From TLEHMAN at lor.net Sat May 22 11:17:40 1999
I don't understand why owning a machine-gun is such a big
thrill for so many people.
Actually, quite few people in the US own machine-guns; maybe you're thinking of another kind of gun? "Machine-guns" as coined in the 30's refer to fully-automatic weapons. In the mean time, I don't understand why owning an SUV is such a big thrill for so many people, but I'm not hell-bent on banning them.
One screwy reality about slavery is that the slaves in olde
south not only owned guns, but, had very easy access to them.
Every time that slave quarters are dug up by archaeologists
this reality comes out of the historical closet. A lot of good
it did them.
One screwey reality about the history of gun control laws in the US and pre-US was that they were largely pointed at minorities. Yes, disarming slaves (and freemen later!) was a big part of the control apparatus and they were the among the first groups to be singled out to be disarmed. This continues today with things like public housing gun bans (who lives in public housing? It sure isn't "the public"!) and 'Saturday Night Special' bans which tend to focus on safety issues (yet exempt police officers who, presumably, can handle the unsafe guns?) but really are pointed at *inexpensive* guns -- cheap guns are the kind used by poor people, of course.
And we know what "poor" means to local city governments.
You can't buy an 'unsafe' $99 .38 revolver in case you'd like to defend yourself when your ex-boyfriend drops by (in defiance of the restraining order you finally were able to secure with your "public defender" -- there's that damn word 'public' again) to beat you senseless, but if you're a dentist who has $500, well step right up and get your Glock.
The hypocracy boggles the mind; unless you understand it's on purpose.
/jordan