Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Every Home have a gun

Expand Messages
  • Julian Gress
    Yesterday I heard that the State Department wanted to build new and better factories for the production of new to-be-designed nuclear weapons. Apparently
    Message 1 of 7 , Dec 7, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Yesterday I heard that the State Department wanted to build new and
      better factories for the production of new to-be-designed nuclear
      weapons. Apparently according to some national or state law, they are
      required to listen to the input of citizens. In any case, at first
      the question is, "why do we need more and better bombs? Can't we
      destroy everything like 8 times over?" One person pointed out to me
      that the sensible nuclear weapon designs program would not be to make
      stronger and bigger bombs, but to make more precise ones, so that
      instead of blowing up whole cities, we may only destroy certain
      buildings or people. Anyway, it seems the role of a gun is not just
      protection in case of an intruder, but prevention--to discourage
      people from doing so. And this accords with the doctrine of mutually
      assured destruction. So, to apply this to a bigger scale, if every
      home should have a gun, should every nation have nuclear weapons?

      I'm curious to see whether you'll stick to your guns on this one :).


      --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Ic Neltococayotl"
      <puritanpresbyterian@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > Now this is my kind of person:
      >
      > http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061206/us_nm/usa_guns_dc
      > <http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061206/us_nm/usa_guns_dc>
      >
      > Yup, self-defense, I love that Biblical command!
      >
      >
      >
      > Edgar
      >
    • Larry Bump
      ... In case anyone missed it, I was joking...
      Message 2 of 7 , Dec 8, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Larry Bump wrote:
        > Ic Neltococayotl wrote:
        >>
        >> Yup, self-defense, I love that Biblical command!
        >
        > Guns are evil, aren't they?
        >
        > Larry
        >

        In case anyone missed it, I was joking...
      • Ic Neltococayotl
        Larry, We know. But nuclear bombs...well that may be another story...indiscriminate killing/murder is evil I think. Edgar
        Message 3 of 7 , Dec 8, 2006
        • 0 Attachment

          Larry,

          We know.  But nuclear bombs...well that may be another story...indiscriminate killing/murder is evil I think.

          Edgar


          --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Larry Bump <lbump@...> wrote:
          >
          > Larry Bump wrote:
          > > Ic Neltococayotl wrote:
          > >>
          > >> Yup, self-defense, I love that Biblical command!
          > >
          > > Guns are evil, aren't they?
          > >
          > > Larry
          > >
          >
          > In case anyone missed it, I was joking...
          >

        • Tom
          This is the kind of careless attitude about firearms that leads to children playing with REAL guns! !!!!!PANIC!!!!!!! Tom ;-)
          Message 4 of 7 , Dec 8, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            This is the kind of careless attitude about firearms that leads to
            children playing with REAL guns! !!!!!PANIC!!!!!!!

            Tom ;-)

            > Guns are evil, aren't they?


            >
            >
            > In case anyone missed it, I was joking...
            > Larry
          • Larry Bump
            ... Yes, even in the cities they took in which they were commanded to kill all of the men, they were not to kill the women and children, nor the livestock and
            Message 5 of 7 , Dec 8, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Ic Neltococayotl wrote:
              > Larry,
              >
              > We know. But nuclear bombs...well that may be another
              > story...indiscriminate killing/murder is evil I think.

              Yes, even in the cities they took in which they were commanded to kill
              all of the men, they were not to kill the women and children, nor the
              livestock and certainly not the trees.

              Using smaller (tactical) nukes against formations, fleets, etc, along
              the scope of an artillery barrage, would fit into the scheme of an holy
              war, but city-busters would not.

              Instead of Hiroshima, they should have nuked the Imperial Palace...
              Of course, the argument that the nuking and surrender saved more
              Japanese civilians than the explosions and radiation killed cannot be
              ignored.

              Larry
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.