Jay Stranahan wrote:

SNIP
I think my point was valid, and certainly not half-cocked. That statement
was in reply to the suggestion that, as is the right of any US citizen, a
criminal can legally carry a weapon.


Oh for Christ's sake.... (rolls eyes). That's not true. Felons cannot legally
own firearms (not that that prevents them. They're *felons*. Duh). At least not
in the great state of California, and I seriously doubt they can *anywhere.* You
are speaking from prejudice and your prejudice is based on ignorance, and if it
annoys you for me to point it out and call it by its proper name, I'm not
completely sorry. Because you've said a couple of things below that I find
seriously offensive.


This only applies to convicted felons.. nothing to stop someone who has
never been convicted from legally owning and carrying a firearm in the
course of his 'employment'... there might be problems if he is caught in
the act while armed... but maybe he shoots his way free and continue as
a non felon.


It's the flagrant willingness to kill,


No, it's a total willingness to defend onesself in one's home. You used to have
the same ethos in your own society. You have successfully argued yourself out of
it, and only time will tell whether this was any sort of an improvement.

No, its a willingness to kill. I can defend myself in my house without
having a gun. Using a gun for self defence implies you are prepared to
use it. If you are prepared to use a firearm, then you are prepared to
kill... you can't guarantee that a shot will not kill...

SNIP