (only to find out the coffee needs to
be let out), walked a mile or so in the dark to a blind or spot in the woods
and sat down for hours in weather so cold you were afraid to fall asleep.
They call it hunting because indeed there is never a guarantee of a kill,
otherwise they would call it killing. I must assume you've never sat in the
cold darkness and gazed at Orion, or listened to the coyotes howl when the
sun creeps over the horizon, or sat so still that a half dozen does walked up
to your feet...then when you blinked, bounded away into the woods like
Santa's reindeer.
It's a fact of life that a large percentage of us are omnivorous. Millions
of animals are killed in factory slaughterhouses to fulfill our need for
meat. If we all had to go out and hunt down our meat supply, there would be
many more vegetarians out there.
I personally enjoy the outdoor experience and even the experience of the kill
and slaughter. Is it fun? No, not really. It is an experience of the
process our ancestors went through and I like having that experience. The
experience and satisfaction of being able to do the process leads to the
"fun" of being a hunter. Sort of like rebuilding the front suspension on a
Spridget.
Another fact is that there are many times more wild animals in my part of the
country right now, purely because of the time, effort, and money spent by
hunters.
As far as population management goes, which would be more humane: A. the
chance of a quick shot and death from a hunter who will make use of the game.
Or B. A long chase, trapping, transporting in a cage, and being gassed or
injected and buried in a landfill. ????
> 5. Guns are useless as self defense. If the criminal has one the only
> thing you can accomplish is a stalemate. Usually the stalemate results
> your death.
Come on Dave, how would you defend yourself? Or would you just say " Oh
golly, hope you don't shoot me! But if you do, make it quick...or could you
please trap and euthanize me instead Mr. Criminal?" I'll take my chances on
besting the intruder. The best home defense is a dog, an alarm system, and a
telephone call to the cops, but I'll still endeavor to defend myself.
> 6. The slippery slope argument between the outlaw of Spridgets, corvairs,
> and guns is flawed. The only persons killed in a spridget crash due to the
> design of the car is the driver and willing passenger "if" an accident
> occurs. Most the time, guns kill the other guy. I do oppose helmet laws
> on
> motorcycle riders because I do see a similarity between a motorcycle rider
> being forced against his will to wear a helmet, and the eventuality of a
> spridget driver being forced to wear a helmet.
almost no comment here...dead is dead. How many of us take children riding
in our Spridets? Are they fully competent to make the life or death decision
as to whether they should ride in our deathtraps?
You really cannot protect people from all "things" and I'm not sure you can
protect them completely from themselves and others.
> 7. You are probably right that the outlaw of guns won't reduce crime, it
> will only reduce the number of 15 year olds mowing down their classmates,
> curious children blowing their brains out and stuff like that.
So outlawing one type of weapon will cure all the psychotic 15 year olds?
How many did they gun down last year and how does this number compare with
the number that died in unsafe vehicles? ( or even on bicycles?)
I have a very curious 11 year old grandson. I once attended a lecture by a
fellow who had written his dissertation comparing curiosity to intelligence
and his conclusion was that without curiosity, intelligence is diminished. I
feel pretty safe in stating that my grandson, who has been taught about
firearms for several years now, would not exhibit his "curiosity" by blowing
his brains out. I think he has a good idea what would happen if he
discharged a weapon at himself or one of his friends.
> 8. I actually support everyone's right to own and collect guns. I simply
> believe that ammunition and reloading equipment should be outlawed.
I actually have several guns for which I own no ammunition....but outlawing
ammunition could work. We could break all the knives and license all the
clubs too. We could outlaw Lucas distributor rotors too, and Pertronix
conversions. If you'd ever ridden in a Spridget piloted by Brad, you'd
understand the safety aspect here.
Nice arguing with ya!
Robert Houston...more guns (and ammunition) than I need, but not as many as I
want.
The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The
man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from
touching the equipment.
Warren Bennis
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive/spridgets
|