NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/dc/talk/guns/27

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-31 | 1.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!opl.com!chad
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: dc.talk.guns
Subject: Gun control
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 31 Dec 92 17:21:43 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: usa
Organization: Project Canada
Lines: 34
Originator: [e-mail]


>> All governments, however formed, have used firearms registration lists
>> to confiscate them at a later date.  Once that happens, government is
>> free to do whatever they want to defenseless citizens.  Believe it or
>> not, the Second Amendment is in the Constitution for a purpose.
>> Ignore that purpose, lose your freedom, and you only have yourself to
>> blame.
>

There is good reason to propose gun control.  Firearms and major
population centers don't mix terribly well.  Deaths from shootings
have reached alarming proportions.

Nonetheless, I think the founding fathers did want an armed populace.
"A well regulated militia" calls to mind the fears of the standing army
which the American colonialists had just defeated.  The declaration
of independence even mentions the historical inevitability of
governmental oppression and malevolence (ie: Jim Crow laws in U.S., early
this century.)  Nazi Germany did much of its evil to Ukranians and Jews
under the cover of laws passed by that regime.

>Anyone who thinks that the public will be able to defend themselves against
>the government with ~9mm semi-auto handguns is definitely a few cards short
>of a deck.

Of course lightly armed civilians are no match for highly trained
soldiers with naval and air support.  Still, even the poorly
armed Jews in the Warsaw ghetto were able to make a valient
resistance.


              -- Chad

              [e-mail]