[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re[4]: [at-l] weight/use efficiency & Guns
- Subject: Re[4]: [at-l] weight/use efficiency & Guns
- From: Bob Cummings <ellen@clinic.net> (Bob Cummings)
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 23:07:16 -0500
- In-Reply-To: <001501c1a93d$413535f0$84f91a3f@bryan>
- References: <001501c1a93d$413535f0$84f91a3f@bryan>
"...Prove it!" demands Bryan to my claim that "a lot of innocent people are
killed by gun accidents each year."
Well, I'm quite sure I could, depending of course, on how one defines "a lot."
My comment suggested that more innocent people are killed by guns in this
country than by bears on the AT.
Frankly I don't know of anyone ever killed by a bear on the AT. A woman some
weeks ago was killed a few miles from the AT in the Smokies. I think it was the
only eastern bear death in years -- may be decades.
I'm an inveterate reader of newspapers and I periodically read of people killed
in gun accidents. I rarely read of people killed by black bears. Rather I read
of a parent shooting his kid. Kids shooting other kids. A butcher shooting a
woman in Bangor Maine.
A friend of mine had his son shot by a neighbor in Connecticut. A few weeks ago
this list debated at length whether we should feel sorry for a father who had
shot his son while hunting.
I would classify even these few cases as "a lot," but I suspect a diligent
search would find scores of other cases of accidental gun deaths in recent
years.
Your strident demand to "prove" the obvious reminds me of the anger I find in
some gun users, which strengthens my opposition to their using guns on a
recreational trail. The simple fact is guns are illegal on much of the AT. I
feel uncomfortable mingling with law breakers in a public area -- especially
when the law violation involves the carrying of a deadly weapon. YMMV.
Weary