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

[david cherryholmes <david.cherryholmes AT gmail.com>]

On 4/26/05, Shea Tisdale <shea AT sheatisdale.com> wrote:
 
> So now it's highly regulated.  A minute ago it was "There's a reason people
> aren't allowed to own weapons like rocket propelled grenades or machine guns
> or tanks..."

Good nitpick.  Any response to the actual substance of his point?
 
> And I never said that people should be able to own any of those
> weapons/destructive devices.  I simply pointed out that your statement was
> factually incorrect.

Obviously not.
 
> Speech is regulated in a much different way than guns though.  Law abiding
> citizens don't have to apply for a permit and have a background check before
> they have a right to speak.  And if someone is speaking at you, you have a
> right to speak back.  You don't have to retreat if an escape is available.

Of course they are regulated differently, since they are completely
different things.  But again, you avoid the fundamental point, that
there is *some kind* of regulation.  So you agree that there should be
some kind of regulation of firearm ownership, leaving us only to
debate what form it should take?  That seems pretty reasonable.

-- 
David Cherryholmes
Network Analyst, PET Facility
Duke Radiology
(919) 684-7979