In <9305231707.AA12544@IMSI.COM>, Jordan Hayes writes: |> From mbriceno@aol.com Sat May 22 03:56:25 1993 |> |> If everybody would be armend, we would no longer look at the |> government as the sole provider of protectios from violent |> crimes, rape, or muggings. |> |> I'm sure lots of people could give examples of areas where "everyone" |> *is* armed, and while they certainly don't rely on "the government" |> (i.e., local police forces) for protection, most would agree the |> situation is not desirable ... "Most would agree"? What a silly statement. You're in a big virtual room with lots of different people, but a lot of them are "card-carrying" libertarians who most certainly don't agree with that. However, Marc also said, "I am glad that someone is finally mentioning [the parallel between crypto and arms]." which is vacuous in light of the _endless_ discussion on this very point on Usenet (sci.crypt and elsewhere) in the beginnings of the wiretap chip flap. Which leads me to my main point: please take this off-list before it turns into the same flamewar that currently rages on talk.politics.guns and for whatever weird reason, sci.skeptic. ^ / ------/---- cp@jido.b30.ingr.com (Freeman Craig Presson) / / Gun Control: The belief that the government, with its great wisdom and moral superiority, can be trusted with a monopoly on deadly force. -- Clayton E. Cramer