Slashdot Mirror
Alaskan Cyclotron - Not in My Backyard!
j-beda writes "Wired reports that "Albert Swank Jr., a 55-year-old civil engineer in Anchorage, Alaska, is a man with a mission. He wants to install a nuclear particle accelerator in his home." To be used to create medically useful isotopes, and even though some of the neighbours are supportive, opponents "compared potential damage from a cyclotron mishap to the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor accident" though an expert says "Probably the worst thing that could happen with small cyclotrons is that the operator might electrocute themselves." It looks like the Anchorage Assembly plans to hold an public hearing on December 20 to determine whether Swank will be permitted to install the device."
First; it is extremely unlikely that a thief will try to enter an occupied house. This is so rare, that when it happened to a handful (6-8 houses) this summer it made national headline news. It was a gang of criminals from eastern Europe who were not very adept to see wether people were in the houses or not.
Second; none of these criminals had weapons on them and noone were harmed. They knew very little about this country, but they knew that if they would have guns on them and they were detected (or even worse for them, use their weapons) they would become the center of of a trigger happy armed police hunt that would last a long time. The police around here are normally unarmed, but they do know how to operate an MP5 and can get permission to arm within minutes. Seconds if they need or do it themselves if the situation is critical. That is why they did not arm themselves.
Third; this country has a very, very liberal self defense law. You are allowed to do whatever it takes to protect yourself or another person from harm. This be things like murder, rape or natural disasters. Yet, the issue of gun carry is moot here, and the few times a gun has been used in argued self defense it has been deemed murder. Why? Becaus,when armed with guns, the victim often use excessive force. You are allowed to stop a perp from commiting or finishing the attack, but the last self defense cases were merely pissed off property owners shooting the perp in the back, on the run.
It is much easier to stop a rape with a heavy stone than a gun (in most rapes, arms are held by the attacker leaving only the legs as a self defense tool.) if you are a passer by that witness this. Around here, most attackers will think it is an air gun or a toy gun anyway and may try to attack you. Unless it is a shotgun, because they are prevailent. There is no court in this country that will convict you for knocking a rapis unconscious until the police arrive (median responce time is around 5 minutes for such calls, they get extreme priority).
Fourth; we have gun culture. Guns are used for hunting and sports. Not self defense. That is why I have (and is allowed to have) a gun, for recreational shooting. And by the way, by the looks of the target skills of those gun owners i chat with in the US, I find it very amusing that they rely on the gun as a self defense tool. I hope the attacker is within 5 meters...
Fifth; (this is in reply to another posting) re: knives vs. guns. Have you ever heard about a drive-by with knives? No? Then you obiously haven't understood the difference between the two.