On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 14:34:55 -0700, Hatunen wrote:
>>thats exactly whats not true unless you redefine what dangerous means
>>into something that denies objective danger like avalanche, rockfall,
>>tsunamis and the like.
>
>Silly analogy. Those are all dynamic things. A tsunami can't be
>put in a drawer, and doesn't exist until it is in motion and then
>it is dangerous. None of those requires human intervention.
>Firing a gun does.
Whats silly is the obstinate pervesion of the meaning of danger to
defend an interest group and its absortion by otherwise clear thinking
people.
If the danger lies in the firer not the gun why isnt a childs pop gun
as dangerous as an automatic rifle?
I'm willing to go through the whole thing for any Brits who fall for
the propaganda, but not Americans. I recently went through the whole
thing in detail with a pro gun, ex army expert in risk assesment. Not
again thanks. It took weeks of prevarication and red herrings before
he gave up. Gun lobby americans (with the exception of one so far)
just become angry and abusive.
>>Its quite easy to show degree of danger
>>changing with the size of the objective risks rather than the user.
>
>I hate to seem as if I'm supporting the old gun-lover's phrase,
>"guns don't kill people, people kill people." It should be,
>perhaps "guns don't kill people, but people who like guns kill
>people."
Theres no need to.
If you think about how risk can be often be seen to vary with the
inanimate object and not the human, it becomes clear the logic is
false.
one bomb, on bomb disposal team
two bombs, one bomb disposal team.
one bomb, two bomb disposal teams
and so on.
I wont insult you by spelling it out.
>A knife isn't dangerous sitting in the kitchen drawer either.
it has *potential* danger, which is what danger always is. Danger does
not become danger when it actually happens, thats "harm". The fact
that a knife is less dangerous* than a gun shows that the danger is in
the inanimate object.
* gun lobbiests will say more people killed by knives or something, I
wont insult you with the reasons thats meaningless.
>It's the combination of human and weapon that's dangerous. We
>can't get rid of the human, so the answer is obvious.
There is danger in both the inanimate gun or knife and in the human.
Two lobbies adopt false logic, the US gun lobby and the UK road safety
lobby. To listen to them you would think a driver running down the
road with a steering wheel shouting "peep peep" was as dangerous as a
ten ton truck. Or that a knife was as dangerous as a gun.
Thats a precis, I cant be bothered to go over the whole thing again.
I see the NRA are now more worried by the republicans than the
denocrats re imposing further gun control!
--
Mike Reid
UK walking, food, photos "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site
Spain walking, food, tourism "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk"
Beginners UK flight sim addons "http://www.lawn-mower-man.co.uk" |