IMHO, the one thing that remains constant in the gun control debate, is that
no-one gets it right. No-one seems to be able to back away from it far
enough to take an objective, yet philosophical view. Governments act on
personal beliefs, regardless of facts. People support legislation against
others, who must be criminals, but surely it doesn't apply to them. ( Here
in Canada, one MP who supports registration, stated that he would not
register his. I wish I could remember who it is, but I can't. Like most
Canadian sheep, myself included, he will probably meet the deadline. )
People spout statistics and attempt to make statistics out of immeasureable
'what-ifs' while others dismiss the 'what-ifs' completely because it doesn't
suit them.
When you hear the percentage of people who supported our current gun control
in the polls, you can take it at face value, or you can call the pollster,
as I did, to find out what the questions were. Questions? Sorry,
'question'. "Do you believe that there should be gun control?" ( I'm
paraphrasing slightly, because my memory is not that great. ) That was the
crux question that the government paid to have asked. There was no attempt
to find out, if they thought that existing legislation was adequate, or if
they support the many invasions in the new proposals, if they would have
supported the 'the only requirement for a search warrant for a registered
owner is that they refuse voluntary inspection' ( again, paraphrased ). To
make a long story short, our government had no concerns about doing the
right thing. There was no search for knowledge, only for statistical
support for an action that they wished to accomplish. That reason alone,
should be reason to not support them. There are many others.
Don't get me going.
Robert D.
pro-gun / anti-crime / and living in a kakistocracy
----- Original Message -----
/// 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
|