From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 10ad19,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10ad19,public X-Google-Thread: 107a89,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid107a89,public X-Google-Thread: 101deb,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 10a146,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public X-Google-Thread: 1073c2,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid1073c2,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-06-08 07:48:32 PST Message-ID: <3B20E4FC.7A7762AD@amsjv.com> Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:45:16 +0100 From: Philip Anderson Organization: Alenia Marconi Systems ISD X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.awk,comp.lang.clarion,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.vrml Subject: Re: Off Topic: Stupid Bureaucrats (was Re: Long names are doom ?) References: <9f8b7b$h0e$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9f8r0i$lu3$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9fgagu$6ae$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9fjgha$blf$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <35mqhtkdfma2rggv1htcaq6vfn2ihs67a1@4ax.com> <9fli1b$4aa$1@nh.pace.co.uk> Organization: LJK Software <9folnd$1t8$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B204C82.C2681D79@home.com> <9fqla6$n3o$1@nh.pace.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit NNTP-Posting-Host: cwmwkn0612.cwmbran.gecm.com X-Trace: 8 Jun 2001 15:36:44 GMT, cwmwkn0612.cwmbran.gecm.com Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!grolier!btnet-peer0!btnet-peer1!btnet-feed5!btnet!newreader.ukcore.bt.net!pull.gecm.com!cwmwkn0612.cwmbran.gecm.com Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8420 comp.lang.awk:2909 comp.lang.clarion:21450 comp.lang.java.programmer:74785 comp.lang.pl1:915 comp.lang.vrml:3653 Date: 2001-06-08T15:45:16+01:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: > > Well that raises a whole can of worms - how the media, et alia are out > screaming how we need all kinds of gun safety laws "to protect the children" Is there a difference between (1) being over-protective of a responsible adult, who can be assumed to know the potential dangers in a hammer or cup of coffee, and (2) protecting 'innocent' users or passers-by, including children, from dangers they have no control over, such as a hammer whose head flies off or a psychotic teenager with a gun? If a bad programming technique is (mis-)used by a games writer and causes a PC to crash, where does that fit in? Or if the same mistake is made in Flight Control Software leading to a plane crash? -- hwyl/cheers, Philip Anderson Alenia Marconi Systems Cwmbr�n, Cymru/Wales