Re: The John and Doug Gun Debate Thread.


"JOF" <jofrancis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9untq11dla7t55v4pto8r9c1juksge4434@xxxxxxxxxx
> On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 12:41:39 -0500, "Popeye"

>> Why is it odd for someone to collect military rifles, but not fighter
>>planes?
>
> Nothing odd about collecting stuff. It's the whole mystique built up
> around the manliness of owning guns that worries me.

While that is both a personal perception and a personal problem,

You still haven't addressed why the "manliness" of owning a fighter
plane -doesn't- bother you.

Answer: fear and paranoia of firearms.

>It's a form of
> pressure that probably pushes too many impressionable people into
> keeping and even carrying guns for the wrong reasons. And if they
> could be convinced they needed or wanted the guns for the wrong
> reasons, how can they be trusted to use them only for the right
> reasons?

That's the grandest and most illogical of suppositions.

And -absolutely- indefensible from a factual standpoint.

> I wasn't going to get into any of this until later, but you asked a
> reasonable question. The problem for me in answering is that I'm
> theorizing with more intuited logic than facts.

Yeah, yeah.

"intuited logic".

That's it.

> If I didn't believe it
> happened the way I describe it, I'd drop it as quickly as the warbird
> argument. Essentially I used the same rationale with that. The
> difference is that flying a P51 or something of that ilk requires
> some pretty solid concentration and attention to the rules to stay
> alive, not even so much the operation as the maintenance. Anyone who
> has the self-discipline to handle that responsibility will likely be
> fine with the guns.

Uh, yeah, but.

All your friend needed to -buy- his fighter plane was a checkbook.

No one made him take a psyche test, or prove why he -had- to have a
military aircraft.

And there was no proof -beforehand- (and not necessarily afterward) that
he had the discipline to handle the responsibility.

He could have become suicidal at any time, and used his aircraft to kill
many.




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The John and Doug Gun Debate Thread.
    ... Do you think there's any limit to how powerful or fast guns should ... >>> Why is it odd for someone to collect military rifles, but not fighter ... >> keeping and even carrying guns for the wrong reasons. ... > Yeah, yeah. ...
    (rec.scuba)
  • Re: The John and Doug Gun Debate Thread.
    ... >>> Why is it odd for someone to collect military rifles, but not fighter ... >> keeping and even carrying guns for the wrong reasons. ...
    (rec.scuba)
  • Re: Defensive Weapons
    ... Fixed guns firing aft - the problem is that the trajectory of ... hoping the fighter behind you would be obliging enough to fly into the ... Forget trying to fly the bomber to get those fixed tail guns on ... Flexible guns firing aft - better than nothing. ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Re: Defensive Weapons
    ... fighter with rear armament wasn't a good one eg Me 110 and Me 410, ... These aircraft came as standard with a rear view periscope sight. ... injection so the guns might have been of some help. ... Heinkel He 111 had a fixed 7.92mm machine gun in the tail that could ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Star wars and the war over it. John F. Kennedy Robert McNama
    ... W. Lucas's defence of his ownership of the trademark Star Wars. ... The nick name for the F-16 is the Fighting Falcon. ... Falcon was to be a all service day fighter. ... No radar nothing fancey a fill in plane. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
Loading