Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Gun Control Again

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Gun Control Again
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(7)
Message 1486 of 5179 (688756)
01-25-2013 5:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1481 by Faith
01-25-2013 2:50 AM


Concentration Camps
I'd call that despotism myself, which Jefferson SEEMS to desire to prevent. Or do you simply define the "backward" or "restrictionist" half as incompetents or something so that they don't have a voice in the matter? Despots have always been very clever at defining their opponents into silence, death or concentration camps, just wondering how you plan to go about it.
I think we were actually planning to beat you by outvoting you, 'cos your "half" of the nation isn't actually half of the nation. However, you are entitled to your own evil and deranged opinions on this subject, and if you prefer to cower and whimper in fear of your paranoid fantasies about "death or concentration camps" rather than look at the facts, then you also deserve to do so.
You people are in a position I find perfectly morally satisfying --- you are not merely being punished for your sins, you are being punished by your sins.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1481 by Faith, posted 01-25-2013 2:50 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1493 by ICANT, posted 01-25-2013 3:55 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(3)
Message 1487 of 5179 (688760)
01-25-2013 8:25 AM
Reply to: Message 1477 by Faith
01-24-2013 9:43 PM


Re: The Un-American Mind
Faith writes:
I have not said anything about how dangerous the country is in general, except in response to the topic of this thread, the increase in random murders.
This is always your answer. Whenever you receive effective rebuttal you always respond with, in effect, "I didn't say that." Then you go on to repeat what you just claimed you didn't say, just in different words, drawing distinctions without a difference.
You believe this country is a dangerous place, too dangerous to be walking around without a gun. What you refuse to recognize is that guns increase the danger, primarily to oneself and those one knows.
And otherwise all I've done is suggest that armed people in schools would be the best defense against these homicidal maniacs.
Keeping in mind that a school shooting was merely the precipitating incident for this thread and that this is not a topic about mass shootings but about gun control in general, adding more guns to the population in this way would merely increase the number of gun deaths, probably more in schools than elsewhere.
Again, Americans have always had guns.
Times change. Guns are not muskets and muzzle loaders anymore.
Why now when these murders are increasing does it suddenly seem necessary to take them away from us?
We're discussing this now because there was a notable precipitating incident. The desire for gun control has been around for a very long time.
This is all just emotion-driven propaganda-driven demagoguery aimed against the second amendment.
Yes, we know. You've already told us that the 2nd amendment is more important to you than life itself. I can already hear you claiming you didn't say that, so here are your own words from Message 1450:
Faith in Message 1450 writes:
This discussion about how many lives are saved or lost is not the important thing to me. The important thing is retaining our second amendment right.
The constitution is a living document, open to change. Nothing in it is sacred, as ICANT can't seem to stop telling us. About the 2nd amendment I think I can safely say that any amendment open to such widely differing interpretations is definitely in need of revision.
The millions of gun owning citizens are NOT the cause of these murders.
I think you may be referring to mass murders here, and of course this is true in a literal sense, but the primary concern is the large number of gun deaths that occur each year, and in this regard the people who own guns and advocate gun ownership *are* indirectly responsible for many of these gun deaths because every gun is a tiny vortex of increased probability of violence.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1477 by Faith, posted 01-24-2013 9:43 PM Faith has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(3)
Message 1488 of 5179 (688761)
01-25-2013 8:41 AM
Reply to: Message 1449 by Faith
01-24-2013 4:12 PM


Re: The Un-American Mind
Faith writes:
The restricting of gun rights is not something WE'd do that He'd react to with punishment, but would itself be God's judgment on the nation, which I would take as a sign that we're so far down the road to total judgment He's abandoned the nation altogether. That is, I attribute the loss of our gun rights to HIS will as judgment against us. It IS punishment, not something He'd punish us FOR.
So let me get this straight. If the US as a nation earns God's displeasure then He will make judgment against us or abandon us, and loss of our guns will be punishment? That sounds wonderful.
And you know God's thinking on guns how?
By the way, your God has a kind of Old Testament flair about him.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1449 by Faith, posted 01-24-2013 4:12 PM Faith has not replied

NoNukes
Inactive Member


(4)
Message 1489 of 5179 (688766)
01-25-2013 9:05 AM
Reply to: Message 1479 by Faith
01-24-2013 10:39 PM


Re: Some cases where guns would have helped and where they did help
Faith writes:
I have most certainly NOT argued that such events DO NOT HAPPEN where guns are present,
Really? Then who typed the material below in all caps (emphasis added by me)?
Faith writes:
IT IS KNOWN THAT THESE MURDERERS WILL NOT RISK BEING KILLED UNTIL THEY"VE SUCCEEDED IN DOING THE JOB OF MURDER WHICH IS THEIR PLAN. THIS HAS BEEN POSTED ON HERE BEFORE BUT YOU ALL INSIST ON YOUR SOPHISTIC LOGIC ANYWAY. THEY ARE WILLING TO DIE BUT ONLY IF THEY'VE KILLED AND KILLED AND KILLED FIRST TO TAKE AS MANY AS POSSIBLE WITH THEM. IF THEY DIE FIRST THEY DON'T GET THAT SATISFACTION. YES, THEY WILL NOT RISK GOING TO A PLACE WHERE THEY KNOW THERE MIGHT BE GUNS FACING THEM.
Yes, they do take those risks. And we don't need to cite the rare exception among mass shootings in order to show exactly that.
And all I meant about "get away with it" was that they succeeded in killing people. Again, you must work hard at finding ways to make it seem I said something I couldn't possibly have meant.
I can accept your interpretation of what "get away with it" means. But I'm not going to accept that you didn't claim that shooters will not risk going to a place where they know that guns will be facing them. You did in fact say exactly that.
And are you REALLY suggesting that unarmed people can do BETTER at taking down an assailant as they did at the Gabby Giffords shooting?
No. I'm pointing out a several other things that ought to be quite obvious to the same. One, unarmed people did not have NO chance of taking down an assailant as you also claimed. Second, guns being present is not as effective a deterrent as you pretend. Third, the pause to reload was important in stopping the assailant in Tuscon.
You are apparently so zealous that you will say just about any stupid extreme thing, often in all capitals. Then somehow it is my fault when I point out that what you have posted makes no sense or is contrary to the facts as we all know them. If you want to take something back that you've said, I have no problem with that, but denials of things we can also see in blue and white are not going to fly.
Finally, you've made it quite clear, that in your mind, saving lives is nowhere near as important as whether or not you have your own guns. Shooting events are not God's judgment, but losing your guns would be. You seem to be completely unaware as to how completely such sentiments discredit your position.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1479 by Faith, posted 01-24-2013 10:39 PM Faith has not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


(2)
Message 1490 of 5179 (688767)
01-25-2013 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1483 by Faith
01-25-2013 3:09 AM


Re: Anti-Constitution Propaganda now
Part of the problem is that you do not seem to have a good grasp of what the words you use actually mean.
Despotism

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1483 by Faith, posted 01-25-2013 3:09 AM Faith has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 1491 of 5179 (688772)
01-25-2013 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 1454 by ICANT
01-24-2013 5:18 PM


Re: Some cases where guns would have helped and where they did help
ICANT writes:
So where does that help you. Now you have 35 families to convince that you are correct.
You're still having problems with numbers. Yes, do the math and it does come out to around 35 murders per day in the US for 2010, but the larger proportion of these people were murdered by someone they knew, not by criminals. They were not confronted by a criminal where perhaps if they had a gun they might have lived. They were murdered by someone they knew who was angry or drunk or on drugs or careless and there happened to be a gun available. It's ironic that guns presumably obtained for safety reasons are most often used to kill loved ones, friends and co-workers.
Had there been no gun available then a large number of those 35 people per day would not have been murdered. Remove guns from the situations that arise in the normal course of life and the number of murders will decline.
Percy writes:
The argument that guns prevent murders is silly. It isn't that they can't - it's that the confluence of circumstances necessary for an armed but otherwise unprepared person thwarting someone intent on murdering them is incredibly unlikely.
What is silly about it?
Do you think persons that have hunted all their lives from childhood is unprepared?
etc...
I think you must have missed some of the earlier discussion. I didn't mean unprepared in the sense of untrained. I meant it the same way I've always meant it in the context of a criminal trying to murder you, that the criminal is ready and you're not. The criminal picks the time and place, you don't. The criminal has his weapon out, you don't.
That's why this idea that if you have a gun when you're out or somewhere in your home when you're not that you're going to be able to get to it and defend yourself is silly. We're not talking about burglars or thieves, we're talking about a criminal whose intent is to murder you. How, precisely, given that you don't know the where, when or how that he'll confront you, are you going to get the upper hand?
At Google News I just typed in "murder", here's what I got from those that were firearm related by a criminal and where the circumstances were described. For each one why don't you describe how, precisely, you would have thwarted the murder had it been you:
  • Man shot and killed when he answered a knock at his door.
  • Man followed to parking garage and shot in torso.
  • Man shot by hitman while sitting in taxi.
  • Woman shot in head while getting out of her car.
Now I of course grant that you have a better chance of defending yourself if you have a gun, but the odds of being the object of a criminal's murderous pursuit are tiny (and the odds of you successfully using the gun to prevent the murder tinier still) compared to the odds that the gun will be used against yourself or someone you know.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1454 by ICANT, posted 01-24-2013 5:18 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1492 by ICANT, posted 01-25-2013 3:20 PM Percy has replied

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


(1)
Message 1492 of 5179 (688807)
01-25-2013 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 1491 by Percy
01-25-2013 10:56 AM


Re: Some cases where guns would have helped and where they did help
Hi Percy,
Percy writes:
Had there been no gun available then a large number of those 35 people per day would not have been murdered. Remove guns from the situations that arise in the normal course of life and the number of murders will decline.
You know that to be a fact based upon what stats or studys?
Percy writes:
that the criminal is ready and you're not.
What makes you think the criminal would be prepared and I am not?
Percy writes:
The criminal picks the time and place, you don't. The criminal has his weapon out, you don't.
Since I was a sniper I will agree that there are times that a person could kill someone and there is nothing they could do about it.
But I don't think a person could approach me and shoot me with a handgun without getting shot. I hope I never have to find out. I do know I would have a much better chance of surviving if I do not leave home without my carry weapon.
Percy writes:
We're not talking about burglars or thieves, we're talking about a criminal whose intent is to murder you.
I am not worried about a professional killer that is intent on killing me as I have no enemies that I know of unless there is some here at EvC that would go to the point of hiring a hit man.
I am worried about that crack head who would kick in my front door wanting money or possessions that could be sold to get another fix. I am also worried about that person that has no regard for anyone but themselves and prey on old folks because they think they are helpless.
Percy writes:
Man shot and killed when he answered a knock at his door.
I never answer the door without knowing who is on the other side. The equiptment for that is very reasonable at Tiger Direct.
Percy writes:
Man followed to parking garage and shot in torso.
The only way I would be in a parking garage would be if I was working in the building that the garage was attached too. So for someone to follow me to my car he would have to come out of the same door I did and I would be waiting for him.
Percy writes:
Man shot by hitman while sitting in taxi.
This is the case of a professional killing someone and is effective in 95% of the time. Wasn't that almost the same thing that happened to president Kennedy. You did not say how close the hitman was.
Percy writes:
Woman shot in head while getting out of her car.
To give a good answer to this I would need more information concerning the time and location said shooting took place.
Percy writes:
Now I of course grant that you have a better chance of defending yourself if you have a gun, but the odds of being the object of a criminal's murderous pursuit are tiny
I would agree that if a professional murder or sniper wanted to kill you there is no escape. If you had a dozen body guards it would make no difference to either, you would be dead.
So lets agree that you are helpless at the hands of a professional killer.
That is not the one I am concerned with. I am concerned with the kind of people you can find if you google 'home invasions in america'.
Percy writes:
(and the odds of you successfully using the gun to prevent the murder tinier still) compared to the odds that the gun will be used against yourself or someone you know.
There are two people who reside in my house and both qualify expert with any weapon we have in the house.
We always know when our grandchildren and great grandchildren are coming to visit and preparations are made prior to their arival.
So I am not worried about myself or someone I know being killed or shot with one of my weapons.
What do you think I mean when I say I am prepared?
As I have stated previously my house is well protected. I have two exterior doors and you can not come in either during the day or night that I or my wife will not know about at the moment you enter either.
In fact if we are both at the grocery store and you enter my house I will get a message to that effect.
If I am in my house you will not be able to kick either door in and enter my house without looking down the barrel of a Ruger 44 magnum loaded with the first bullet being a armor pericing bullet followed by a hollow point bullet. I have never pointed my weapon at anything that I did not shoot and hit at the exact spot I wanted to hit. I pratice regularly and qualify expert.
Now what do you think your survival chances would be if you broke into my house? I am not going to look to see if you have a gun or a knife or any other object. I will fire upon your entering my house in such a manner.
Granted there are a lot of people that is not as prepared as I am. But I would dare say everyone that was in military during the decade and the one after it that I was is just as qualified as I am. I would not guess what those that were trained later would be qualified to do.
I would say that everyone that goes to the range that I do would be people that you would not want to enter their house by kicking their door down.
Maybe we are paranoid but we intend to survive, if someone breaks into our houses while we are home. All the time we hope that no one ever tries to prove our determination to be wrong.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1491 by Percy, posted 01-25-2013 10:56 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1501 by Percy, posted 01-25-2013 7:19 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 1517 by Straggler, posted 01-27-2013 7:22 AM ICANT has replied

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 1493 of 5179 (688808)
01-25-2013 3:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1486 by Dr Adequate
01-25-2013 5:08 AM


Re: Concentration Camps
Hi Dr,
Dr Adequate writes:
I think we were actually planning to beat you by outvoting you, 'cos your "half" of the nation isn't actually half of the nation
Half of the nation would be 21 States as there are 52 States.
But half of the 52 States can not impose their will on the other States.
In fact a majority of the 52 States can not impose their will of the rest of the States.
It takes 3/4's or 39 States to change the Constitution.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1486 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-25-2013 5:08 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1495 by RAZD, posted 01-25-2013 4:19 PM ICANT has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 1494 of 5179 (688809)
01-25-2013 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1455 by New Cat's Eye
01-24-2013 5:19 PM


because it is the topic?
the topic is gun controls and is in response to the school massacre
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1455 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-24-2013 5:19 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 1495 of 5179 (688810)
01-25-2013 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1493 by ICANT
01-25-2013 3:55 PM


52 states?????????
Half of the nation would be 21 States as there are 52 States.
really?
(1) what are those 52 states?
(2) 52/2 = 26
(3) 50/2 = 25
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.
Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1493 by ICANT, posted 01-25-2013 3:55 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1497 by AZPaul3, posted 01-25-2013 4:27 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 1500 by Theodoric, posted 01-25-2013 6:52 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 1503 by ICANT, posted 01-26-2013 12:11 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 1496 of 5179 (688811)
01-25-2013 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Percy
12-15-2012 2:27 PM


Re: Homicide Rate Graphs
Can you replace the second Canada graph with one for England?

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Percy, posted 12-15-2012 2:27 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 1497 of 5179 (688812)
01-25-2013 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 1495 by RAZD
01-25-2013 4:19 PM


Re: 52 states?????????
Hmm ... I do count 52. How odd.
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Confusion
Connecticut
Delaware
Dumbdumb
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1495 by RAZD, posted 01-25-2013 4:19 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1498 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-25-2013 5:16 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


(1)
Message 1498 of 5179 (688816)
01-25-2013 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1497 by AZPaul3
01-25-2013 4:27 PM


Re: 52 states?????????
Confusion and Dumbdumb....states of mind I guess.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1497 by AZPaul3, posted 01-25-2013 4:27 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1499 by AZPaul3, posted 01-25-2013 5:22 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 1499 of 5179 (688817)
01-25-2013 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1498 by Tanypteryx
01-25-2013 5:16 PM


Re: 52 states?????????
Red States.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1498 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-25-2013 5:16 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 1500 of 5179 (688823)
01-25-2013 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 1495 by RAZD
01-25-2013 4:19 PM


Re: 52 states?????????
Someone must have told him that it is 2 less than a deck of cards.
I am sure his deck has jokers.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1495 by RAZD, posted 01-25-2013 4:19 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024