Re: "Show me an example of terrorists using the Internet or crypto"

In article <34302d8d.8163438@newshost.cyberramp.net> you wrote:

[lots of ranting deleted]

: Banning guns because criminals might use them equates to banning
: encryption because criminals might use it.  And if you really believe
: that both should be banned, then perhaps you should be banned from
: using oxygen, because criminals breath it too.

You people just don't get it do you? A gun has one purpose: To kill. Just like
any other tool, a gun, if it is available _will_ be used at some point.

So making sure there are lots of guns around only serves to make a lot of
people very dead. This is a Bad Thing.

Gun control laws are not the issue. It's a matter of mentality. In Europe,
where we have rather strict guncontrol laws, and have had them for a long
time a decent human being will not even think of shooting someone else. In the
US, where guns are tradition and part of the American way, many people would
not think twice before shooting someone. The result of this is that the
number of people getting killed by guns is enourmous, be they criminals,
little kids, old grannies, or presidents.

This sucks.

We are not trying to export our stupidity, we're just trying to explain to
you how we live. We live in a place where we don't even have to think about
getting a gun, because the chances of us encountering a gun in the hands
of an adversary are negligible.

Wake up and smell the coffee, dude. If you have lots of guns around, you're
gonna end up with lots of people getting shot.

Alex

--- 
/// I dabble in techno-house and sometimes,
/// I do that badass hip-hop thang...
/// But the F U N K gets me every time!

--Boundary..3985.1071713737.multipart/signed
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

At 07:16 PM 10/1/97 +0100, Alex Le Heux wrote:
>You people just don't get it do you? A gun has one purpose: To kill. Just
like
>any other tool, a gun, if it is available _will_ be used at some point.
>
>So making sure there are lots of guns around only serves to make a lot of
>people very dead. This is a Bad Thing.
>
>Gun control laws are not the issue. It's a matter of mentality. In Europe,
>where we have rather strict guncontrol laws, and have had them for a long
>time a decent human being will not even think of shooting someone else. In
the
>US, where guns are tradition and part of the American way, many people would
>not think twice before shooting someone. The result of this is that the
>number of people getting killed by guns is enourmous, be they criminals,
>little kids, old grannies, or presidents.

You are right to the extent that the US has a more violent culture than the
UK and many other European countries, and has a higher murder rate.
However, your argument that the presence of guns == corpses is demonstrably
false.  Private ownership of firearms has a significant deterrent effect on
violent crime.  This may not be obvious when comparing the US to the UK,
but when comparing the statistics for areas within a country, region, or
city, it becomes indisputable.

Before Kennesaw, Georgia passed its famous (or infamous) ordinance
requiring each household in the city to own a gun and allowing concealed
carry of firearms, it had an average of 25-27 violent crimes (murder, armed
robbery, etc) per year.  After the ordinance was passed, there was one
violent crime the first year, and three the next.  The gun control shills
in the press reported this as a tripling in the violent crime rate.  Since
the state of Florida passed a "shall issue" concealed carry law (if you
apply, pay the fee, pass the safety course, and are not a felon or mentally
incompetent, the state shall issue you a concealed carry permit) it has
experienced significant reductions (10-20%) in the rates of murder, rape,
armed robbery, and other violent crimes.  Even in England and Scotland,
this inverse relationship between private gun ownership and violent crime
can be demonstrated, according to Colin Greenwood, retired chief of the
West Yorkshire Constabulary and criminology researcher since the sixties.

The explanation for this phenomenon is simple.  Most people are not
mentally unbalanced, or violent criminals, and therefore are capable of
safe and responsible gun ownership.  I had a gun when my wife told me that
she was having an affair with one of her co-workers.  By your theory, my
wife should be dead.  However, she remains in good health, we communicate
frequently, and are currently working on a reconciliation.  Why?  Because I
(and most other people) have sufficient moral fortitude to reject the idea
of committing murder for foolish reasons.  I am not a lunatic, therefore I
do not behave like one.

When the general population is armed, especially if they are armed during
their daily activities, the life of muggers, rapists, and murderers becomes
extremely dangerous.  People who insist on staying in these professions are
quickly removed from the gene pool by natural selection, and the smarter
ones gravitate to less dangerous professions, thereby reducing the crime
rate in two separate ways.  Even if only 10% of the population is carrying,
the 1% or less that is still outgunned by a factor of 10 or more, and only
fools play those odds.

The US has a higher rate of murder by strangulation than does the UK.
Would you argue that Americans posess more hands than their British
counterparts?

At 04:20 PM 10/1/97 -0400, Cynthia Brown wrote:
>IMNSHO the best way to fight crime is not with bigger guns than the "bad
>guys", but with better social programs such as universal health care, and
>improved day care so single parents can show their kids what a productive
>lifestyle looks like.  This takes longer than blowing the brains out of some
>teenager that feels his only path to a better life is through crime, and it
>doesn't give the same adrenalin rush.  However, it works at the source of
>crime, and not the consequences. 

We already have more social programs than we can afford--they are a large
part of the problem.  Why would a 19 year old work for minimum wage at an
entry-level job when he can get on walfare and get better benefits than he
would from the job, and thereby have the time to make $1000 per night
selling crack.

Jonathan Wienke

What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed" is too hard to understand? (From 2nd Amendment, U.S. Constitution)

PGP 2.6.2 RSA Key Fingerprint: 7484 2FB7 7588 ACD1  3A8F 778A 7407 2928
DSS/D-H Key Fingerprint: 3312 6597 8258 9A9E D9FA  4878 C245 D245 EAA7 0DCC
Public keys available at pgpkeys.mit.edu. PGP encrypted e-mail preferred.

Get your assault crypto before they ban it!

US/Canadian Windows 95/NT or Mac users:
Get Eudora Light + PGP 5.0 for free at http://www.eudora.com/eudoralight/
Get PGP 5.0 for free at http://bs.mit.edu:8001/pgp-form.html

Non-US PGP 5.0 sources:
http://www.ifi.uio.no/pgp/
http://www.heise.de/ct/pgpCA/download.shtml
ftp://ftp.pca.dfn.de/pub/pgp/V5.0/
ftp://ftp.fu-berlin.de/pub/pc/win95/pgp
ftp://ftp.fu-berlin.de/pub/mac/pgp
http://www.shopmiami.com/utopia.hacktic.nl/pub/replay/pub/pgp/pgp50/win/

RSA export-o-matic:
print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

--Boundary..3985.1071713737.multipart/signed
Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="pgp00000.pgp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="pgp00000.pgp"
Content-Description: "PGP signature"

LS0tLS1CRUdJTiBQR1AgU0lHTkFUVVJFLS0tLS0KVmVyc2lvbjogUEdQIGZv
ciBQZXJzb25hbCBQcml2YWN5IDUuMApNZXNzYWdlSUQ6IERKTjYzTkhEQ0Zw
cWpUNEZVNXdSTXVVV1ZoS3RuUnVpCgppUUEvQXdVQk5EYVU2OEpGMGtYcXB3
M01FUUpjYmdDZmJlcVRHRTJ4QnVZbnllR2RVVDk3T3NscUs1MEFvT1FYCks3
N0pUVUpka1ZlcWR1d3V4Sm9zT3ZBdgo9V0VBUAotLS0tLUVORCBQR1AgU0lH
TkFUVVJFLS0tLS0K
--Boundary..3985.1071713737.multipart/signed--

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In <Mutt.19971001191622.alexlh@sarah.yc>, on 10/01/97 
   at 07, alexlh@yourchoice.nl (Alex Le Heux) said:

>In article <34302d8d.8163438@newshost.cyberramp.net> you wrote:

>[lots of ranting deleted]

>: Banning guns because criminals might use them equates to banning
>: encryption because criminals might use it.  And if you really believe
>: that both should be banned, then perhaps you should be banned from
>: using oxygen, because criminals breath it too.

>You people just don't get it do you? A gun has one purpose: To kill. Just
>like any other tool, a gun, if it is available _will_ be used at some
>point.

>So making sure there are lots of guns around only serves to make a lot of
>people very dead. This is a Bad Thing.

>Gun control laws are not the issue. It's a matter of mentality. In
>Europe, where we have rather strict guncontrol laws, and have had them
>for a long time a decent human being will not even think of shooting
>someone else. In the US, where guns are tradition and part of the
>American way, many people would not think twice before shooting someone.
>The result of this is that the number of people getting killed by guns is
>enourmous, be they criminals, little kids, old grannies, or presidents.

>This sucks.

>We are not trying to export our stupidity, we're just trying to explain
>to you how we live. We live in a place where we don't even have to think
>about getting a gun, because the chances of us encountering a gun in the
>hands of an adversary are negligible.

>Wake up and smell the coffee, dude. If you have lots of guns around,
>you're gonna end up with lots of people getting shot.

What a crock of shit!!

Europe has been in a perpetual state of war for the past 2,000 years where
countless tens of millions of people have been slaughtered. Chances are
very high that you will face an advisatory with a gun, the fact that he
collects a paycheck from a government wont make you any less dead from his
bullets.

You must be getting some good drugs over there to conjure up this fantasy
land where everyone loves one another and would never think of killing
someone because it sure as hell doesn't exist in Europe.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBNDKAPo9Co1n+aLhhAQFUWgQAuk9PWtRBxSX1NkTBtLiUIovEmlXBZOIm
McghiyPovkCdx8zmqjLuhi3e4x4LpbfBq5EaNwrPxYEZlC39pg3ubZk4LR1n+n4p
vXgCWLPl0KHntonNsh8STI3TxuzRMUzUvTz5H5hrIJVOn3URkUwkxVBAx8kPquGB
ROL+fZNqJag=
=LTCe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

William H. Geiger III writes:
> 
> What a crock of shit!!
> 
> Europe has been in a perpetual state of war for the past 2,000 years where
> countless tens of millions of people have been slaughtered. Chances are
> very high that you will face an advisatory with a gun, the fact that he
> collects a paycheck from a government wont make you any less dead from his
> bullets.

Maybe you haven't noticed, but seen on 2000 year scales, the entire world
is constantly in a state of war. Europe isn't special in that regard. Even
though it doesn't look like there's many countries that are about to take
war to us here, it still might happen. And even if I had my AR15 then, it
wouldn't help me a lot against guided missiles and mortar fire. And anyway,
"to defend yourself in a war" is not one of the usual arguments against gun
control. 

> You must be getting some good drugs over there to conjure up this fantasy
> land where everyone loves one another and would never think of killing
> someone because it sure as hell doesn't exist in Europe.

Well, we're a lot closer to it over here than you guys are over there.

Alex

-- 
/// I dabble in techno-house and sometimes,
/// I do that badass hip-hop thang...
/// But the F U N K gets me every time!

> Maybe you haven't noticed, but seen on 2000 year scales, the entire world
> is constantly in a state of war. Europe isn't special in that regard. Even
> though it doesn't look like there's many countries that are about to take
> war to us here, it still might happen. And even if I had my AR15 then, it
> wouldn't help me a lot against guided missiles and mortar fire. And anyway,

	This statement shows you know nothing about warfare execpt what you 
see on TV. 

> "to defend yourself in a war" is not one of the usual arguments against gun
> control. 

	No, but "To defend yourself against Government Thugs" is. 

> > You must be getting some good drugs over there to conjure up this fantasy
> > land where everyone loves one another and would never think of killing
> > someone because it sure as hell doesn't exist in Europe.
> Well, we're a lot closer to it over here than you guys are over there.

	Stalin. Hitler. Bosnia. 

	Yup. Lots closer.

Alex Le Heux writes:

>                                                                 And anyway,
> "to defend yourself in a war" is not one of the usual arguments against gun
> control. 

Actually, most of us prefer the `defend yourself against the government'
argument around here.  That's one of the reasons why the right to arms
is enshrined in our constitution.


-- Jeff

On Wed, 1 Oct 1997, Alex Le Heux wrote:

> You people just don't get it do you? A gun has one purpose: To kill. Just like
> any other tool, a gun, if it is available _will_ be used at some point.
> 
> So making sure there are lots of guns around only serves to make a lot of
> people very dead. This is a Bad Thing.
> 
> Gun control laws are not the issue. It's a matter of mentality. In Europe,
> where we have rather strict guncontrol laws, and have had them for a long
> time a decent human being will not even think of shooting someone else. In the
> US, where guns are tradition and part of the American way, many people would
> not think twice before shooting someone. The result of this is that the
> number of people getting killed by guns is enourmous, be they criminals,
> little kids, old grannies, or presidents.
> 
> This sucks.

I agree wholeheartedly.  Uncontrolled guns do not solve problems, they 
create them.  If most households have at least one firearm, it makes it 
that much easier for a criminal to obtain one by stealing yours while you 
are at work.

Canada may be regulated to death according to most libertarians, but I for
one like it that way.  I can walk alone and unarmed at night in Ottawa,
Toronto, etc. without fearing for my life.  Can a female resident of
Washington or New York say the same?  Our schools do not have metal detectors
at the entrances because they are not needed. 

IMNSHO the best way to fight crime is not with bigger guns than the "bad
guys", but with better social programs such as universal health care, and
improved day care so single parents can show their kids what a productive
lifestyle looks like.  This takes longer than blowing the brains out of some
teenager that feels his only path to a better life is through crime, and it
doesn't give the same adrenalin rush.  However, it works at the source of
crime, and not the consequences. 

Cynthia, unrepentant bleeding-heart liberal
===============================================================
		   Cynthia H. Brown, P.Eng.
E-mail:     cynthb@iosphere.net  | PGP Key:  See Home Page
Home Page:  http://www.iosphere.net/~cynthb/
Junk mail will be ignored in the order in which it is received.

        Klein bottle for rent; enquire within.

> On Wed, 1 Oct 1997, Alex Le Heux wrote:
>>You people just don't get it do you? A gun has one purpose: To kill. Just like
>>any other tool, a gun, if it is available _will_ be used at some point.
> 
>>So making sure there are lots of guns around only serves to make a lot of
>>people very dead. This is a Bad Thing.
> I agree wholeheartedly.  Uncontrolled guns do not solve problems, they 
> create them.  If most households have at least one firearm, it makes it 

	Name one problem that you have with "uncontrolled" guns that you 
don't with controlled ones. 

> that much easier for a criminal to obtain one by stealing yours while you 
> are at work.

	Not if it is with you. 

> Canada may be regulated to death according to most libertarians, but I for
> one like it that way.  I can walk alone and unarmed at night in Ottawa,
> Toronto, etc. without fearing for my life.  Can a female resident of
> Washington or New York say the same?  Our schools do not have metal detectors
> at the entrances because they are not needed. 

	Toronto has how many people? And the cultural mix is?
 
> IMNSHO the best way to fight crime is not with bigger guns than the "bad
> guys", but with better social programs such as universal health care, and
> improved day care so single parents can show their kids what a productive

	Crap. The kind of crime that guns stop isn't the kind solved with 
"better social conditions". Rape has nothing to do with how much money _either_
person makes. Muder rarely does. If you can't see this, then you have your
head firmly up your governments ass.

	Stop and take a hard look at who kills who with guns and why. 

> lifestyle looks like.  This takes longer than blowing the brains out of some
> teenager that feels his only path to a better life is through crime, and it
> doesn't give the same adrenalin rush.  However, it works at the source of
> crime, and not the consequences. 

	You may know a bit about crypto, but you don't know a god damn thing 
about crime and it's causes. Shoemaker stick to your lasts.

Cynthia Brown wrote:
> Canada may be regulated to death according to most libertarians, but I for
> one like it that way.  I can walk alone and unarmed at night in Ottawa,
> Toronto, etc. without fearing for my life.  Can a female resident of
> Washington or New York say the same?  

> Our schools do not have metal detectors
> at the entrances because they are not needed.

Boy, do I feel like an idiot.
Since I wrote the above, the Province of Nova Scotia shut down Cole
Harbor school for a week to install surveillance cameras, and now
they have armed policemen patrolling the highways.

Although the body-searches have shown that the students are not 
carrying weapons, it turns out they are also not wearing any panties.
{This doesn't come as news to *some* of us. <nod-nod> <wink-wink>}

Cynthia, unredundant bleeding-nose liberal
{Please join me in posting at midnight tonight, in the first annual
 FemniPunk 'Take Back The CypherPunks List' electronic march to
 Bienfait, Saskatchewan where we will byte Human Gus-Peter.}
======================================================================
                   Cynthia H. Brown, P.Ing.
E-mail:     cynthb@iosphere.net  | PrettyGoodPenis Key:  See Bone Page
Home Page:  http://www.iosphere.net/~cynthb/
Punk mail will be impaled in the order in which it is repreived.

        Calvin Klein for rent; enquire within.

On Fri, 10 Oct 1997, someone from sk.sympatico.ca wrote:

> Boy, do I feel like an idiot.

Just in case some people don't read headers, that message DID NOT come
from me. 

Cynthia
===============================================================
		   Cynthia H. Brown, P.Eng.
E-mail:     cynthb@iosphere.net  | PGP Key:  See Home Page
Home Page:  http://www.iosphere.net/~cynthb/
Junk mail will be ignored in the order in which it is received.

        Klein bottle for rent; enquire within.

Cynthia Brown wrote:
> Canada may be regulated to death according to most libertarians, but I for
> one like it that way.  I can walk alone and unarmed at night in Ottawa,
> Toronto, etc. without fearing for my life.

  I can walk alone and armed anywhere I damn please, without fearing
for my life.

>  Can a female resident of
> Washington or New York say the same?  Our schools do not have metal detectors
> at the entrances because they are not needed.

  Without fascist gun control measures in place, Canada had never had
a big problem with gun-related violence.
  The fact that the Canadian government has gone to such great lengths
to 'solve' a problem which does not exist, speaks volumes.
 
> IMNSHO the best way to fight crime is not with bigger guns than the "bad
> guys", but with better social programs such as universal health care, and
> improved day care so single parents can show their kids what a productive
> lifestyle looks like.  This takes longer than blowing the brains out of some
> teenager that feels his only path to a better life is through crime, and it
> doesn't give the same adrenalin rush.  However, it works at the source of
> crime, and not the consequences.

  This is precisely the reason that governments are pushing for stronger
and stronger gun control laws.
  The government has no interest in removing the source of crime. Crime-
-violent crime, in particular--is the government's best friend. By using
gun control to disarm *only* the law-abiding citizens, they put the 
safety of the citizens in the hands of their own LEA's. And by failing
to
provide safety for the law-abiding citizens, they force more and more
of them to break the law in order to protect themself.

> Cynthia, unrepentant bleeding-heart liberal

  Suzie, unrepentant bleeding-pussy hoir.

>         Klein bottle for rent; enquire within.

         Calvin Kleins for rent; enquire within.

Suzy Creamcheese

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

An entity claiming to be Cynthia Brown wrote:

: 
: I agree wholeheartedly.  Uncontrolled guns do not solve problems, they 
: create them.  If most households have at least one firearm, it makes it 
: that much easier for a criminal to obtain one by stealing yours while you 
: are at work.

So take your gun to work ;)  Yeah, I know ... that's not the point.


: 
: IMNSHO the best way to fight crime is not with bigger guns than the "bad
: guys", but with better social programs such as universal health care, and
: improved day care so single parents can show their kids what a productive
: lifestyle looks like.  This takes longer than blowing the brains out of some
: teenager that feels his only path to a better life is through crime, and it
: doesn't give the same adrenalin rush.  However, it works at the source of
: crime, and not the consequences. 

I agree, but here's the catch:  once you place the responsibility in the
hands of the gov't, the system comes to a screeching halt.  That which is 
mandated is corrupt, inefficient, and utterly useless.  I'll tell you the 
first step to reducing crime ... get to know your neighbors.  The problem
that we have here in the U.S. is mobile society.  How many Americans know
the people on their street or in their complex?  We have very little 
community left.  A cow-orker of mine lives in the Oranges (near Newark, NJ),
and she doesn't feel fearful when she walks through her complex at night.
The tenants meet at least once a month on a semi-social basis, and so they
know each other.  It makes a big difference.  I don't see most gov't
funded social programs making even that amount of difference.  The change
has to be internal to the community, essentially decentralized.  You can
seed the ideas, but you have to understand that simply improving day care
and health care isn't going to solve the problem, there has to be the
internal process.


Doc


- -- 
[] Mark Rogaski                   "That which does not kill me
[] wendigo@pobox.com                 only makes me stranger."

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBNDLyS8HFI4kt/DQOEQJQeACg/faa10X1VKsvrxupS+FVNhDHI7IAnRbK
2WZq4js/Ont5zmkHsh8KzCYT
=1sal
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Alex Le Heux wrote:
> In article <34302d8d.8163438@newshost.cyberramp.net> you wrote:
> : Banning guns because criminals might use them equates to banning
> : encryption because criminals might use it.  And if you really believe
> : that both should be banned, then perhaps you should be banned from
> : using oxygen, because criminals breath it too.
 
> You people just don't get it do you? A gun has one purpose: To kill. Just like
> any other tool, a gun, if it is available _will_ be used at some point.

  A remailer has one purpose: To spam. Just like any other tool,
a remailer, if it is available *_*will*_* be used at some point.
 
> So making sure there are lots of guns around only serves to make a lot of
> people very dead. This is a Bad Thing.

  Making sure there are lots of remailers around only serves to make
a lot of people very spammed. This is a **_**Bad Thing**_**.
 
> Gun control laws are not the issue. It's a matter of mentality. In Europe,
> where we have rather strict gun control laws, and have had them for a long
> time a decent human being will not even think of shooting someone else.

  That's right. Since Hitler instituted gun control in Europe, the
decent
human beings in Europe gas people en masse.

> In the
> US, where guns are tradition and part of the American way, many people would
> not think twice before shooting someone. The result of this is that the
> number of people getting killed by guns is enourmous, be they criminals,
> little kids, old grannies, or presidents.

  In Europe, where ovens are a tradition, and part of the European way,
many people would not think twice before gassing someone. The result of
this is that the number of people getting killed by ovens is enourmous,
be they little Jews, old Jews, or Jew lovers.
 
> Wake up and smell the coffee, dude. If you have lots of guns around, you're
> gonna end up with lots of people getting shot.

  Not many Europeans complained when the American gun-loving people came
to visit and a lot of Nazis got shot.
  Wake up and smell the burning Jews, dude.

> /// I dabble in techno-house and sometimes,
> /// I do that badass hip-hop thang...
> /// But the F U N K gets me every time!

 /// I dabble in techno-arms and sometimes,
 /// I do that badass boom-bang thang...
 /// And I get the F U C K every time!

Axel Le Hoir

William H. Geiger III <whgiii@invweb.net> wrote on  1 Oct 97:
..PGP sig data of WHG deleted...
> In <Mutt.19971001191622.alexlh@sarah.yc>, on 10/01/97 
>    at 07, alexlh@yourchoice.nl (Alex Le Heux) said:
> 
> >In article <34302d8d.8163438@newshost.cyberramp.net> you wrote:
> 
> >[lots of ranting deleted]
> 
> >: Banning guns because criminals might use them equates to banning
> >: encryption because criminals might use it.  And if you really believe
> >: that both should be banned, then perhaps you should be banned from
> >: using oxygen, because criminals breath it too.
> 
> >You people just don't get it do you? A gun has one purpose: To kill. Just
> >like any other tool, a gun, if it is available _will_ be used at some
> >point.
> 
> >So making sure there are lots of guns around only serves to make a lot of
> >people very dead. This is a Bad Thing.
> 
> >Gun control laws are not the issue. It's a matter of mentality. In
> >Europe, where we have rather strict guncontrol laws, and have had them
> >for a long time a decent human being will not even think of shooting
> >someone else. In the US, where guns are tradition and part of the
> >American way, many people would not think twice before shooting someone.
> >The result of this is that the number of people getting killed by guns is
> >enourmous, be they criminals, little kids, old grannies, or presidents.
> 
> >This sucks.
> 
> >We are not trying to export our stupidity, we're just trying to explain
> >to you how we live. We live in a place where we don't even have to think
> >about getting a gun, because the chances of us encountering a gun in the
> >hands of an adversary are negligible.
> 
> >Wake up and smell the coffee, dude. If you have lots of guns around,
> >you're gonna end up with lots of people getting shot.
> 
> What a crock of shit!!
> 
> Europe has been in a perpetual state of war for the past 2,000 years
> where countless tens of millions of people have been slaughtered.
> Chances are very high that you will face an advisatory with a gun,
> the fact that he collects a paycheck from a government wont make you
> any less dead from his bullets.
> 

This Californian now living abroad hears a great deal about what a 
violent place America is largely because we have the right to bear 
arms.  Of course, I remind these cretins that no other place on the 
world has a greater degree and respect for civil rights than 
does America.  Amazing when you consider that America is also the 
ultimate melting pot too.  Sure a lot of ethnic and racial tension 
still exists in America, but let's tour Europe:

1) Northern Ireland, where you have two groups who speak the same 
language and basically are cut from the same cultural cloth but 
religions differ

2) The Bosnia region:  different languages and religions, possibly 
different cultures although the years under Tito must have forced 
the people represented here (the Catholic Croats, the Eastern 
Orthodox Serbs, and the Muslims) to understand a little of each 
other's culture

3) Cyprus:  different languages and religions for sure, but Greeks 
and Turks are really brothers and sisters under the skin (i.e., are 
more alike than they care to admit to)

Look at the savagery and genocidal activities of the groups involved 
in those conflicts now and historically.

The kind of ethnic/subcultural strife and difficulties in America  
pales in comparison to the kind of savage killing and cold-blooded 
enmity that these "Europeans" have for one another.  That'll be the 
day when any European gives me a sanctimonius lecture about civil and 
human rights as they oughta be!

Don't tell me about the Americans who have left their homeland--maybe 
moved to Europe ;-) --and said, "Man, am I glad to be rid of my 
motherland and glad to be here."  You will always find the anecdote 
here and there.  And sure for some Americans it will be a step up 
from whatever hell they thought they were living in the States.  But 
don't expect in the next 10 generations to see Americans in a mass 
migration to get away from all urban violence ("because of our stupid 
gun freedom laws") to move to the relative police states that exist 
everywhere outside of America (with the possible exception of 
Canada--I love those Canadians).  You European snobs should really 
get a grip yourselves!

Cynthia Brown <cynthb@sonetis.com> wrote on  1 Oct 97:

> Canada may be regulated to death according to most libertarians, but
> I for one like it that way.  I can walk alone and unarmed at night
> in Ottawa, Toronto, etc. without fearing for my life.  Can a female
> resident of Washington or New York say the same?  Our schools do not
> have metal detectors at the entrances because they are not needed. 

Painting America with a rather broad brush, aren't you?  I never went 
to a school--and I attended public schools for ALL of my 
education--which had a metal detector.  But comparing America and 
Canada is pretty much apples and oranges again.  Do you [in Canada] 
really have our ethnic mix?

America's violence problem is not one bit related to guns everywhere 
in the street.  There are much deeper problems, including distrust 
between ethnic groups.  The O.J.Simpson was a real eye-opener on 
black-white relations, for example, and I think the Native Americans 
have yet really to speak about the shitty way they have been treated 
over the years.  By the way, have Canada's European descendants come 
to proper terms with its native American neighbors?

> 
> IMNSHO the best way to fight crime is not with bigger guns than the
> "bad guys", but with better social programs such as universal health
> care, and improved day care so single parents can show their kids
> what a productive lifestyle looks like.  This takes longer than
> blowing the brains out of some teenager that feels his only path to
> a better life is through crime, and it doesn't give the same
> adrenalin rush.  However, it works at the source of crime, and not
> the consequences. 
> 
> Cynthia, unrepentant bleeding-heart liberal
>      Cynthia H. Brown, P.Eng.

Now you're talking!  Don't ever repent for thinking clearly.  But do 
keep in mind that not all people who own guns and wear red plaid 
Pendletons and sport scraggly beards are the neoFascists of tomorrow. 
I don't own a gun myself, but I wouldn't hesitate to obtain one to 
defend my civil rights against a corrupt police force or government 
"just doing its job" (how many horror stories do we hear about a 
bureaucracy going by the rules as it sees them and with a stroke of 
the pen, a mid-level govt official puts a family on to the street?  
And this can happen in the US?  Book recommendation:  Dark Rivers of 
The Heart by Dean Koontz;  think it's all fiction?)

Yours in paranoia, ;-)

On Thu, 2 Oct 1997, S. M. Halloran wrote:

> Painting America with a rather broad brush, aren't you?  I never went 
> to a school--and I attended public schools for ALL of my 
> education--which had a metal detector.  But comparing America and 
> Canada is pretty much apples and oranges again.  Do you [in Canada] 
> really have our ethnic mix?

Not identical, but we have large groups from various parts of the world,
and we are by no means ethnically uniform.  The two most numerous, of
French and British Isles descent, have very different cultures; Vancouver 
has large communities from Asia; etc. etc. And my brush is no broader than 
the "all government workers are lazy, corrupt little power-trippers"
mantra that appears here so often, uncontested. 

> America's violence problem is not one bit related to guns everywhere 
> in the street.  There are much deeper problems, including distrust 
> between ethnic groups.  The O.J.Simpson was a real eye-opener on 
> black-white relations, for example, and I think the Native Americans 
> have yet really to speak about the shitty way they have been treated 
> over the years.  By the way, have Canada's European descendants come 
> to proper terms with its native American neighbors?

Granted that the guns are a symptom and not the underlying problem.  
However, having them readily available makes it that much more likely 
that a person will do something regrettable in a fit of rage (or just 
plain annoyance).

Our history is not squeaky clean either, but at least we're trying to 
settle things by negotiation and referenda instead of violence.

> Now you're talking!  Don't ever repent for thinking clearly.  But do 
> keep in mind that not all people who own guns and wear red plaid 
> Pendletons and sport scraggly beards are the neoFascists of tomorrow. 

Agreed.  There are also dedicated, hard-working, community-oriented 
policemen out there. (I'm probably going to get flamed for daring to 
say that, but tough.)

Cynthia
===============================================================
		   Cynthia H. Brown, P.Eng.
E-mail:     cynthb@iosphere.net  | PGP Key:  See Home Page
Home Page:  http://www.iosphere.net/~cynthb/
Junk mail will be ignored in the order in which it is received.

        Klein bottle for rent; enquire within.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

An entity claiming to be Cynthia Brown wrote:

: Agreed.  There are also dedicated, hard-working, community-oriented 
: policemen out there. (I'm probably going to get flamed for daring to 
: say that, but tough.)
: 

There are some cops who I have known or had dealings with (even ones
who have given me a citation) who I consider very principled and generally
good people ... they actually "serve and protect".  However, from my
experience with cops in general, even the sight of a cruiser knocks
the adrenalin into gear.  I have seen friends harrassed and even beaten
by cops.  I don't trust a cop to protect my well being any more than I
trust my mechanic to protect my well being.  Big difference is, I can
choose my mechanic.

Doc

- -- 
[] Mark Rogaski                   "That which does not kill me
[] wendigo@pobox.com                 only makes me stranger."

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBNDcFVcHFI4kt/DQOEQLWVgCgu+2GywrmIPRD5p/URat77xE8zcMAoKtn
jNjs4UG6Et7SrZgMz7YnWgCW
=lU3u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Guns aren't really a cypherpunks topic, though the below-mentioned
clueless power-hungry terrorists do use the Internet and crypto
to help maintain their position relative to their victims and to
other competing clueless power-hungry terrorists.]

>Uncontrolled guns do not solve problems, they create them.  

I used to take the traditional U.S. Liberal-Statist view that Guns Are Bad,
and Guns Need Controlling.  But the way Americans and Europeans control guns
is to hire a bunch of armed thugs and use them to terrorize the population
into giving these people their guns and not buying more.  And, well,
I decided it was pretty hypocritical to hire armed thugs to take away
peoples' guns at gunpoint.  I had to give up that position.
(A Conservative-Statist wouldn't have any contradiction - the rabble
can't be trusted with guns, so we'll take them away at gunpoint,
and we'll be safer.  Trust us.  Or we'll shoot you too.  No problem :-)

Now, if the Amish want to do gun control, it's a different story.
If people want to keep around guns for killing people, 
keep talking to them about it until they reform, and if that doesn't work,
_stop_ talking to them until they reform.  No hypocrisy, no problem.

>IMNSHO the best way to fight crime is not with bigger guns than the "bad
>guys", but with better social programs such as universal health care, 

Those things are fine, but one of the big reasons people shoot each other
in this country is fighting over the money involved in the Black Market
for drugs.  After all, in a War On <whatever>, you can't expect one side
to do all the shooting.  All this crime and violence over drugs with a
free-market value of <$3/day for coke and <$1/day for heroin.  
You'd think the people in power are either ravingly clueless or they 
like Power for its own sake.  And you certainly shouldn't trust either
the clueless or the power-greedy to do the right thing with guns...

>improved day care so single parents can show their kids what a productive
>lifestyle looks like.  
....
>Cynthia, unrepentant bleeding-heart liberal
The traditional solution to day care was people taking care of each 
other's kids, either within the family or their neighbors, at home.  
Do-gooder liberals have made this more difficult by making laws mandating
quality control over day care, government certification for day care workers,
and safety certifications that the average home has trouble getting.
So the single parent can't show their kids a productive lifestyle by
taking care of the neighbors' kids for money, which would also free up
the neighbors to work.  And it's not just single parents who do this,
it's married women whose husbands aren't making enough to support them
in an Ozzie&Harriet lifestyle.

I do agree with you that blowing away the neighbor's teenager who's
trying to steal you TV isn't a good thing.  If it's just the kid,
he'll be gone before your police get there, and if it's someone dangerous
you may not have a chance to call them.  I keep a fire-extinguisher
by the bed, not only for fires, but for shooting first, asking questions
later, and clubbing them with as a fallback.  :-)  On the other hand,
back when I lived in Jersey, one of those grannies y'all were worried about
was on the front page of her local paper holding her pistol --
"Police?  Are you kidding?  They don't come to _my_ neighborhood, 
it's too dangerous!"
				Thanks!
					Bill
Bill Stewart, stewarts@ix.netcom.com
Regular Key PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF  3C85 B884 0ABE 4639

Bill Stewart wrote:
> 
> [Guns aren't really a cypherpunks topic, though the below-mentioned
> clueless power-hungry terrorists do use the Internet and crypto
> to help maintain their position relative to their victims and to
> other competing clueless power-hungry terrorists.]

  Munitions is munitions.

The Right Guy has Left the building...

At 11:16 AM -0700 10/1/97, Alex Le Heux wrote:
>You people just don't get it do you? A gun has one purpose: To kill. Just like
>any other tool, a gun, if it is available _will_ be used at some point.

When I was on my high school rifle team, I thought the one purpose of guns
was to poke holes in a piece of paper closer to the center of the
bull's-eye than the other team could.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | Internal surveillance      | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | helped make the USSR the   | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | nation it is today.        | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA