[Vision2020] The N.R.A. at the Bench

[Andy Boyd]

I've never seen any report on a child killed by another individual by
stuffing food in their mouths and other accidents.  Accidents are not
murder.

 

Andy Boyd

 

From: Gary Crabtree [mailto:moscowlocksmith at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 11:55 AM
To: Tom Hansen
Cc: Andy Boyd; vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The N.R.A. at the Bench

 

A question for you, Low-T...

 

What is the magic number? What length is too great if it will save but a
single precious child? Because if the cost/benefit ratio on this issue is
the gold standard you better get ready to lay down the law on solid food
(choking) open bodies of water (drowning) and life in general (accidents)
All are more responsible for child mortality then firearms.

 

g

On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote:

Question, gc . . .

 

What is the magic number?  How many deaths of children are required before
we should become concerned about the uncomfortably easy access to
semi-automatic weapons and high capacity magazines?

 

You say that you support armed teachers.  Suppose a (or some) teacher(s) are
unable to teach for a given period of time due to illness or some school
commitment.  Should we require that substitute teachers be armed?

Seeya round town, Moscow, because . . .

 

"Moscow Cares"

http://www.MoscowCares.com

  

Tom Hansen

Moscow, Idaho

 


On Dec 28, 2012, at 11:30 AM, Gary Crabtree <moscowlocksmith at gmail.com>
wrote:

"Since the assault weapons ban has been lifted, there have been more violent
crimes."

 

 

I can't speak to "violent crimes" over all as I don't know how it's defined
but gun violence is down. The assault weapons ban had zero effect on gun
crime.

 

"I don't wish to take away all guns. And I don't imagine the benefits, they
are real."

 

Since you are willing to take away many thousands of guns to solve a problem
that reflects less than two percent of gun violence, how many guns would you
be willing to ban to prevent over sixty two percent? Suicide by firearm only
requires but a single shot. Why would any sane American believe that once
one class of firearm was made illegal that others wouldn't soon follow?
People such as yourself will always have a rationalization for taking away
the rights of others

 

g

 

 

 

g

 

On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Andy Boyd <moscowrecycling at turbonet.com>
wrote:

Since the assault weapons ban has been lifted, there have been more violent
crimes.

 

=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
              http://www.fsr.net
         mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20121228/47a743a4/attachment.html>