Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!boulder!ucsu!ucsu.Colorado.EDU!fcrary
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: My Gun is like my American Express Card
Message-ID: <1993Apr18.161049.10422@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>
Sender: news@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: ucsu.colorado.edu
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
References: <CMM.0.90.2.734911642.thomasp@surt.ifi.uio.no> <viking.734945095@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu> <CMM.0.90.2.735132009.thomasp@surt.ifi.uio.no>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1993 16:10:49 GMT
Lines: 85

In article <CMM.0.90.2.735132009.thomasp@surt.ifi.uio.no> Thomas Parsli <thomasp@ifi.uio.no> writes:
>Drivers licence:
>Forgot that USA is THE land of cars.....
>Getting one in Scandinavia (and northern europe) is not easy.
>Average time is about 20 hours of training, and the cost is rather......

Is the license required for driving a car exclusively on private
property, such as a farm? Here in the United States, the license
is required only for the use of public roads.

>Abuse by the goverment:
>This seems to be one of the main problems; Any harder gun-control
>would just be abused by the goverment.(!)
>Either some of you are a little paranoid (no offence...) OR you should
>get a new goverment. (You do have elections??)

We also have a nation of 250 million people, _many_ issues and
usually only two candidates for a given office. A President
might be willing to abuse mild gun control laws and create
a de-facto ban (something a majority of the people would object to)
and still be elected: The voters might look at issues like the
civil rights of minorities, health care, etc... and vote
for the "lesser of two evils." I don't think this is a matter
of paranoia, since local governments in (for example) New York
and Chicago have abused existing, mild gun control laws to 
create a virtual ban.

>Guns 'n Criminals:
>MOST weapons used by criminals today are stolen.
>Known criminals can NOT buy weapons, that's one of the points of gun control.

In which case, the United States already has adaquate gun control laws:
According to federal statistic, only 7% of gun-wielding criminals
legally purchase their own guns from licensed dealers. If that's
the point of gun control (to prevent criminals from legally purchasing
guns) then America doesn't need any additional laws to accomplish
this.

>Mixing weapons and things that can be use as one:
>What I meant was that cars CAN kill, but they are not GUNS!

How is this any different from guns? There are legal purposes for
owning and using a gun: They are appropriate tools for hunting,
target shooting and self-defence. Like cars, murder isn't
their only (or even a common) use.

>If 50% of ALL murders was done with axes, would you impose some regulations on them
>or just say that they are ment to be used at trees, and that the axe is not a problem,
>it's the 'axer' ??

I certainly couldn't imagine the American public accepting regulation
of axes. While the politics of other nations may be different,
in America there is strong opposition to any intrusive law that
primarily would effect the average, law-abiding citizen who had
not done anything wrong.

>Think about the situation in Los Angeles where people are buying guns to protect
>themselves. Is this a good situation ?? Is it the rigth way to deal with the problem ??

A good way to deal with which problem? It is an excelent way to deal 
with the short-term problem of rioting and violent attacks. Of course,
it doesn't do anything for the long-term issues that start riots. But
at this point, what can these individuals do about long-term social
problems? 

>If everybody buys guns to protect themselves from criminals (and their neighbor who have
>guns) what do you think will happen ?? (I mean if everybody had a gun in USA)

There are, according to surveys, guns in 40% of American homes.
In many parts of the country, this is closer to 100%. Those places
where almost everyone owns a gun are, on average, safer than those
where guns are less common.

>LAST WORD:
>Responsible gun owners are not a problem, but they will be affected if
>you want to protect your citicens.

This is, I think, a fundamental difference between American government
and that of other nations. Here it is not acceptable to punish
or restrict the average, law-abiding citizen in the name of some
vague "common good." 

                                                   Frank Crary
                                                   CU Boulder

