Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!att-out!att!att!drutx!druwa!dlo
From: dlo@druwa.ATT.COM (OlsonDL)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: The 'pill' for Deer = No Hunting
Message-ID: <24491@drutx.ATT.COM>
Date: 15 Apr 93 20:13:25 GMT
References: <1993Apr13.174829.2324@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu> <1993Apr14.182610.2330@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu>
Sender: news@drutx.ATT.COM
Lines: 20

In article <1993Apr14.182610.2330@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu>, jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu writes:
} 	The vast majority get through life without ever having to
} 	own, use or display a firearm.
} ...
} 
}       Given society
} 	as we now experience it - it seems safer to get rid of
} 	as many guns as possible.

Considering that the uses include self defense, hunting, target shooting
and collecting, I don't buy the notion that the vast majority of people
don't "own, use or display a firearm".

But let's say your contention is true.  What's the point of "get[ting]
rid of as many guns as possible", if they weren't being used anyway?
--
David Olson            dlo@drutx.att.com
"Well, I did say we'll put it out and we'll put it out when we can.
 But I don't know what we can put out or when we can put it out."
 -- George Stephanopolous.
