In the FBI stats that came out the majority of police officers killed are killed with their own gun? They'd probably been better served by a stun-vest... Perhaps we should take guns away from them, then those fine officers would probably have lived longer. If you can't trust a weapon to a individual, how can you trust it to a group of individuals? ____________________________________________________________________ If the law is based on precedence, why is the Constitution not the final precedence since it's the primary authority? The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
At 05:45 PM 3/16/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
In the FBI stats that came out the majority of police officers killed are killed with their own gun? They'd probably been better served by a stun-vest...
Perhaps we should take guns away from them, then those fine officers would probably have lived longer.
If you can't trust a weapon to a individual, how can you trust it to a group of individuals?
England serves as a fine example here; With an armed populace and a disarmed police force :: low crime rate With a disarmed populace and an armed police force :: high crime rate. Read'em & weep, Phill. Reese
Reese wrote:
England serves as a fine example here;
I'm sure it does, but of what? I think the murder rate in Britain is about 1/6 of what it is in the USA. (I mean rate, not actual numbers, this is not a 28% paternity error). And the proportion of people killed accidentally is far lower here as well. We are perhaps a fine example of finding ways to live longer?
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Ken Brown wrote:
Reese wrote:
England serves as a fine example here;
I'm sure it does, but of what?
I think the murder rate in Britain is about 1/6 of what it is in the USA. (I mean rate, not actual numbers, this is not a 28% paternity error). And the proportion of people killed accidentally is far lower here as well. We are perhaps a fine example of finding ways to live longer?
If anyone cares, the interpersonal violence rate is considerably higher in the UK. Recent statisics on crime in industrialised countries (and therefore excluding South Africa) showed Australia leading the world and the UK second. America trailed far behind. -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015
Jim Dixon wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Ken Brown wrote:
Reese wrote:
England serves as a fine example here;
I'm sure it does, but of what?
I think the murder rate in Britain is about 1/6 of what it is in the USA. (I mean rate, not actual numbers, this is not a 28% paternity error). And the proportion of people killed accidentally is far lower here as well. We are perhaps a fine example of finding ways to live longer?
If anyone cares, the interpersonal violence rate is considerably higher in the UK. Recent statisics on crime in industrialised countries (and therefore excluding South Africa) showed Australia leading the world and the UK second. America trailed far behind.
Of course - that's the point. Brits are no less violent than USAns, no less likely to be criminal, no more polite or neighbourly (in fact rather less). But we are *far* less likely to be killed or seriously injured by our neighbours, or by the State. And part of the reason for that is that "normal" people don't have guns in Britain. Ken (still really not wanting to restart the Great Permanent Floating Internet Gun Rant)
At 4:34 PM +0000 3/19/01, Ken Brown wrote:
Of course - that's the point. Brits are no less violent than USAns, no less likely to be criminal, no more polite or neighbourly (in fact rather less). But we are *far* less likely to be killed or seriously injured by our neighbours, or by the State. And part of the reason for that is that "normal" people don't have guns in Britain.
Ken (still really not wanting to restart the Great Permanent Floating Internet Gun Rant)
Then don't. --Tim May -- Timothy C. May tcmay@got.net Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Ken Brown wrote:
I think the murder rate in Britain is about 1/6 of what it is in the USA. (I mean rate, not actual numbers, this is not a 28% paternity error). And the proportion of people killed accidentally is far lower here as well. We are perhaps a fine example of finding ways to live longer?
Yup. I'm not sure that's actually better though. Don't get me wrong, I've nothing against living a long time -- but I'm also perfectly willing to accept that being free enough to find extreme ways to live or silly ways to die young is also better than being "protected" from myself. As I get more accustomed to living in close proximity to many others (urban vs. rural) I'm mellowing in this opinion a little bit. It's easy for a rural kid to accept that stupid people get themselves killed -- I'm accustomed to thinking of guns as just one more tool that a rancher needs to keep the numbers of predators down so s/he can raise stock, and of course farm machinery is all over the place. But guns, farm machinery, etc, take a really heavy toll on idiots and the careless, and that's just the way the world works. But in the city, you can die because someone *else* is being stupid, and that's a lot harder to accept. Also, in a city, there are a lot fewer non-stupid uses for guns. So now at least I see the point of some of these laws, even if I still don't agree with them. It's the old argument about being free enough to make our own mistakes -- with guns, or otherwise. I prefer it to most of the alternatives. Bear On a faintly related note, every time I ride BART (the subway to new yorkers; the metro to europeans), I hear the recorded safety announcements and I'm vaguely horrified that there are apparently people out there, still alive and most likely capable of breeding, who are so stupid they have to be warned not to lick the third rail....
At 10:20 AM 3/19/01 +0000, Ken Brown wrote:
Reese wrote:
England serves as a fine example here;
I'm sure it does, but of what?
Crime rates.
I think the murder rate in Britain is about 1/6 of what it is in the USA. (I mean rate, not actual numbers, this is not a 28% paternity error). And the proportion of people killed accidentally is far lower here as well. We are perhaps a fine example of finding ways to live longer?
Peter Trei just posted a url to an Economist story, and THIS, lists just about everything BUT murder: http://itn.co.uk/news/20010116/britain/06crime.shtml - so what's the rest of the story? Reese
At 14:35 -1000 on 3/16/01, Reese wrote:
At 05:45 PM 3/16/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
In the FBI stats that came out the majority of police officers killed are killed with their own gun? They'd probably been better served by a stun-vest...
It's also worth noting that, that statistic is "Of officer's killed with a gun most are killed with _________". Most police officer's die from car accidents. -- "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- Justice William O. Douglas ____________________________________________________________________ Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott mailto:kelliott@mac.com ICQ#23758827
participants (7)
-
Jim Choate -
Jim Dixon -
Ken Brown -
Kevin Elliott -
Ray Dillinger -
Reese -
Tim May