Media Bias - Surprise

Dennis Putnam dap1 at MINDSPRING.COM
Mon Aug 25 17:30:17 MDT 1997


At 07:25 PM 8/24/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Well, Dennis, I associate less credence with the biased writings of the NRA
>then I do with the media - that can be best quantified as a "trace" amount.

They are not biased since they come not from the NRA but from the files of
police departments nationwide. The NRA mearly reprints them.

>I am confident you will try to conclude my position - but tell me - how
>many people a year die from gun shots?  How many of them would die without
>the guns?

I think I answered that in another post. Obviously this can never have a
real number since it requires predicting the actions of a violent criminal
had he/she not been stopped with the threat of an armed citizen.

>I know that gun control will never work - prohibition is simply not a
>solution.  It never has been.  Drugs, alcohol, guns.  Any of those used
>improperly is dangerous.  Legislation won't change that.  I am
>anti-gun-control based on my belief against prohibition - not on my belief
>- which I do not believe - that we have the inherent right to posses tools
>that were made with the intent of killing each other.  I personally do not
>wish to live next door to some gun whacko who owns assault weapons simply
>because he believes the Constitution says he can.  As with so many of the
>liberal programs, the gun nuts have gone to an absurd extreme.

Assault weapon? Please define. If you are using the HCI definition you
neighbor has arms more powerful and deadly then that which are perfectly
legal. In anycase if you don't like the 2nd Amendment they the alternative
is to repeal it not illegally ignore it.

>I see the problem as being the exact same as it is with so many other
>issues - it has gone to the extremes of total absurdity.  No common sense
>You have often quoted "what sane men would agree on".  Tell me Dennis, what
>would these "sane men" agree on in regards to ownership of guns?

Doesn't matter. The 2nd does that for us and is clear for anyone that looks
at it without bias or ignorance.

>The issue to me runs very deep.  Should we be free to kill an intruder?


>Should we be free - as just legislated in either Louisiana or Mississippi -
>to kill someone attempting to hi-jack our automobiles?


>  Just two example -
>but do we draw the line anywhere?   Where does a person cross the line from
>being a stranger to being an intruder?

We don't. Under what cirsumstances would a strange break into your house an
not be an inturder?

> Maybe we should adopt the old
>standard "make sure they fall ins die the house."

Why? We have a jury system to decide those issues. "Better to be judged by
twelve then carried by six."

>No amount of legislation will ever stop killing.  I state that as an axiom.
> Gun control - even gun elimination - will not stop it.  I just question
>the practice of freely distributing tools to make it so darned easy.

Define your term again. "Freely disturbuting?" What does that mean and where
do I go to get in line? I pay though the nose for my arms.

>I've had a gun pulled on me - by a drunk that we were trying to keep from
>driving home.  A friend - until that night.  A guy who claimed he had a
>constitutional right to have it.

Like any other right, when you use to to violate the rights of others you
forfit that right. I you deny someone their right to live you forfit your own.

>I guess I just wish that the folks who promoted gun ownership put half of
>that effort into responsibility of ownership.

This statement implies you think they do not. The amount of money spent on
education and promoting responsibility of gun ownership by law abiding
individuals is double what is spent on legislation to protect RKBA.
Virtually none of which is tax dollars. That amount is exceeded by the money
spend on anti-RKBA legislation and almost all of which is tax dollars. How
much would it take to satisfy your wish?

Version: 2.6.2


Dennis Putnam                   Public Key can be obtained from:
Loganville, Ga.                 <>

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list