F. Leon Wilson writes:
> Martin William Smith wrote:
> >Jonathan A. Reich writes:
> >>         Leon:  your first question is absurd on its face.  The 2nd
> >> question is a good one, and the answer is: because there isn't any good
> >> reason for people to own guns.  They have done great evil in societies
> >> around the world.  They cause great suffering in this country.  We would
> >> all be better off without them, and, if we had any sense, we'd amend our
> >> constitution to take guns away from people.
> >
> >Well there are at least three good reasons to own a gun: hunting,
> >target shooting, membership in the national guard.  I argue that
> >self-defence is not a good reason, because, if people are not safe in
> >a society, then the society has failed and needs to be resturctured at
> >a more fundamental level.
>
> I have a major problem with the statement, "if people are not safe
> in a society, then the society has failed and needs to be
> resturctured at a more fundamental level."
>
> If I, and individual of some "constructed society" decides to shoot
> (to kill) someone has society failed?

No, if a single murderer decides to kill in a society, then the danger
to any other particular individual in that society is miniscule.  In
that situation, the violent crime rate is low, and no one can argue
that he needs a gun for his self-defence.  But if the violent crime
rate becomes so high that there is a significant chance that any
individual will be a victim of violent crime, then one can argue that
he needs a gun for self-defence.  My point is that if the crime rate
reaches that level in a society, then that society is a failure.  I'm
assuming that peace and safety are requirements for a successful
society.  You can measure success in other ways, but if you really
can't go out at night without a gun, then with respect to peace and
safety, your society has failed, and it is time to rebuild.

> I have never join a specific aspect of "society."
>
> How is membership in the society determined?
>
>  How does one become a member of society?

If you live in the US, you are a member of US society.

> Is society limited by locale or it some imagery makeup?

It doesn't matter really, except that if you live in Punkin Corner,
Colorado, your crime rate will be a lot lower than if you live in
Chicago.


> >I suppose American society has very nearly reached that point, but
> >before throwing everything out and starting over, strict gun
> >control like Norway's should be tried.
>
> I don't beleive this statement.  American society has reach no point
> close to you statement.

Ok, then in america, you can't justify owning a gun for self-defence.

> People make life choses each day.  They they decide to kill, they
> have that right to kill.

The right to kill?  Other people?  No, Sovereign states claim that
right, which is one reason why their count should be reduced to one,
but individuals have no right to kill other people.

> Perhaps I should ask, "Do people have the right to kill?

Under what circumstances?

martin

Martin Smith                    Email: [log in to unmask]
P.O. Box 1034 Bekkajordet       Tel. : +47 330 35700
N-3194 HORTEN, Norway           Fax. : +47 330 35701