Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - RE: [internetworkers] OT: In Florida, shoot first, ask questions later

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

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

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Shea Tisdale" <shea AT sheatisdale.com>
  • To: "'Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/'" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: RE: [internetworkers] OT: In Florida, shoot first, ask questions later
  • Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:46:53 -0400

Michael Czeiszperger wrote:
> I think we both believe there are some weapons which are too dangerous
> for the society as a whole for individuals to own.

It could be argued that the society as whole does own weapons of mass
destruction and is responsible for their use. As for individuals, I do
agree that some degree of regulation is necessary.

>
> > However the *how dangerous* argument is not really something I can get
> > behind for use in attempting to determine whether something should be
> > illegal or not in our current society.
>
> So you wouldn't mind if your neighbor had a nuclear weapon? Or was
> sitting on enough explosives to blow up a town? Or a biological
> weapon? As a general rule wouldn't you say that something which could
> kill everyone on a block in a matter of minutes should be illegal?

Once again do we have to go to the very edge of the rational thinking? I
mean why not just ask if everyone should be allowed to have a doomsday
weapon that will destroy the universe...

My point was that many things in today's society are not regulated based on
"*how dangerous*" they are. They are regulated via a variety of formulas
and yours might prove to be quite a surprise is applied to other things -
and might have an unintended consequence if applied to guns.

For example:

Statistics say there are approximately 200 million guns in America owned by
35% of the population.

According to the Associated Press in 1994 there were 14.24 guns deaths per
100,000 people. That works out to be .0001424%

Compare that to the following:


FORMAL NAME INFORMAL NAME % ALL DEATHS
(1) Diseases of the heart heart attack (mainly) 28.5%
(2) Malignant neoplasms cancer 22.8%
(3) Cerebrovascular disease stroke 6.7%
(4) Chronic lower respiratory disease emphysema, chronic bronchitis 5.1%
(5) Unintentional injuries accidents 4.4%
(6) Diabetes mellitus diabetes 3.0%
(7) Influenza and pneumonia flu & pneumonia 2.7%
(8) Alzheimer's Disease Alzheimer's senility 2.4%
(9) Nephritis and Nephrosis kidney disease 1.7%
(10) Septicemia systemic infection 1.4%
(11) Intentional self-harm suicide 1.3%
(12) Chronic Liver/Cirrhosis liver disease 1.1%
(13) Essential Hypertension high blood pressure 0.8%
(14) Assault homicide 0.7%
(15) All other causes other 17.4%




>
> I find the libertarian arguments that government has no role in
> regulating citizens to be non-practical. There's just so many
> practical areas in which society, by which I mean the general consensus
> of the citizenry, has come to the conclusion that we're going to have
> certain rules to minimize loss of life.
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> _________
> Some try to achieve immortality by performing grand deeds or the
> accumulation of
> great wealth. On the whole I prefer to achieve immortality by not
> dying. -- Pratchett
> -- michael at czeiszperger dot org, Chapel Hill, NC
>
> ---
> Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site!
> http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> You are currently subscribed to InterNetWorkers mailing list
> To unsubscribe visit
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/internetworkers





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page