Willaim Thurber - PhD Student
thurber at FMGMT.MGMT.UTORONTO.CA
Wed Sep 27 15:24:36 MDT 1995
On Wed, 27 Sep 1995, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> If I might add: I think Will is saying it is circular because if guns were
> outlawed then there would not be any reason to have guns for self-defense.
> Thus the circular reasoning that Will may be indicating.
> Correct me if I'm wrong, Will, I don't want to put words in your mouth.
I would if I could but you might have gotten it right, at the very least
a close cousin. I was thinking that the circ. self defense point was 'we
need guns to defend ourselves from others because they are allowed to have
guns". Like I said, I am not sure I can discriminate between what I was
thinking might be circular and your speculation. Do you see a difference?
The point (Dennis Jr's I think) that guns can be used to defend oneself from
knives, baseball bats, etc is well taken. It renders immaterial the
utopian notion that if we outlawed guns then criminals wouldn't have them.
Likewise the contribution of hunters to conservation is indeed positive.
You are right David I don't hunt, but I still appreciate the work of
groups like Ducks Unlimited etc. I hope that David is not too
uncomfortable to be on the same side of an issue as an "environmental wacko".
Another way of looking at my original question might be, if the RKBA had
been repealed in 1895, how might american society be different?
I stand by my point though that something is systematically different in
the US that creates such an urgent need for self defense, especially
in comparison to other countries like the UK, Japan, Germany, Australia,
Canada, Spain, Italy etc.
More information about the Rushtalk