On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 08:10:21 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 16:30:02 -0700, Jim Stewart
wrote:

Gary Coffman wrote:
On 17 Jul 2003 12:02:06 -0700, (Tony Pratt) wrote:

The designed purpose of any gun ever made is to kill or maim in the
most efficient manner, clearly no other object comes into this
category!!

On the domestic front, the CDC reports that 1 in 42 gunshot wounds
are fatal, while 1 in 7 stabbing attacks are fatal. That makes an attack
by a knife wielding assailant 8 times more likely to prove fatal than an
attack by an assailant with a gun. (The explanation for this disparity
is that a knife wielding assailant is more likely to press home the attack,
and keep stabbing until the victim ceases to twitch than is an assailant
with a firearm.)

Firstly, you're comparing knife *attacks* with
gunshot *wounds*, clearly non-sequitur.

Huh? Knife attacks ALWAYS produce wounds. Knife fighters say that the
winner of the knife fight is the one whom leaves in an ambulence.

Isn't that "leaves in a ambulence with the siren on"?

I still don't understand why people are such hoplophobes (sp). The
only reason I can see is that they are basically cowards. I define
coward as someone unwilling to stand up and suffer for what is right.
The in essence want peace without cost. I mean really, wouldn't it be
nice if no one needed guns :^). But that's not reality, so you might
suspect someone who is cowardly to have a distorted view of what
reality is. Afterall they have to make "reality" harmonize with their
desire for peace without having to pay the price for peace.

Evil men will always exist to this or that degree. Taking away
weapons that the weak could use to defend themselves from evil men is
not going to make the evil men go away nor will it mean evil men won't
find some other weapon (such as their fists) to dominate the weak.

John

Please note that my return address is wrong due to the amount of junk email I get.
So please respond to this message through the newsgroup.