On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 14:18:06 -0800, Big Will
>cquirke (MVP Win9x) wrote:
....etc.
>If you think about it, though, how would you assess the monetary value
>of the level of support the US gives to the UN.
That's a good point. Dunno how they assess who owes what
>As for working through the right org for the job, I say why bother if
>it's broken. If it's broke, why use it?
Well, that's the general case made by vigilantes (sp?) all over,
including around where I live.
>> Abso. Keep the cat in the bag - as some have done with personal
>> firepower (neither SA or US fall into that happy category). I can see
>> a time that the National Nukes Association will staunchly defend the
>> right of every US household to nuke whoever, tho...
>How funny, especially since we have gun control laws in the US, they
>just aren't enforced. Unfortunatly, this leads to law-abiding citizens
>being left helpless against the tyranny of any crook that gets a gun
That's what I mean about "keeping the cat in the bag". We have
military-grade weapons caches all over the place, so the scene is
awash with military-grade hardware. Only the "good guys" follow the
law, so laws to curb weapons ownership in this context are ineffectual
for exactly the reasons you mention.
If OTOH we had a scene that was not already awash with guns - as may
still be the case in UK, Japan, etc. - then it would be really dumb to
let them in and spread around.
>-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Trsut me, I won't make a mistake!
>-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -