NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/alt/peeves/19768

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-28 | 3.5 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!ibmpcug!demon!antipope.uucp!root
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
From: [e-mail] (Superuser)
X-Mailer: SCO System V Mail (version 3.2)
Subject: Re: More Gun Control
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 19:47:43 +0000
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Lines: 75

[e-mail] (Andrew Clayton)
>
>Peeve: This entire thread.
    :
>Yeah.  Isn't it true that -most- burglaries take place when the
>victims are away from their abode?

Not necessarily.

Way back when the world was young, I lived in a house that was burgled
frequently enough that we were on a first-name basis with the local
cop shop. On one of those occasions I was actually >in< at the time.
Luckily (for me, I guess) I was hacking away on my ZX81 with a pair
of headphones plugged into the stereo, which was playing something
LOUD.

We followed the trail of rifled drawers from the broken window, through
the hall, upstairs, along the passage to my parent's bedroom -- next
to mine -- then out their window! The burglar had heard the headphones
and done a high-speed runner.

I think we lost a stray five hundred peseta note (worth about three
pounds) on that occasion. 'Course it was in the high teens burglary-
wise, so we all knew better than to leave stealable property lying
around.

[Russ writes:]
>> Other than making my point, you failed to address the rebuttal of your
>> point that a firearm couldn't be both safe from children and other
>> pests and still be available for self defense purposes.  There are a
>
>Your point was as vacuous as the entire 'issue'.  If you are in
>the process of being robbed, then the criminal is unlikely to
>give you any chance of rushing into your bedroom, and unlocking
>your weapon; rather he or she will blow your fool head off before
>you even get to say 'eek!  A robber!'.

Bollocks. On nine out of ten occasions the robber will shit
themselves and jump out the window, because they are expecting
someone who is  * in their own territory *  and angry! SOP if
you're in a house with a burglar is to invite them to get the
hell out of the nearest window as loudly as possible. _Don't_
make them think you'll attack them as soon as they turn to run,
or they'll stand and fight in self-defense; leave them a way
out. But _don't_ quail in fear, or you're asking for trouble.

Oh, and remember this; your property is worth less than your
life. As far as the burglar goes, it's worth less than _their_
life. And it's also probably worth less than the PTSD and/or legal
trouble associated with blowing someone away, even if you're
armed and you've got the drop on them.

>Arguing this point is futile.  You want to own a gun?  Fine.
>When you shoot yourself in the face in a reloading accident, I'll
>be the first one to say "I told you so." Remember, I do not CARE
>if you own a gun, several guns, or an entire range of diverse
>weaponry.
>
>What I cared about was being told that I'm somehow at fault
>because an Australian state government decided to enact harsher
>firearm ownership restrictions.
>
>Guns don't kill people.  Fuckheads kill people.  Fuckheads with guns.

Too true. And the best way to let fuckheads get their hands on guns
is to make them freely available, without restraint.

Little known fact; crime in the UK -- all crime -- dropped by 85%
or so in the 1830's ... when they disarmed the aristocracy. And
no, they weren't soft on crime in those days. (They'd only just
gotten rid of the death penalty for stealing a loaf of bread.)

--- Charlie

    [e-mail]