Re: Todays rant

On 6/2/2025 12:02 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On 2 Jun 2025 08:28:17 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:
 

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On 6/1/2025 5:12 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Thu Dec 12 18:37:02 2024 Frank Krygowski  wrote:

On 12/12/2024 2:49 PM, AMuzi wrote:

On 12/12/2024 11:51 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:

On 12/12/2024 8:48 AM, AMuzi wrote:

On 12/12/2024 7:19 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:

On 12/11/2024 4:59 PM, AMuzi wrote:

>
So you agree with me that the crucial aspects are the actor and the
act, not the hardware.

>
To a certain extent.
>
If every human being could be trusted to act responsibly, allowing a
device that was developed expressly to kill other human beings to be
possessed without any restrictions wouldn't be a problem.

>
But in that case, why would a person possess such a device? Some level
of intent to kill is what drives ownership.
>
Yes, yes, I know that Andrew is not intent on killing when he takes his
AR to the range. But somewhere in there is "practicing in case I need
it" as motivation. That is, the motivation is not to put closely spaced
holes in paper, because a .177 air rifle can do that as well or better.
Somewhere is "I can blast away and destroy."
>

Following your posit to the extreme, there should be no reason
therefore to prevent me from mounting a fully- operational m134
minigun on the roof of my car. Hey, I'm a responsible adult, never
been arrested, I've never committed any acts of violence, even had a
security clearance for a time. If the criteria is _solely_ 'the actor
and the act', why shouldn't I be able to do that?
>
Why shouldn't _any_ one who has never had any history of violent
behavior _not_ be allowed to own weapons of war? It's not like people
with no history of violence have _ever_ engaged in a mass shooting....

>
Well, you could.
>
Tedious lengthy process plus $200 will get you your very own NFA tax
stamp,

>
But nobody does that without harboring at least the image of using such
a gun to kill other people.
>
I think it's a bit weird even when it's confined to the world of video
games. But when it leads to possession and proliferation of devices
designed for such killing, it's a real societal problem.

>
Tell me Frank, what does it feel like for the law itself to disagree with you?

>
Damn, Tom, what does it feel like to have to resurrect arguments from
December 12 to feel good about yourself? Have you been constantly
stewing over that for almost six months?

>
I suspect in this case it’s incompetence rather than deliberate!
Roger Merriman

 The 6 month delay is not Tom's incompetence or malice.  Tom is using
newshosting.com as his Usenet News service and his news reader
program:
<https://www.newshosting.com/newsreader/>
I tried it...

It's nice of you to be kind, but I don't think the bad newsreader excuses Tom's incompetence. If we can tell he's responding to a 6 month old thread, Tom ought to be able to tell.
--
- Frank Krygowski