Gun Control (my opinion)

Dennis Putnam putnamd at ATLODBS1.HAYES.COM
Tue Jul 30 07:17:38 MDT 1996


>
> Well I asked first, and I did in sincere curiosity.  I trust you did
> too.  I am not sure how you think I interpret the meaning of the 2nd
> Admt.  But the quantitative difference between pocket knives and
> automatic rifles is the amount of human destruction from what range in a
> limited period of time.  Now will you tell me if you support civilian
> control of nuclear arms, and the rationale behind your support or lack of
> same?
>

I have already sent a post explaining how the founders envisioned the 2nd. I
hope that post got through, if not let me know and I'll repost. However, I
want to address Will's question of 'civilian control of nuclear arms.' I'm
not sure you meant what you said but nuclear arms *are* under civilian
control. Indeed, the entire military is under civilian control and that is
exactly what the founders intended. The commander-in-chief (present office
holder excepted) is the civilian control over the military including nuclear
arms. So to answer your question, yes, I believe (as did our founders) that
nuclear arms should be under civilian control. The rationale is explained in
the Federalist Papers much better than I could ever dream of explaining it.

---
Dennis Putnam, Manager
Technical Planning and Services
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc.

Opinions expressed are mine and should not be viewed as an official positon of
Hayes or its management.

"Our Founding Fathers did not create our civil liberties ... They safegarded
them." Tanya Mataksa, NRA-ILA Executive Director.



More information about the Rushtalk mailing list