User Tag List

First 8910111220 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 212

  1. #91
    Senior Member ZPowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    unafraid, i asked him how many times he'd been robbed this week.
    anyone wanna guess what his answer was?
    To be fair, I never carry a weapon anywhere and I've also not been mugged this week.

    Or ever.
    Does he want a pillow for his head?

  2. #92
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nebbykoo View Post
    Because it's only purpose is to kill people at a distance. it's not for shooting gophers.
    Are you suggesting that a .45 or .38 don't serve the same purpose?

    I'd understand if you said this about all guns. I'd disagree with it, but at least it would make sense and be consistent. Saying it about .50 caliber is just weird and actually kind of shows a lack of critical thought.

    Edit: and on that note, .50 just isn't all that popular. Nobody goes around doing massacres with .50 cal weapons. Police don't carry them, soldiers don't carry them except on vehicles, unless they are snipers or EOD, and even then their intended purpose is to take out vehicles, armored targets, or bombs. They do get used on people but that is their secondary purpose.

  3. #93
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZPowers View Post
    To this point, the main thing that annoys me is, yes, the gun debate is more or less finished for the foreseeable future in this country, but there's this level of paranoia among gun owners that persists.
    it's called vigilance, and without it, the lurking antagonists would leap from the shadows and capitalize on the situation.

    what the "clever" cartoon leaves out is that horrific civilian massacres take place where guns are illegal more than they do in places they're not.

    it must really hurt losing this argument... i mean to perpetually condescend to the winning party by insisting they're paranoid is pretty pathetic.
    it's not paranoia to own or want a gun.
    it's not paranoia to defend your right to own a gun, whether it's been threatened or not.

    Quote Originally Posted by ZPowers View Post
    To be fair, I never carry a weapon anywhere and I've also not been mugged this week.

    Or ever.
    so i guess it's not that obvious that was meant to be a rhetorical device...
    we fukin won boys

  4. #94
    Senior Member ZPowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post

    it must really hurt losing this argument... i mean to perpetually condescend to the winning party by insisting they're paranoid is pretty pathetic.
    it's not paranoia to own or want a gun.
    it's not paranoia to defend your right to own a gun, whether it's been threatened or not.
    I never claimed I had any stance one way or the other on this issue. I think mass murders are probably a little easier with laxer gun laws, but looking at overall crime and murder rates and the statistics related to them I'm on the fence.

    I never said it was paranoid to own a gun. I actually do, though I never really use it. It was a gift.

    I said it was paranoid to assume the government or certain officials are going to take your guns even though there hasn't been any significant attempts to do so in over 20 years and the political capital to do so clearly does not exist.

    It's paranoid to assume Obama is after your guns when you have no evidence of this and, in fact, the man has never even spoken openly on the subject (except in the past few days, when he said new laws were not necessary), has signed laws allowing people to concealed carry in national parks, recieved an F from a prominent gun control group.

    And I hear gun owners all the time talk about Obama taking their guns, and gun sales skyrocketed after he took office.

    That sounds like fear of persecution or attack without reasonable grounding and founded only on delusion, as well as an extreme level of distrust without empirical support. Let's compare:

    Paranoia
    1: a psychosis characterized by systematized delusions of persecution or grandeur* usually without hallucinations
    2: a tendency on the part of an individual or group toward excessive or irrational suspiciousness and distrustfulness of others

    Vigilance would be the one where you keep watch for a threat, confirm or deny its existance, then respond. Paranoia is the one where you make up a threat, respond, then later possibly learn if it existed or not.

    * Delusions of grandeur like, say, claiming if you had a gun in a dark room full of tear gas not only making it hard to see but also burning your eyes and limiting your breathing abilities, plus loud noises from both the movie and gunshots and tightly cramped with over a few hundred innocent people and one armored shooter, dressed in black like the walls of said theatre and not affected by the gas, you could have been the big hero, instead of making yourself a target or accidentally shooting an innocent.
    Does he want a pillow for his head?

  5. #95
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    those last few lines were meant to be directed at the comic, not you.

    take it easy...
    we fukin won boys

  6. #96
    Senior Member ZPowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    those last few lines were meant to be directed at the comic, not you.

    take it easy...
    Fair enough. If that was your intent, then I apologize for my unintentional overreaction.
    Does he want a pillow for his head?

  7. #97
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    what the "clever" cartoon leaves out is that horrific civilian massacres take place where guns are illegal more than they do in places they're not.

  8. #98
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Ugh, stupid browser is stupid..

    Anyway, I had a really lengthy piece on how the morality of the self is connected to the responsibility one has to society.

    So, I guess you should be happy the browser crashed...you get a summary.

    My concluding thought was this.

    A law should be made that emphasizes the responsibility a gun carrying citizen has to their society. If a person insists on carrying a gun, that comes with certain responsibilities. Why? Because when you have a gun, you increase the level of danger of everyone in your vicinity. If no one had a gun, then the possibility of being shot goes down to zero for everyone. If more than one person has a gun, the possibility of a person being shot goes up for everyone, not just for the people who have the guns. While it's your right, if you as an individual choose to step out in public with a gun, then you are affecting not just yourself, but everyone else. Failure to meet those responsibilities should be met with fines/revoking of privileges/gun responsibility seminars/jail?

    I also noted that while the morality or logic or ethicalness (or whatever judgement framework from which you work) of this may be questionable...the law isn't about any of that. It's about achieving a certain affect or controlling a certain situation. If a law is indeed needed, then; I think if people knew that owning a gun came with responsibilities (whether or not they agreed with the logic/morality/ethicalness of it, as long as it is imposed) such that they might be fined or forced to attend a state mandated gun responsibility seminar or even spend some time in jail, just for being in a situation with a gun in which they did not act in the appropriate way, then the right type of (legal) people would have guns. And the wrong type of (legal) people would be prevented from getting and keeping guns, and illegal gun owners can be pursued more effectively.

    So, even though I don't really agree with the utilitarainist argument in the first paragraph, it wouldn't be hard to form a convincing argument around that basis, and a lot of other moral bases. Any moral position that is "outwardly societal" will be able to form their own unique arguments on why a person has added societal responsibility if they choose to carry a gun, which I think is intuitively evident and practically needed. Also, I dislike very much utilitarianism...but that's a non sequitur...so, you can criticize that, and I'd agree that it has some major holes.

    What doesn't, though, is achieving the best affect possible. And this is what a law is supposed to do. The (inevitably flawed) reasoning behind the law comes second...to appease people so they don't start stupid revolutions and stuff.

    In short, inaction can and should be punished, if you insist on carrying a gun.

  9. #99
    Nerd King Usurper Edgar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZPowers View Post
    To this point, the main thing that annoys me is, yes, the gun debate is more or less finished for the foreseeable future in this country
    What do you base that conclusion on, that debate is is more or less finished? States and municipalities constantly try to pass new laws and regulations on guns. There was a Supreme Court decision on that very topic not that long ago.
    Listen to me, baby, you got to understand, you're old enough to learn the makings of a man.

  10. #100
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZPowers View Post
    Someone totally falsely imagining a threat to guns with zero evidence or support for the claim whatsoever
    Gun rights are only protected by a 5-4 Supreme Court decision, and most of the media/entertainment industry (which has significant capacity to frame the debate, whether deliberately or otherwise) is at least somewhat hostile to the entire concept; the former can change very quickly (almost certainly in the opposite direction if Obama replaces a Republican appointee with one of his choosing) and the latter is unlikely to change anytime soon. The 'paranoia' might be excessive, but its not without a fair amount of justification.

Similar Threads

  1. The Gun Appreciation Thread
    By Rainman in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 506
    Last Post: 12-20-2012, 12:19 PM
  2. Gun Control in the UK
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 249
    Last Post: 12-09-2009, 09:16 AM
  3. Gun Control in the UK (Not Gone, Is Being Fixed...)
    By Halla74 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-08-2009, 11:29 PM
  4. American Gun Control (Version 2!)
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 234
    Last Post: 12-08-2009, 02:24 PM
  5. Gun Control
    By Kiddo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 06-13-2008, 03:24 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO