Iraq (np political spam)

[kelber at mindspring.com]

Given this kid was suicidal, it's unlikely he cared whether or not anyone else could shoot back.

Laura

>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Dave Monroe <monropolitan at yahoo.com>
>>Sent: Apr 19, 2007 10:10 AM
>>To: David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>, "mikebailey at speakeasy.net" <mikebailey at speakeasy.net>
>>Cc: pynchon-l at waste.org
>>Subject: Re: Iraq (np political spam)
>>
>>--- David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/19/07, mikebailey at speakeasy.net
>>> <mikebailey at speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > (and although Va is a concealed-carry state,
>>> > the campus had unfortunately a weapons ban, so
>>> > the killer could be pretty sure none of his
>>> > targets could shoot back)
>>> 
>>> I'm assuming that the statement above is a joke,
>>> although it is an absurd NRA talking point.
>>
>>I'd like to assume that, but ... well, having just
>>addressed this, if not absurd, ultimately, logically
>>flawed point elsewhere this morning ...
>>
>>If YOU can get a gun, there's no reason to assume that
>>someone else CAN'T, whether legally or otherwise. 
>>ESPECIALLY if you assume (quite rightly) that even
>>those who can't legally acquire one can get one (not
>>to mention more) nonetheless.  You're ALRADY assuming
>>that ANYONE could have a gun in that case, so ...
>>
>>So there's no reason for you not to ALREADY assume
>>everyone you meet as you walk down the street is
>>packing his/her own heat, concealed (or otherwise)
>>carry law or no.  Legalities are completely irrelevant
>>ALREADY, it's an ASSUMPTION of the argument that
>>anyone/everyone could well be armed.  
>>
>>The ODDS that someone is armed might of course vary
>>with a concealed carry law, but, given the possible
>>consequences (i.e., injury/death), it's nigh unto
>>Pascal's wager, without even the chance of infinite
>>reward.  And if yr NOT rational enough to work all
>>that out, well, concealed carry simply ISN'T going to
>>be a deterrent to you ...
>>
>>This is only even more true in the case of someone
>>ILLEGALLY bearing arms.  If YOU can get a gun even if
>>you shouldn't be able to, if you can conceal it, why
>>assume ANYONE else isn't armed as well?  And you might
>>well have exercised yr non-right to bear arms
>>PRECISELY bcause you've gone irrational (heat of the
>>moment, crime of passion, just plain nuts), so ...
>>
>>In short, it's simply a non-argument ...
>>
>>__________________________________________________
>>Do You Yahoo!?
>>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
>>http://mail.yahoo.com