On 2/25/2022 12:27 AM, John B. wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 04:16:03 -0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
> <ralph@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 24 Feb 2022 12:02:17 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/24/2022 11:19 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 2/23/2022 10:49 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, February 23, 2022 at 5:49:51 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2/23/2022 6:44 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 12:27:31 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2022 9:16 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2022 7:57 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/22/2022 8:31 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, of course I was ridiculing Franks assertion, at
>>>>>>>>>>>> least as I
>>>>>>>>>>>> understood him, that somehow one would be more, or less,
>>>>>>>>>>>> stricken by
>>>>>>>>>>>> grief depending on the cause of death.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You're being totally unrealistic, in a foolish attempt to
>>>>>>>>>>> pursue a nonsense argument.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Neither individuals nor society treat all deaths as equal,
>>>>>>>>>>> nor have identical feelings about all deaths.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The death of an elderly person who has lived a full life is
>>>>>>>>>>> one thing. Perhaps it is regrettable depending on
>>>>>>>>>>> conditions, but often people remark "Well, it was time" or
>>>>>>>>>>> something similar.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The death from natural causes of a middle aged or younger
>>>>>>>>>>> person is generally treated as a bit more regrettable. A
>>>>>>>>>>> similar death of a child even more so.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> An accidental death of those people triggers yet more
>>>>>>>>>>> regret, and may lead to anger at how such a thing could be
>>>>>>>>>>> allowed to happen.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The murder of a person rightfully triggers outrage and
>>>>>>>>>>> criminal prosecution.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The murder of a child, even more outrage.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The killing of 20 children sitting in school is considered
>>>>>>>>>>> truly heinous. At least, by people who are not avid fans of
>>>>>>>>>>> the weapon used.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes I understand you and you're not wrong in principle but policy
>>>>>>>>>> based
>>>>>>>>>> on anomalies doesn't always work out well.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1927-bombing-remains-americas-deadliest-school-massacre-180963355/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A British-born engineer and colleague of mine in the 1970s used to
>>>>>>>>> mock
>>>>>>>>> a slogan the NRA promoted in those days. He said "And when bombs are
>>>>>>>>> outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I wonder if today's pretend soldiers will use the Second Amendment to
>>>>>>>>> call for free use and possession of bombs?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are slipping right down into the throes of silly ness.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your colleague's mocking comment is pretty silly as today, in the
>>>>>>>> U.S., several states with rather severe hand gun control laws are
>>>>>>>> finding more and more being smuggled into the state. So it is a truism
>>>>>>>> that when guns are outlawed only criminals will have guns.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You might try a google search on "gun+smuggle". I get 15,600,000
>>>>>>>> "hits".
>>>>>>>> https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/gun-trafficking-ring-ohio-camden-new-jersey-weapons-arrests/205248/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Out here in the actual world it's the same market phenomenon
>>>>>>> as dope. Prohibition or hyper regulatory tax schemes
>>>>>>> guarantee a higher profit to contraband.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK, you guys have convinced me! Laws never work, so we should outlaw
>>>>>> all laws. Got it!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Since this is Usenet, I may have to say that was sarcasm.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggestions welcome.
>>>>
>>>> OK:
>>>>
>>>> Canadian laws.
>>>>
>>>> British laws.
>>>>
>>>> French laws.
>>>>
>>>> Heck, Swiss laws. Lots of guns, but in "well regulated militias." And
>>>> far, far less gun crime than the U.S.
>>>>
>>>> Very few developed nations emulate the U.S.
>>>
>>> Re Canadian laws...
>>>
>>> I did a bit of research and Canada has a far lower incident of violent
>>> crime, i.e. law breaking, then the U.S.
>>>
>>> Do you suppose that this is a matter of better laws or is it a matter
>>> of a more law abiding people?
>>> And, I suspect the same applies to The British, and the Swiss.
>>
>> While the US Constitution talks about “life, liberty and the pursuit of
>> happiness”, the original Canadian Constitution mentioned “peace, order and
>> good government”.
>>
>> One is decidedly every man for himself, while the other is much more
>> focused on the country as an interdependent community, and I think those
>> two phrases have defined both countries.
>
>
> Errr... Not exactly. the life, limb, etc. quote is from the
> Declaration of Independence (1776), which says in part,
>
> We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
> equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
> Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
> Happiness.
>
> The Constitution itself provides guarantees, for, basically:
> Freedom of speech
> Freedom of the press
> Freedom of religion
> Freedom of assembly
> Right to petition the government
>
> There are other rights such as right to own firearms, right to a
> speedy trial, etc., but for comparison to Canada the above are
> probably the critical ones.
>
> The Canadian Constitution consists of the Canada Act 1982 (which
> includes the Constitution Act, 1982), Section 2 provides for,
> Under the heading of "Fundamental Freedoms" the section states:
>
> 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
> (a) freedom of conscience and religion;
> (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including
> freedom of the press and other media of communication;
> (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
> (d) freedom of association.
>

Bah, 1982. pffft.
Not now:

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2022/02/14/full-text-of-chrystia-freelands-remarks-during-emergencies-act-announcement.html

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971