Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 13:36:19 +0000 From: Paul Richards <paul@originative.co.uk> To: Mark Ovens <mark@ukug.uk.freebsd.org> Cc: Jay Nelson <noslenj@swbell.net>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: On "intelligent people" and "dangers to BSD" Message-ID: <38DCC0D3.99AB6F28@originative.co.uk> References: <38DB8D34.1A750C81@originative.co.uk> <Pine.BSF.4.05.10003241806320.805-100000@acp.swbell.net> <20000325104927.B234@parish>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mark Ovens wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2000 at 06:07:47PM -0600, Jay Nelson wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, Paul Richards wrote: > > > > >Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > > >> > > >> > > In one word: tyranny. > > >> > > > [snip] > > > > >Ok, not the best example. I guess the handguns law is a better one since > > >it's now illegal to have a handgun in the UK even if you bought it > > >before the law changed. > > > > > >Everyone here who had one was required to hand them in when the law came > > >in to effect. > > > > I hope they weren't foolish enough to actually hand them in. > > > > Most of them did (there was a compensation scheme). The big difference > of course is that over here most people realize that there is no real > justification for *any* civilian, except farmers, to own firearms (we > don't have grizzlies and rattlesnakes, so walking in the hills is > safe). Personally, I think they govt went a bit far because the massacres weren't caused by gun owners but by pschycopaths who are know massacring people with samurai swords instead, though admittedly there are fewer victims from a sword than there are from an automatic weapon. I think the few Olympic medals that Britain was still able to get in the shooting events suffered and I would have thought that there could have have been some dispensation for people such as them to carry on their sport. > The law was introduced after the massacre at a school in Dunblane, > Scotland, which was not unlike Columbine (sp?) in the US, except that > the kids were only ~5 years old. Yes, and I understand the reasoning for the law change but I think it was a knee jerk over reaction to the situation. Those who illegitimately need guns can still get them but those that had them for sport now cannot. I have no interest in guns, I've never owned one, have never shot one (except for an air rifle in an army open day when I was a kid) and have only ever seen one once and that was Jordan's :-) I just feel strongly about the civil liberties issue and the waning of rights that's occuring over here. The abolishment of the double jeapordy law being the next thing I'm going to be pissed off about, even though I'm fully in support of the Lawrence situation that's prodiving the excuse. Sometimes the solutions to problems have a greater impact than is justified. Paul. p.s. for overseas viewers, the lawrence case involved a racist murder where the white youths alleged to have murdered Stephen Lawrence have already been tried once but in a bungled case where the police involved in the inquiry have been alleged to have been racist themselves. The govt is now proposing to change the law to allow people to be tried more than once for the same crime. While I can see the reasoning for this in terms of the Lawrence case, the implications for the future are pretty scary. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?38DCC0D3.99AB6F28>