A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

TnT says:
===================
That there are subcultures that don't know how to properly exercise our
rights, does not mean that the rest of us should be deprived of being
able to exercise those rights ourselves.
==================

Your argument is seductively simple, but it flies in the face of most
laws that are passed to restrict your actions.

Let's take a very simple example: lawn darts (at least that's what I
think those "toys" were called). After some period of use, it became
clear that these darts presented a serious danger to people using them
in recreational activities in backyards and on picnics (that is, people
ended up getting them stuck in their skulls).

The darts were subsequently taken off the shelves at your local ToysRUs
and, as far as I know, are no longer avalable for sale. Using your
logic, we should all be outraged that, because of a few careless
people, we've been denied the right to toss lethal darts in the air at
our mother-in-law's picnic.

Precisely correct. I am outraged that the CPSC would force the withdrawal of
a an adult lawn game merely because since 1988 only THREE children have been
killed, and ONE child injured by improper use of an adult toy.

That militates for criminal and civil sanctions against careless adults who
allow children to use lawn darts or be in the area when lawn darts are being
used, not a hysterical overreaction to an extremely rare event. The
Nanny-State twits at the CPSC put the company that manufactured this
enjoyable adult device out of business, and that was WRONG.


That's the nature of laws in a civilized society -- the "people" decide
that certain activities, products, whatever, do more harm to the
"greater good" than it's worth. IMHO, guns fit into that category.

Problem is, you're wrong. Way wrong. So wrong that it's imperative that we
ensure that you don't get your way, ever, because if you do, billions of
people will suffer and die as a result.


Many of you Americans clearly disagree. As you can. But as you
disagree, it might be useul to examine how much ownership of guns
parallels ownership of lawn darts.

The only parallel is that responsible adults ought to keep children out of
the line of fire when using, and teaching their children to use firearms.

In both cases, innocent people are
injured and die due to accidents. Had the lawn darts/guns not been
lying around, that misery could have been avoided.

Then let's ban cars. Remember, only THREE children were killed by lawn
darts, ever. That's simply not justification for banning the object, period.

The same is true of guns. Accidental deaths of children caused by firearms
are very few in number, and are being reduced every year, in large part
thanks to the NRA and it's firearms safety training programs.

Banning guns because a very small number of unfortunate accidents happens
is, quite literally, throwing out the baby with the bath water. The
consequences of even trying to ban guns so as to attempt to eliminate
accidents involving children (or adults for that matter) are so horrific
that it's not even open to consideration, even if it were possible, which
it's not.
--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser