Guest guest Posted February 13, 2003 Report Share Posted February 13, 2003 I can only say that ROTC and the military train with all manner of explosive devices made with everything from the contents of your kitchen to exotic plastique mixes, and the detonators range from mercury switches and proximity fuses to electronic devices as simple as walkie-talkies, TV remotes, and the beeper that opens your car door before you reach the car. In other words, the uses to which all kinds of things are put are determined by the users, not the makers. Kill a person with a screwdriver, or shovel, or a rolling pin. That was your call, and certainly not up to the maker. Now, you certainly have a case in boycotting, say, the company that puts the components together into a land mine. That I can see as a bad thing. The components, though, might just as easily have been used to fashion something useful. Think hard now, folks, about hand guns. On Thursday, February 13, 2003, at 03:57 PM, wrote: > Re: Guns Don't Kill But People Kill With Them > > well oil is something i wish we could stop using, and i don't drive a > car for just that reason.. > > but my understanding of what i was told is that land mine-detonation > devices differ from the detonation devices used in larger > explosives. meaning that motorola is designing detonation devices > specificially and exclusively used for land mines. i would like to > know whether or not that is the case. > > > , " daveo " <daveo@m...> wrote: >> >> Mining for natural resources...oil exploration...demolition of aged > building >> (using controlled implosions) to make way for new construction...in > a >> limited number of cases--road, canal, and tunnel construction. >> >> Oops!! Once I got started, I couldn't stop. I hope, you're not > upset to >> get six. >> >> DaveO >> There is in the clergy of all the Christian denominations a time-serving, cringing, subservient morality, as wide from the spirit of the Gospel as it is from the intrepid assertion and vindication of truth. ~ John Quincy Adams Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2003 Report Share Posted February 14, 2003 if i could live in my magical little fantasy land, they're would be no guns. but apparently i don't, so i merely hope for tighter restrictions on handguns, namely, requiring a certain amount of training to purchase one. you need a liscense to drive and to hunt (which does require a short safety course) but in lots of places any idiot who hasn't already killed someone can buy a gun. statistically speaking they're more likely to have an accident than fend off an attacker. in a fair world, good, responsible gun owners shouldn't have to pay for the bumblings of the irresponsible one. but i say better they have to go to a few more gun classes if it means one less kid blowing their brains out. is that an unreasonable request? please don't give some intellectual darwinism response. -- In , The Stewarts <stews9@c...> wrote: > I can only say that ROTC and the military train with all manner of > explosive devices made with everything from the contents of your kitchen > to exotic plastique mixes, and the detonators range from mercury switches > and proximity fuses to electronic devices as simple as walkie- talkies, TV > remotes, and the beeper that opens your car door before you reach the car. > > In other words, the uses to which all kinds of things are put are > determined by the users, not the makers. > > Kill a person with a screwdriver, or shovel, or a rolling pin. That was > your call, and certainly not up to the maker. > > Now, you certainly have a case in boycotting, say, the company that puts > the components together into a land mine. That I can see as a bad thing. > The components, though, might just as easily have been used to fashion > something useful. > > Think hard now, folks, about hand guns. > > On Thursday, February 13, 2003, at 03:57 PM, > wrote: > > > Re: Guns Don't Kill But People Kill With Them > > > > well oil is something i wish we could stop using, and i don't drive a > > car for just that reason.. > > > > but my understanding of what i was told is that land mine- detonation > > devices differ from the detonation devices used in larger > > explosives. meaning that motorola is designing detonation devices > > specificially and exclusively used for land mines. i would like to > > know whether or not that is the case. > > > > > > , " daveo " <daveo@m...> wrote: > >> > >> Mining for natural resources...oil exploration...demolition of aged > > building > >> (using controlled implosions) to make way for new construction...in > > a > >> limited number of cases--road, canal, and tunnel construction. > >> > >> Oops!! Once I got started, I couldn't stop. I hope, you're not > > upset to > >> get six. > >> > >> DaveO > >> > There is in the clergy of all the Christian denominations a time- serving, > cringing, subservient morality, as wide from the spirit of the Gospel as > it is > from the intrepid assertion and vindication of truth. > ~ John Quincy Adams Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2003 Report Share Posted February 14, 2003 You probably didn't think you'd ever be hearing this from me, but I support tighter gun controls too. Too many crazies can now get guns, and I don't like that. DaveO dave <dave4sale [dave4sale] if i could live in my magical little fantasy land, they're would be no guns. but apparently i don't, so i merely hope for tighter restrictions on handguns, namely, requiring a certain amount of training to purchase one. you need a liscense to drive and to hunt (which does require a short safety course) but in lots of places any idiot who hasn't already killed someone can buy a gun. statistically speaking they're more likely to have an accident than fend off an attacker. in a fair world, good, responsible gun owners shouldn't have to pay for the bumblings of the irresponsible one. but i say better they have to go to a few more gun classes if it means one less kid blowing their brains out. is that an unreasonable request? please don't give some intellectual darwinism response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.