From: Llywelyn <samman@CS.YALE.EDU>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 94 18:21:55 PDT
To: Norman Hardy <norm@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Warrentlesss SEarches (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199404250026.RAA07388@mail.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9404242159.Q23743-b100000@jaguar.zoo.cs.yale.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> >2)I know the value of a gun in this environment.  I know how many times
> >our home has been kept safe because my father has been willing to wield a
> >gun against either intruders or against 'undersireable' characters coming
> >around(read drug dealers, crack heads, you name it).  Our part of the
> >block has a reputation for not being somewhere for these pepole to hang
> >out because my father and our neighbors have taken a stand against such
> >scum. 
> >
> ...
> >Any comments?
> 
> Thanks for your perspective. I have imagined that if I found it necessary
> to live in such a place that I might favor choosing a building with some
> sort of covenant, explicitly agreed to by all tenants, that allowed
> searches for weapons. I take it that you would not find that to be a good
> idea. Do you have other ideas along such lines?

Yes.  Should I be subject to the 'tyranny of the masses' as deToqueville
put it?  Conventional wisdom would say 'yes' however, I disagree. 
Conventional wisdom also suggests that I have a choice to live here or
not.  For many people living in subsidized housing, there is no choice,
but rather, the choice is between there and the street.  You said that if
you had a choice, fine, but for most if not all of these people, there is
NO choice.  They cannot choose a building, they simply take what is givne
to them.  Such are the breaks of being poor.

Also there exists another problem with it.  Why should I give up my gun
which I use to protect my family when its not even illegal except in
places where the the government is the landlord, that is mostly poorer
sections of town.

Ben.