Usenet Posts

Today is Patriot's Day, the anniversary of the Battles of Lexington and Concord, so I have my flags up. This time they're a U.S. flag and a Gadsen flag - the yellow one with a coiled rattlesnake and the motto, "DON'T TREAD ON ME."

I do some of my best (and certainly my most prolific) writing when I'm posting to Usenet, the Internet service where you'll find all those thousands of news groups - discussion groups dedicated to some subject, but often used to discuss somewhat, uh, irrelevant issues. I have decided that, rather than wasting all that fabulous writing on those miscreants (with a very few exceptions) on Usenet, I'll repost some of them here. Consider it a form of electronic recycling. Note- these posts tend to be done "on the fly," and you will find more errors. Nonetheless, I'll be reproducing them "as is," warts and all.

This symbol - ">" - designates material to which I'm replying. Two >s indicate the the previous message was posted before the material with just one >.

On 18 Apr 2007 19:11:52 -0700, Fran wrote:

(snips)

>On the other hand, if we are discussing simple utility, there's no
>reason to suppose that if a higher proportion of people carried
>firearms and used them to kill spree-killers, that a modest number of
>high toll spree-killings would not be replaced by a burgeoning number
>of low toll spree killings, which in aggregate, might exceed the death
>toll currently attaching to spree killings.

That theory has been thoroughly disproved by the results obtained in those American jurisdictions which have radically liberalized their gun laws, especially with regard to the "shall issue" states which allow any law-abiding adult to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon after undergoing a rudimentary background check. The instances of those people using their guns to commit crimes (of any kind, let alone mass murder) are vanishingly rare. Such jurisdictions do not turn into modern versions of wild-west Dodge City, with shootouts over every minor dispute. But then, Dodge City wasn't like that either, except in the movies.

There is PLENTY of reason to NOT suppose that which you suggest is a likely consequence of allowing law-abiding adults to carry guns, even on campuses (campi?). In fact, there is no reason to suppose that it makes any more sense to ban concealed guns carried by permit holders on a campus than anywhere else large groups of people gather. That gathering together of large groups of people is exactly what makes such places inviting targets for mass murderers, and adding in the added attraction of the potential victims having no guns at all just makes them even more likely targets, thus making the benefits to be obtained from having a few permit holders present all the more valuable.

I should think the recent events at VT would disabuse even the most dreamy-eyed idealist of the bizarre notion that declaring a given place to be a "gun-free zone" really does make it a gun-free zone. What it actually does it to make such a designated place a shooting gallery, chock full of helpless human targets.

Feel free to blast away by sending to rsturge@inreach.com.

Back to Musings.

Back to my home place.