jj@alice.UUCP (04/18/85)
>>Jeff, you've failed to illustrate how the threat of deadly force, in >>any *general* way, is a civilizing influence. >> -Ed Hall > >Ed, he may have neglected to do lots of things, but let me just pick on >this one, o.k.? There are hundreds of examples that can be chosen on >either side of the argument -- the expansion of the west during any >period you care to name before, say, 1900 -- was the threat of deadly >force (practiced by the marshalls) a civilizing influence, or was the >threat of deadly force (practiced by the lawless gunslingers) a barbarous >force? Our whole western history (and probably eastern, too, but I don't >... >we become more civilized because of our past or in spite of it? > >... >Somehow, _whether_ the citizens of a country have a right to bear arms >doesn't seem to have a whole lot to do with civilization. Better questions >might be "what do they do with that right?" "how do they deal with >situations that historically have been dealt with with arms?" "what made >them retain or reject that right?" "are they still around?" "would I like >to live there?" "do I agree with them?" Well, the question regarding "which was a civilizing influence" avoids one point, namely that those of bad will will ALWAYS be willing to use deadly force. Ergo, those who will never use deadly force will eventually make themselves extinct. -- DO TEDDY BEARS HAVE OPINIONS? ASK YOURS TODAY! "I'm amazed that men like you can be so shallow, thick and slow" (ihnp4/allegra)!alice!jj