[lit-ideas] Re: Feeling Safe isn't safe
- From: Phil Enns <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 16:07:26 -0300
Lawrence Helm wrote:
"Would Cho have even attempted his rampage had not Virginian Tech disarmed
itself? Probably not."
The argument seems to be that if gun possession is prolific, people are less
likely to go on 'rampages'. Wouldn't Iraq and Somalia (and feel free to add
others) be empirical cases against this argument? It seems more the case
that when a place is awash with guns, rampages are more likely because
everyone knows that those who survive also have guns. What we see in Iraq
is killing on a horrific scale because a single killing here or there is
pointless when everyone has an AK. In short, the logic of arming everyone
necessarily leads to killing on a larger scale.
Sincerely,
Phil Enns
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
