>I do agree with the argument that allowing
>law-abiding citizens to carry weapons helps to protect even those
>who are unarmed.

And there I have never disagreed. My sense has always been that a citizen
should undergo at least as much training to own a gun as s/he undergoes to own
and use a car. Proper training in safety, useage, storage and so on.

To the person afraid of coming here due to the violence issue...if you come
alone, you're going to be okay, because something like 4 out of 5 gun related
incidents happen between people who *know* each other (and in many cases are
married to or involved with one another).

People seem to go into this knee-jerk reaction whenver anyone starts saying
things like the stuff two paragraphs up, and make it into a threat to take away
one's gun. It's simply a statement that steps can and should be taken to make
sure the person who *buys* one knows how to use it.

A car exists for many purposes, and can if misused result in someone's death.

A handgun exists for only one purpose: to shoot another human being.

Shouldn't the standard for ownership of the latter be at *least* as reasonable
and thorough as the standard for the first?

jms

(jmsatb5@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
(all message content (c) 2000 by
synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
to reprint specifically denied to
SFX Magazine)