Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

["Alan MacHett" <machett AT ibiblio.org>]

In reference to David Minton's message:
> On 11/12/04 12:51 PM, "Tarus Balog" <EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED because,
Hey!, the archives are public ya know...> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 9, 2004, at 12:33 PM, David Minton wrote:
>>>
>>> I hate to break it to you, but getting shot with a deer rifle will
>>> really
>>> ruin your day. Weather a gun is for hunting animals or people is based
>>> on
>>> the intent of the user, not the marketing material packaged with the
>>> firearm.
>>
>> But it's harder to stick it in your pocket.
>
> I don't quite understand your comment. We were discussing the difference
> between hunting rifles, and "assault style" rifles. What do you stick in
> your pocket?
>

Handguns.  I don't recall who began the thread, but at some point a
reference was made to gun control laws; and then you noted that a gun is a
gun and it doesn't matter what fires the bullet because it's the bullet
that kills you.

Well, a person has to pull the trigger and, being the nuanced creatures
that we are, certain facts about people must be taken into consideration. 
Gun control laws have mostly dealt with handguns, assault rifles, and
automatic weapons because they pose the most danger from a human
standpoint.  Handguns are easily concealed, therefore more readily used
for criminal intent; so are sawed-off shotguns, which is why they, too,
are illegal.  The same logic and legal intent applies to switchblade
knives, for comparison.  Assault rifles and automatic weapons are designed
to kill more and faster.  The legal intent of limiting those weapons
should be obvious.

Have hunting rifles been used in the commission of crimes?  Of course they
have: Lee Harvey Oswald, Charles Whitman, the Beltway Snipers, et.al. 
After all, in military parlance a hunting rifle is called a sniper rifle. 
However, for reasons of socialization and psychology, people are
considerably less likely to use such a weapon in the commission of a
crime.

-Alan