-=> Quoting Roger Fingas to Andrew Cummins <=-
 AC> Guns should be no more restricted than free speech, at least
 AC> not unless you want to amend the Constitution.
 RF> I'm Canadian, so don't ask me to go into the details of that.
I once heard that this is a place called Canada to the
north of us.  Unfortunately, the place is so unremarkable
that we almost never hear of it. 
 RF> Imposing regulations doesn't necessarily mean taking away
 RF> freedom; it generally means conditions to freedom, like how criminals
 RF> waive that right.
It's difficult to regulate without significantly imposing
on protected freedoms.
 RF> But how do you instill responsibility?  Unless North America
 RF> suddenly undergoes a mass religious conversion, it's not about to
 RF> happen.  Regulations -of the right sort, mind you - are useful in the
 RF> meantime.
Instilling responsibility is easy -- we let people sleep in the
beds they make.  But, nooooo.  If a man wants to build a house
where the government refuses to give him a building permit
(because of the location) and insurance companies refuse to
insure (because of the location), that man sues to government to
get the permit and when his house is wiped out, us taxpayers buy
him a new one.
Or, let's go back to crime.  Any criminal knows that he most
likely will *not* get caught for any given crime and if he does
he is most likely to just get a slap on the wrist.  Crime
pays, thanks to the joke of our legal system.
Oh, and there's those lifestyle things, like smoking and
eating tons of hamburger.  The freedom to smoke tobacco
is under heavy assault, the freedom to smoke pot is already
gone.  But, if we get heart disease from our diet, we can
expect the gubberment to pay our medical bills.
We are increasingly living in a society that hates both
freedom and responsibility.
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/Wildcat5! v2.0
---------------