Posted by Ritch on October 27, 2002, at 14:11:14
In reply to Re: gun control, posted by Dinah on October 27, 2002, at 10:48:37
> >
> > Yes, but if there was a National Ballistics Database, which the NRA and many oppose, they could have much sooner tracked down the person(s). A further number of lives COULD have been saved.
> >
> How? Please forgive my ignorance, but how could a National Ballistics Database (which I do not, by the way oppose) have helped track down the current owner of an illegally obtained weapon? I could understand if it was the weapon used in the Alabama murder, since it would have provided a link to the fingerprint earlier. But the weapon used in the Alabama murder was not the same weapon used in the sniper attacks
>
> >
> > If these things don't change, the U.S. is going to dwindle to being a 'former' empire, and turn into a war raveged and very poor country. That I feel sad for, because America was such a beacon of hope for so many post-WWII. America is still very rich with amazing minds and thinkers, and many of the values America places on liberty and freedom are quite similar to ours here in Canada.
> > I *really* hope somebody can save the country. I was a person who admired Bill Clinton in his first presidential election. He had some wonderfully progressive ideas, and he had the knowledge to use them. Sadly..he didn't..and fell back on a number of things, which is also just as sad.
> >
> >
> > Anyhow..just my .02 cents.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Jay
> >
> >
> That is an interesting perspective Jay. I suspect we in the U.S. will muddle through somehow. But how do you suspect we will go from where we are now to a war ravaged and very poor country? It would seem that there would be a few steps along the way. And how long a time frame are you envisioning? Ten years? Fifty?
>
> I would be interested in hearing some examples of countries that have adopted the policies that you propose to save the United States from the upcoming disaster. Are there any? And how are they faring?
>
>
Dinah, I think it is going to be too costly (in many ways) for us to aggressively take on this role of being a global supercop. Perhaps I am being a little isolationist here, but we went from nearly a $200 billion budget surplus in 2000, to nearly a $200 billion dollar deficit in 2001, and the "war on Iraq" is supposed to cost $200 billion, AND the president wants MORE money to be spent on defense, AND he wants to cut taxes even further. It is Reagan super-deficits all over again. We may indeed be "war-ravaged and poor" if Bush gets his way. What about all of the money that we will sink into Iraq to rebuild it? It seems a little odd to spend money to arm Saddam in the '80's, spend money to move him out of Kuwait in 1991, spend money to enforce all the sanctions, now spend more and more money to *really* get him out, then more and more money to fix all of the stuff we are going to blow up- a lot of which is oil field equipment which (hmmm) some folks might make a killing on after the war. If we don't emerge bankrupt after all of that it will be a miracle.
poster:Ritch
thread:31596
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20021022/msgs/31715.html