Quote:
Originally posted by Urbane Guerrilla
Well, on general principles one hopes so, but you sure couldn't prove it by me, the way Xugu put it. I wouldn't be caught writing it like that, for sure.
|
How about asking for clarification rather than instantly flying into a rant that equates my opinions with pure evil?
The examples given were examples of injustice. Since the outcome of the examples given was how people defending themselves were punished by the justice system, the examples document something that is unjust, in my opinion. Thus, examples of injustice.
I wonder what the sniper victims' families think about gun control. I think some of them are on Donahue (today? this week?). I am sure it'll be easy to explain to them how the sniper's most likely legal firearm had nothing to do with destroying their lives. After all, the attacker could as well have murdered lots of people with a knife, and still remain unidentified and safe from a distance. Oh. He couldn't have, could he. Oh dear.
This thread was about the sniper. Its focus shifted to firearms. If anything, the fact that the sniper is being very careful suggests that he knows someone could shoot him with their legal concealed weapon, and is taking precautions. Which invalidates the theory that firearms provide protection from potentially insane people like him/them. The casual armed robber may very well kill you if he sees you going for a weapon, and the well-prepared attacker isn't even going to be affected by it, since he may very well land a fatal blow first to avoid retaliation. If anything, a well-armed populace will escalate the situation to where any robbery will start by attempting to subdue or neutralize any defensive capability.
Hurray. The solution to violence is more violence.
X.