Not difficult to understand, and most would agree that those responsible should be held to account for their crimes (I think). But what is the "responsible way" to distribute this software? This software isn't "sold" to anybody (that I'm aware of) and there is no central authority responsible for regulating it. Who should and how should they do it? Are these software the new "munitions" (like encryption software)? What capabilities would get a piece of software classified as such? Who does get to see these software and what qualifications will be required of them? There are many such questions and grey areas in this debate, and few good answers (that I have heard). You may not have said "ban" the software, but the "blaming the tools" approach starts you off down that road. I agree with the "bad things should happen to those bad people who do that bad stuff", but the "bad tools should be controlled" needs more and better explanation. Unless you want to get the feedback that comes along (like baggage) with that topic. A happy day to you, Troy >>> smac at visi.com 10/22/03 02:54PM >>> I did not say to "ban" the software. I said it's irresponsible do distribute it in the way they are doing it. I said the people who use it for evil piss-me-off. We need the tools but we don't "LEGALLY" sell guns to criminals or minors. We require minors to be educated about guns if they will use them for sport shooting. _______________________________________________ TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list