"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:33:15 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
calmly ranted:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message

Remember what Thomas Jefferson had to say about that?
"The man who would choose security over freedom deserves neither."

So, if 20-shot magazines are what people buy for personal security, what
do
they then deserve?

What freedom do they give up by purchasing 20-rounders, sir?

Well, that's an interesting question, and we'd have to get into the
consequences of living with a bunker mentality to get into it. But I doubt
if we'd reach any agreement on the subject.

Why does society deserve comity?

Because other people live here, too. Close to 300 million of them. And
it's
their country as much as it is yours.

What business is it of theirs what I store my ready ammo in?
You forget that when the **** hits the fan, these comity deservers
all flock to those who HAVE the larger magazines, don't you?

And which **** and fan are we discussing here, Larry? The Whiskey Rebellion,
or Shay's?

I'm beginning to think that your entire philosophy is based on fantasies of
roving mobs swarming across your front lawn.


If I ever had to run around with three full magazines, which is unlikely
in
the extreme, I wouldn't worry about what people thought. When people run
around in the woods with 20-shot magazines, I assume they're a little
nutz.
And I believe that's a common, as well as a generally accurate,
perception.

In the last post you said you had one in the gun and two in your
pockets. Your paragraph above this comment could be right out of a
Michael Moore movie, y'know? He uses the same "sane" talk about
himself and uses the "run around in the woods" and "nutz" type terms
on others he doesn't like.

Sometimes he's right. And, if you want to understand the politics of gun
control in the US, you first have to step back and see how you look to those
who would vote in ways you don't like. I'm not talking about HCI, but those
in the general population who might favor one gun-control law or another.

Most people aren't libertarian ideologues. That is to say, most of them do a
pretty good job, overall and in the long run, of sizing up the ideologues
and judging whether they're using their heads, or if their heads are using
them. They can sniff out a philosopher who's in love with his ideas. Most
people are pragmatists.


I have no fear of larger magazines. But I think you could do a
psychological
profile of the people who own them, and it wouldn't be a pretty sight.
That
isn't science. That's politics, and common sense, and experience.

There wouldn't be too many "pretty" profiles on anyone I've seen in
politics, power, or money. AAMOF, I don't think a pretty profile
would be found anywhere. We're all nuts, each in our own way.

Ta!

Speak for yourself, John. g

Ed Huntress