|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> That's because a hundred or more years ago they a) fought duels in
> public,
I think the number of deaths by duel where both sides agree to shoot at each
other is nominal, unless you have some evidence that it was common.
> b) didn't have a lot of rules about when it was and wasn't
> justified to shoot someone,
Of course they did.
> and c) you didn't have whole organizations
> dedicated to BS like, "Guns don't kill people, people do!",
Because nobody was stupid enough to think otherwise. Guns were tools just
like knives were.
> makes about as much sense as saying, "cars without working brakes don't
> kill people, the people that drive them do.", oh.. and the crazy idea
> that guns represent someone *other* than a very clear, specific, and
> intentional, way to kill things.
Guns are not likened to cars without brakes. How many policemen carry guns?
How many policemen would drive a car without brakes?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"How did he die?" "He got shot in the hand."
"That was fatal?"
"He was holding a live grenade at the time."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |