User Tag List

First 61415161718 Last

Results 151 to 160 of 212

  1. #151
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Ah, what you're trying to say is that gun violence and homicide rates go down but in general stay the same, implying that people just found another way. I don't think there can be any serious argument that guns do not make people more dangerous. The only real argument here is about whether or not gun control laws keeps guns out of peoples' hands, but we know that once a person has a gun they are more dangerous. You might also want to remember how many people (many children) just shoot themselves or someone else accidentally.
    You can take a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. People are going to do dumb things and have accidents no matter what, so no.. I don't count that anymore than I count people accidentally cutting themselves or stabbing themselves the fault of knives. Guns are more dangerous than knives, but they are also a great deal harder to get your hands on than knives.


    Americans think they have laws for keeping guns out of dangerous peoples' hands. If you check out gun regulations in a lot of other developed nations you'll see the USA's are kind of flimsy, to say the least.
    I don't see this as a valid argument either. Simply enforcing the laws already in place would be a great deal easier than trying to create new laws. You're saying we can't even handle what we currently have, but we want to put MORE on the table? I don't know how completely irradicating gun ownership would be LESS complicated than just actually DOING what you say you're going to do.

    There are lots of things that used to be normal that aren't any more which lack lobbyists defending our ability to keep them. On this, I'm going to say that I don't care if it's a cultural thing. If you're saying the culture makes the law less effective there might be and interesting point there. However, if you're just saying that cultural attachments will make people unhappy, I don't really care. We had to take slaves from the south, and boy they didn't like that!
    Slavery isn't really a cultural thing.. We were lazy rich fucks that got free work. Of course they didn't want to give that up. Guns, however, are very cultural. There is an art to them, and an appreciation for their work. Owning a well-made Japanese katana would make a person more dangerous.. but I don't think it is my place to say a person IS dangerous for owning any weaponry. There's shooting done for sport, and hunting/killing food is a lot more merciful with a gun than with a knife or bow for the animal. (I don't know how it is up there for ya'll, but people here go hunting for their own food all the time here) There are OTHER purposes for guns. They were designed to kill.. but Cheetos were designed for eating, and an artist made drawings out of them. Vodka was made for drinking, but we use it in homemade mouthwash, bug spray, and disinfectants. I don't think it is fair to say one thing is dangerous, like a gun, without acknowledging that MANY things are dangerous, like a Car.

    No, there's a way better argument for why cars are not as regulated; cars are vastly more useful. There cost-benefit analysis between a car vs. a gun is so completely different that the comparison makes a fatuous argument. Furthermore, cars kill me people because they are used so frequently, which is because they are so immensely useful and basically power our economy and lifestyle. A gun is borderline useless. The only thing it does is kill. That's it's purpose. You'd have a hard time explaining how you shot someone dead while you were going about the daily grind.
    Sure. A car is more useful on a daily basis than a gun. But I'm not running over a bobcat on my friend's property anytime soon either. It depends on where you live.. You live in a city. It's easy to see guns as useless out there. But you can't just call pest control and spend $300 to remove every predator that gets on your farm. And a car doesn't help in hunting your own food either. Your lifestyle is not the only one out there.

    It wouldn't have stopped him. It probably would have brought his kill and injury rate down.
    Assuming he didn't use something like, say, a dirty bomb or something. I'm not speculating whether it would have gone down or not.. but I'm assuming he went out with the intent to take out as many people as possible, based on the sheer number of casualties. I'd say he'd have found a way to make that happen whether a gun was there or not.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  2. #152
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    Your lifestyle is not the only one out there.
    Pretty much what this all boils down to.

  3. #153
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    You can take a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. People are going to do dumb things and have accidents no matter what, so no.. I don't count that anymore than I count people accidentally cutting themselves or stabbing themselves the fault of knives. Guns are more dangerous than knives, but they are also a great deal harder to get your hands on than knives.
    The latter point is crucial. Would the rate be lower if they were even hard to get your hands on? That's what I'd like to know.

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    I don't see this as a valid argument either. Simply enforcing the laws already in place would be a great deal easier than trying to create new laws. You're saying we can't even handle what we currently have, but we want to put MORE on the table? I don't know how completely irradicating gun ownership would be LESS complicated than just actually DOING what you say you're going to do.
    So you're saying the problem is that the current laws aren't enforced? Sure, it could be improved, but then the reality is that regulations have some slippage no matter how good they get, but they can get better. I didn't actually say we can't handle the regulation we currently have. Where did I say that?

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    Slavery isn't really a cultural thing.. We were lazy rich fucks that got free work. Of course they didn't want to give that up. Guns, however, are very cultural. There is an art to them, and an appreciation for their work. Owning a well-made Japanese katana would make a person more dangerous.. but I don't think it is my place to say a person IS dangerous for owning any weaponry. There's shooting done for sport, and hunting/killing food is a lot more merciful with a gun than with a knife or bow for the animal. (I don't know how it is up there for ya'll, but people here go hunting for their own food all the time here) There are OTHER purposes for guns. They were designed to kill.. but Cheetos were designed for eating, and an artist made drawings out of them. Vodka was made for drinking, but we use it in homemade mouthwash, bug spray, and disinfectants. I don't think it is fair to say one thing is dangerous, like a gun, without acknowledging that MANY things are dangerous, like a Car.
    First of all, slavery was cultural. There were plenty of lazy rich people in the north that didn't have slaves. It was a part of a regional culture. Secondly, I don't really care how artful this stuff is. I would not be moved by a dangerous piece of art just because it was art.

    Because something has multiple possible uses does not make them equal or comparable. Art is kind of a bad example because you aren't going to objectively measure it. I acknowledge everything is potentially dangerous, I've never had a problem doing that. What you're asking me to do is not make a distinction between a bar of soap and a hydrogen bomb. The difference in how effective one is at killing is relevant, or has the defense department been mistaken with all these jets and ballistic missiles? Someone should tell them the army would be much cheaper and just as effective if we armed everyone with pencils.


    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    Sure. A car is more useful on a daily basis than a gun. But I'm not running over a bobcat on my friend's property anytime soon either. It depends on where you live.. You live in a city. It's easy to see guns as useless out there. But you can't just call pest control and spend $300 to remove every predator that gets on your farm. And a car doesn't help in hunting your own food either. Your lifestyle is not the only one out there.
    Forgive me for basing my policies on statistics.


    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    Assuming he didn't use something like, say, a dirty bomb or something. I'm not speculating whether it would have gone down or not.. but I'm assuming he went out with the intent to take out as many people as possible, based on the sheer number of casualties. I'd say he'd have found a way to make that happen whether a gun was there or not.
    It can actually be really trick to make and deploy one of those home made bombs correctly. I guess I'm not so much a believer in that notion that there's a way where there's a will.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  4. #154
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    The latter point is crucial. Would the rate be lower if they were even hard to get your hands on? That's what I'd like to know.
    Probably. But would crime also go down? Is it worth all that trouble if crime doesn't significantly go down? When we could focus on more guaranteed things, like the War on Drugs which effect many more facets of politics and social life?

    So you're saying the problem is that the current laws aren't enforced? Sure, it could be improved, but then the reality is that regulations have some slippage no matter how good they get, but they can get better. I didn't actually say we can't handle the regulation we currently have. Where did I say that?
    If they're flimsy, then they need to be strengthened. Ability to enforce the rules would be way easier than making new ones. I'm not saying those rules can't get some improvements to help them out, but I am saying the balance that regulating the bad guys as much as possible without assuming EVERYONE is a dangerous, bad person in the process has to be here. I think that it is important as Americans to recognize that our founding fathers gave us the ability to bear arms for a damn good reason. Im not saying its the way EVERY country should be ran, but it IS the way ours is.

    First of all, slavery was cultural. There were plenty of lazy rich people in the north that didn't have slaves. It was a part of a regional culture. Secondly, I don't really care how artful this stuff is. I would not be moved by a dangerous piece of art just because it was art.
    I am. And many are. You can't discount something because it doesn't move you. We (non-muslims) don't tell Muslims that we don't care that it's honorable to cover their faces just because we don't see the point in it. All I see as a military police officer is a huge security risk.. But I don't let my personal opinion overshadow the fact that they're paying homage to biblical women. Art is art. It may not be what you consider art, but it's narrow minded to think that "Guns kill. Thats ALL they can do."

    Because something has multiple possible uses does not make them equal or comparable. Art is kind of a bad example because you aren't going to objectively measure it. I acknowledge everything is potentially dangerous, I've never had a problem doing that. What you're asking me to do is not make a distinction between a bar of soap and a hydrogen bomb. The difference in how effective one is at killing is relevant, or has the defense department been mistaken with all these jets and ballistic missiles? Someone should tell them the army would be much cheaper and just as effective if we armed everyone with pencils.
    Soap hasn't killed too many people so far as I know. I think I'm more making a comparison between something designed to kill (a gun) and something that isnt (a car). Cars have multiple functions, but kill a LOT and do a great deal of environment and social damage in the process. (How many people make poor financial decisions based on cars?) If people were REALLY concerned about safety of human life.. We'd be building public transportation everywhere and trying to get rid of cars being used on a daily basis. But it isn't practical to do that. Im just saying that assuming something designed to kill is ONLY going to be used for bad is too narrow-minded. Its not practical to just say "Fuck the constitution and fuck the whole 'history repeats itself' bit that people preach about.. Guns are bad, and I don't care for them, so just get rid of them." I understand making it more difficult to get one, which we have done, or cracking down on people who have done bad things in the past, but you're only looking at one lifestyle when you go beyond that.

    Forgive me for basing my policies on statistics.
    Those statistics don't include the amount of people who use their guns to save things like their livestock on a daily basis. Or protect their children who live on those farms and ranches from bobcats and other predators that could do some serious harm. Those statistics don't include the sheer massive amount of people that own guns and haven't used them for anything besides occasional hunting and some fun at the shooting range.

    A plane was hijacked with a box cutter. I'm in no rush to believe that crimes will go down to such a utopian significance that it makes ridiculous sense to restrict them or ban them. I really just don't want to live in that time where decent citizens lose their rights while criminals still have those weapons in their hands. Sometimes, and many times, a robbery at a convenience store is thwarted only by the fact that the owner has a weapon and is armed. I don't see that improving with gun control laws across the board.

    I'm all for criminals losing rights. If you committed a crime, being suspended from owning a gun for a certain time, or if convicted of a violent crime or insanity banning them from owning entirely.. You make those decisions and you live with them. But assuming people are dangerous because they own guns is way too pessimistic for my taste. Almost everyone I know owns a gun.. and Ive only seen the same amount of violent crimes that any major city sees. I don't find myself in more danger, or more scared, because of this fact. It is a normal thing for us. I can understand how some people would find that odd, but dangerous isn't the first word that jumps up.

    It can actually be really trick to make and deploy one of those home made bombs correctly. I guess I'm not so much a believer in that notion that there's a way where there's a will.
    Its a powerful one. I believe in it entirely.. I prefer the stories where people walk after doctors tell them they can't though.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  5. #155
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    The test for a cultural item isn't how loudly it honks your horn. It's how well or how badly it fits into the environment, broadly conceived. The traditional academic example is the supposed Eskimo practice of letting their old people die once they reached a certain age. In ye olde days, in an inhospitable land that literally could not support overly large groups of roaming nomads, leaving the old people behind on some ice floe was reasonable and something indeed that the old people could be proud of taking part in. These day, bumping off grandma to satisfy the louder honk of your cultural horn is inappropriate. Your culture has stepped out of touch with the reigning human possibility.

    Which means comparing guns and burhkas is inappropriate. Compare the utility and protection afforded by guns to that of female genital mutilation. Cutting off the clitoris not only protects a female's position in society, it helps her not go develop epilepsy, mania and hysteria through too much masturbation. And keeping guns lets you kill of pests and predators, human and otherwise.

    Stop and consider, the obviousness of the utility of individually owned weapons, how different is it from the obviousness of the utility of female circumcision? I know you're all too wrapped up in a society that actually does have guns to see that your evaluation of their utility is a weighted objectivity, aka just another culturally loaded evaluation that helps you honk your own horn, but hey, Africa and Egypt gave us libraries and language, and fewer clitorises. It's all good.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  6. #156
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524
    How can we stop Americans killing each other?

    We declare the National Rifle Association a terrorist organisation and invoke the Patriot Act.

  7. #157

    Default

    I mentioned this in the Random Thought Thread, but this is really a better place. Are you lot familiar with the latest tech breakthrough? 3D printing technology for at-home users? Well, someone's used theirs to create a functional semiautomatic:

    'It wasn't that difficult'

    Dunno boutchoo, but that's concerning to me.
    "The purpose of life is to be defeated by greater and greater things." - Rainer Maria Rilke

  8. #158
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Bump.

    The following is a letter to the editor of a local newspaper: http://www.calgaryherald.com/Nose+Hi...#ixzz22t4xRCHB

    I recently visited Calgary from Michigan. As a police officer for 20 years, it feels strange not to carry my off-duty hand-gun. Many would say I have no need to carry one in Canada.

    Yet the police cannot protect everyone all the time. A man should be allowed to protect himself if the need arises. The need arose in a theatre in Aurora, Colo., as well as a college campus in Canada.

    Recently, while out for a walk in Nose Hill Park, in broad daylight on a paved trail, two young men approached my wife and me. The men stepped in front of us, then said in a very aggressive tone: "Been to the Stampede yet?"

    We ignored them. The two moved closer, repeating: "Hey, you been to the Stampede yet?"

    I quickly moved between these two and my wife, replying, "Gentlemen, I have no need to talk with you, goodbye." They looked bewildered, and we then walked past them.

    I speculate they did not have good intentions when they approached in such an aggressive, disrespectful and menacing manner. I thank the Lord Jesus Christ they did not pull a weapon of some sort, but rather concluded it was in their best interest to leave us alone.

    Would we not expect a uniformed officer to pull his or her weapon to intercede in a life-or-death encounter to protect self, or another? Why then should the expectation be lower for a citizen of Canada or a visitor? Wait, I know - it's because in Canada, only the criminals and the police carry handguns.

    - Walt Wawra, Kalamazoo, Mich.


    To put this into context the Stampede is a rodeo, agricultural exhibition and festival. Asking a tourist if he'd been to the Stampede is a totally plausible question in early July. It would be like asking a tourist in London right now "Have you been to any Olympic events?"

    A few people have noted that very liberal gun laws are a 'cultural' thing in the United States. It seems like it's a culture of paranoia and fear. Have fun with that.


    (In future I will need to find an excuse to use "Gentlemen, I have no need to talk with you, goodbye." )

  9. #159
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iwakar View Post
    I mentioned this in the Random Thought Thread, but this is really a better place. Are you lot familiar with the latest tech breakthrough? 3D printing technology for at-home users? Well, someone's used theirs to create a functional semiautomatic:

    'It wasn't that difficult'

    Dunno boutchoo, but that's concerning to me.
    Pretty soon people are going to remember that they can make their own stuff period.

    The Wright Brothers didn't sit there and wonder "how make plane?". They didn't say "we don't have a factory". They just made their plane and flew it. After they set the groundwork then all kinds of people started making planes.

    With all the private machine shops and the ability to buy steel and molding equipment and composite materials, with some people building entire cars and boats from scratch, it's a wonder that we haven't seen more independent firearm replication already.

    All 3D printing really did is clue people in that they could have done this all along if they really set their mind to it.

  10. #160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    How can we stop Americans killing each other?

    We declare the National Rifle Association a terrorist organisation and invoke the Patriot Act.
    Don't send me to Gitmo, man!

    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

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