Well, his post is as rational and coherent as anything else I read here.

 

Well, his post is as rational and coherent as anything else I read here.

In order for his point to be coherent, it has to be applicable to all similar situation. Whatever could be done to law-abiding gun owners who have never committed a crime in the name of defending someone's right not to be shot by a gun has to also be done to all law-abiding ski owners who have never committed a crime in the name of defending that same person's right not to be hit by an out-of-control skier.

Otherwise the point becomes nothing more than a claim that we should be able to do anything we want to a group that we don't like by just inventing a specific narrow right that we can claim might potentially be violated by someone in that group. That's capriciousness at it's very extreme.

 

I am closing this thread under the accusation of becoming stale, bickering and about politics.

I think each one's points of view came along, though, and we got to know each other better; and that's a good thing.

Unless another mod decides to appeal this closing, discussion is over.