Media Bias - Surprise

Helen Cadogan editors at TCLQ.ORG
Sun Aug 24 20:48:00 MDT 1997

Let me answer for the man from Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn, who's not
online to answer for himself.  This guy was braced by a couple of hoods
wanting money, I think they had a knife or a gun or something.  Anyway, the
pair was armed.  Whether or not they'd got the money, they would've sought
to kill the guy, that's the norm.  Well, surprise, surprise, he whipped out
a gun, shot and killed one, wounded the other, and **saved his own life**.

Let's not be cute here.  Having a gun in one's possession does save either
one's or somebody else's life.  Using guns to save lives does not occur in
a vaccuum -- which is what the question presumes.  In a crime situation,
when one is under attack, and the choice is one's own life, or the
criminal's, IMO, he's toilet paper.  Deservedly so.

Lots of people, as Dennis's numbers testify, have had their lives saved
because they had a gun.  I would bet that a significant proportion of the
lives in the second set of numbers are criminal.  If the prey has a gun,
s/he deters the predator; if the predator is deterred without the gun being
fired, then two lives are saved.  I won't lose any sleep if the predator
will not be deterred and winds up as a statistic in the morgue.

>>Guns saving lives: ~2.500M/yr., increasing annually
>>Guns taking lives: ~0.280M/yr., decreasing annually
>How does a gun save a life?  If this were true, then everybody should own
>one.  Maybe I have led a far too sheltered life - I don;t know anyone who
>has ever been saved by a gun.  I know many who have been killed.
>Stephen Frye


Helen Cadogan

I Know That My Redeemer Liveth!

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list