NIP arrived. 975

Following up to Mark Foster

please see below.

Do you claim the above untrue? Remarkable.

You are just saying "no it isn't" or "rubbish" all the time. That is meaningless. Some time ago I attempted to demonstrate the above point with the car-road-driver situation but several people didn't seem to understand what I was saying, talking about the driver going off on his own to do other harm, which is beside the point. I think the gun-gunman situation is clearer. I didn't have a strong view on this matter when we started but I'm increasingly certain we have to view it this way. Danger is an interaction between elements. With gun and gunman you have danger of shooting someone, remove either and you don't. Build a safety catch into the gun, you make things safer. Train or socialise the gunman you make things safer.

The argument "guns don't kill, people do" is used in the US to sustain the appalling number of guns there, its as false as pretending roads do not play a role in road safety.

Its just shorthand, "potentially" also applies to the driver BTW. I'm quite happy to settle for "roads are potentially dangerous" as more precise. But I will not be bothering to type it every time. -- Mike Reid