Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 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
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 2493 of 5179 (729497)
06-12-2014 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 2492 by New Cat's Eye
06-12-2014 5:41 PM


Re: feigned concern
You don't care about people dying.
Speak for yourself.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2492 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-12-2014 5:41 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2496 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-12-2014 6:39 PM vimesey has not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 2510 of 5179 (729564)
06-13-2014 7:07 PM
Reply to: Message 2506 by New Cat's Eye
06-13-2014 2:56 PM


Re: feigned concern
I don't think Vimesey is an idiot.
Nor do I think you are. I just think you're wrong.
I think he was using emotive cases to bolster his preconceived position.
I dispute that my position is preconceived. It is my position after a great deal of thought. I will concede that the cases are emotive however. This is not as a result of any effort on my part, though.
Guns cause such a relatively low number of innocent deaths
Only when you compare them to day to day causes of natural death, such as heart disease. Otherwise, the record's not so good.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2506 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-13-2014 2:56 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 2528 of 5179 (730295)
06-26-2014 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 2527 by ramoss
06-26-2014 2:41 PM


Did they seriously fire a live shell, or was this a freak accident with some sort of blank ?

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2527 by ramoss, posted 06-26-2014 2:41 PM ramoss has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2529 by Theodoric, posted 06-26-2014 5:25 PM vimesey has replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 2530 of 5179 (730297)
06-26-2014 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 2529 by Theodoric
06-26-2014 5:25 PM


For crying out loud !
Clearly there is no amount of damage, no potential loss of innocent life, which is too great a price to pay, for a pretty enough bang from a gun for these muppets !
Edited by vimesey, : No reason given.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2529 by Theodoric, posted 06-26-2014 5:25 PM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2531 by ringo, posted 06-26-2014 5:44 PM vimesey has not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


(6)
Message 2558 of 5179 (730722)
06-30-2014 5:55 AM
Reply to: Message 2557 by Heathen
06-30-2014 5:28 AM


What strikes me as missing from the pro-gun side of the debate, is the concept of reasonable force, in self-defence.
In the UK, we have a right of self defence - but our right is to use reasonable force in our defence. We are expected to act as decent, reasonable human beings - even when dealing with shitty little toe rags who are trying to steal from us or attack us.
This is because we think that just because someone is a shitty little toe rag, it's very rarely right to use lethal force against them. I'm quite proud that we think like that.
I fear that the debate in the US has become so polarized, that it is seen as an unbearable admission of weakness on the part of the pro-gun movement, to accept any concept of reasonableness. In fact, they want to go the opposite way, and have the right to kill somebody just because they felt a bit threatened by them. By moving the goalposts so far to the extreme, they don't need to worry about being limited by reasonableness any more.
So people keep on dying, not because they were in the process of using lethal force against someone, but because they were sassy to someone; or were abusive; or were walking through a neighbourhood where they had a minority skin colour; or were mistaken for someone; or were in the wrong place at the wrong time. And every last life taken away in these circumstances, is a life the pro-gunners are happy to see taken away, because their right to have a gun is more important.
So here's a question for people who are pro-gun - should you have to show, legally, that it was reasonable to kill someone, because no other reasonable course of action was open to you to protect your life, in order to escape punishment for that person being killed ?

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2557 by Heathen, posted 06-30-2014 5:28 AM Heathen has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2563 by marc9000, posted 06-30-2014 6:32 PM vimesey has replied
 Message 2659 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-07-2014 2:57 PM vimesey has replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


(7)
Message 2566 of 5179 (731859)
07-01-2014 2:55 AM
Reply to: Message 2563 by marc9000
06-30-2014 6:32 PM


No reasonable pro-gun advocate expects to be able to kill someone without facing the U.S. legal system and make a case why he/she shouldn't be punished for what happened.
Trayvon Martin's killing, and George Zimmerman's acquittal, would suggest that the bar is set so low, that an ant with broken legs would look for something more challenging.
This is my point - laws like "stand your ground" and the "castle doctrine" prevent any genuine application of reasonableness to self defence. If your position is that it is reasonable to kill someone because you feel a bit threatened by them, then your definition of "reasonable" becomes valueless.
Oh come on, you know they understand there will be plenty of reasonableness at their trial.
We seem to differ on what is reasonable. Me, I think it is unreasonable to be shot dead for walking through the wrong neighbourhood - I even think (and boy is this radical, I know) that it is unreasonable to be shot dead for walking through the wrong neighbourhood, and looking like there's a possibility that you might be up to no good.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2563 by marc9000, posted 06-30-2014 6:32 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2567 by Heathen, posted 07-01-2014 8:27 AM vimesey has not replied
 Message 2570 by marc9000, posted 07-03-2014 8:25 PM vimesey has not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


(1)
Message 2646 of 5179 (732382)
07-07-2014 6:09 AM
Reply to: Message 2645 by Tangle
07-07-2014 5:15 AM


Re: The state as of this date
Guns aren't making you safer, they're making you feel less secure.
Well put.
I can see the circularity of the issue, and the difficulties, posed by the sheer volume of guns in the US, but when I hear the pro-gun argument that having a gun makes you feel much more secure, I always think how much more secure I feel, going about my daily life, in the knowledge that the chances of anyone I meet, or walk past, or bump into, having a gun are ridiculously low. I realise that at some point, I might meet violence or the threat of it, but I can take sensible precautions to reduce the risks - and if it happens, then that's the nature of life sometimes.
In the meantime, I don't worry about shooting my foot off; about anyone in my family getting hold of a gun; about the immensely higher chance that a criminal will be armed; about the personal devastation it would cause me to actually shoot and kill someone (even in self-defence, that's some heavy shit to deal with); about someone else's child being gunned down in a school as the price of my gun ownership; or anyone in my family being gunned down as the result of other people's gun ownership.
It's just conceivable I could be attacked one day, and die as a result of my not owning a gun - or that our democracy could in some seriously warped reality become a despotic regime which could somehow be halted by civilians having pistols - but I can intelligently assess risk, and come to the conclusion that widespread gun ownership just isn't worth giving up all of the advantages listed above (and a bunch of others).
Gun ownership may make some gun owners feel more secure in the US (and given the prevalence of guns in the US, there are clearly differences in comparison with the UK), but I wager that I both feel more secure, and am more secure here, than I would feel and would be in a country with near unrestricted gun ownership.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2645 by Tangle, posted 07-07-2014 5:15 AM Tangle has seen this message but not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


(1)
Message 2651 of 5179 (732406)
07-07-2014 11:18 AM
Reply to: Message 2650 by Dr Adequate
07-07-2014 10:25 AM


Re: emergency prep
It's fairly easy to shoot a hurricane. It's difficult to make one bleed.
Then you ain't shootin' at it with a big enough gun, pilgrim.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2650 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-07-2014 10:25 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 2666 of 5179 (732472)
07-07-2014 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 2659 by New Cat's Eye
07-07-2014 2:57 PM


How do your laws go about determining whether or not an amount of force was reasonable?
The key factor is that it is an objective test. The Court looks to determine what a hypothetical average man would think was reasonable in the particular circumstances of the case. (Rather quaintly, the case law requires us to ask what "the man on the Clapham omnibus" - in other words, a normal, reasonable member of the community - would have done). What this means is that it is not enough for someone asserting self-defence to show that they thought they used reasonable force - they also have to show that it was objectively reasonable.
This will always be a question of fact, in each case, and of course, no case is the same as another. Over time, a body of case law builds up, and general patterns emerge, but it is always up to a jury, guided by the judge and by previous similar decisions, to decide if the force used was, in each case, objectively reasonable.
If I get time, I'll look up some case law for some examples for you, but in general terms, that's how it works.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2659 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-07-2014 2:57 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


(2)
Message 2792 of 5179 (733504)
07-17-2014 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 2790 by New Cat's Eye
07-17-2014 4:56 PM


I just don't get this tolerance for criminal action and intolerance victim action.
C'mon CS - you know full well that people who oppose widespread gun ownership, don't do so out of any tolerance of criminal action. We do so because, in general, widespread gun ownership leads to more deaths than highly restricted gun ownership. In general - those are the key words.
I will readily concede that there will be circumstances in which an individual possessing a gun, will result in them avoiding death or serious violence or violation. Yes, those circumstances exist. But they exist rarely.
In general, in a society, widespread gun ownership will lead to more violent deaths than are prevented in the circumstances I've just referred to.
What I perceive is an almost visceral, emotional attachment amongst the defenders of widespread gun ownership to the concept of an absolute right to self defence. Nothing is more important. Nothing is more fundamental or absolute than the right to kill in defence of yourself and your property. And a criminal's life (and for that matter, the lives of all the innocent and accidental victims of widespread gun ownership) have to take a backseat to that all-conquering, near divine right to self-defence.
I do get - I really do understand - that emotion. There's some sort of feeling of righteousness to being able to defend yourself in the most absolute way possible.
But I feel that we should, in the pursuit of the sanctity of life, in the pursuit of a civilised society, and in the pursuit of a safe environment, seek to limit our right to self defence to the most reasonable extent we can. And advocating a society in which we allow every person to arm themselves to the teeth with lethal weapons, strikes me as advocating a very unreasonable restraint on self-defence.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2790 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-17-2014 4:56 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2794 by Coragyps, posted 07-17-2014 7:37 PM vimesey has not replied
 Message 2814 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-18-2014 12:36 PM vimesey has not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 2804 of 5179 (733547)
07-18-2014 4:02 AM
Reply to: Message 2796 by mram10
07-17-2014 9:32 PM


Guns don't kill people, people do
I've always seen that as an incomplete statement. The fuller and more useful phrase is: "Guns don't kill people, people do - but guns sure do make it a heap easier to !"

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2796 by mram10, posted 07-17-2014 9:32 PM mram10 has seen this message but not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 2865 of 5179 (735922)
08-27-2014 6:41 PM
Reply to: Message 2863 by NoNukes
08-27-2014 5:03 PM


Re: And yet another incident..
Really? There is some serious doubt about whether we ought not let a 9 year old handle an UZI? How bizarre.
Just wait and see what the NRA comes up with, in defence of the rights of 9 year olds to shoot sub-machine guns.
All part of their tactics. Defend vehemently the outrageous and the indefensible, and you move the debate away from where it really should be.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2863 by NoNukes, posted 08-27-2014 5:03 PM NoNukes has not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 3214 of 5179 (745994)
12-31-2014 4:20 AM
Reply to: Message 3210 by Percy
12-30-2014 8:27 PM


Re: News Break
A thought for a letter of condolence the NRA could send to the woman's family:
"Dear [ ],
We are sorry to hear of the tragic loss of [ ]. We are sure that you will agree that this was a terrible accident, which had nothing to do with the inherent danger of carrying a loaded gun around with you.
We hope that you will understand, and take comfort from the fact, that her death is a sacrifice we are willing for you to make, so that we can maintain the fuzzy, warm illusion that we can prevent a burglary or mass shooting every other week, through our professional and John Wayne-like use of our beautiful guns.
Yours, in solidarity."

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3210 by Percy, posted 12-30-2014 8:27 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 3236 of 5179 (746495)
01-07-2015 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 3234 by Dr Adequate
01-07-2015 10:24 AM


The stupid is strong with this one...
I wonder if it scares gun owners, who consider themselves responsible, that the natural consequence of them being able to own a gun, is that people as phenomenally stupid as this guy, are allowed to as well.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3234 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-07-2015 10:24 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 3237 of 5179 (746497)
01-07-2015 12:04 PM
Reply to: Message 3235 by RAZD
01-07-2015 12:01 PM


Can't be the Darwin Award really - I'm afraid the principal idiot's genes are still washing around in the global gene pool.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3235 by RAZD, posted 01-07-2015 12:01 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3238 by RAZD, posted 01-07-2015 12:15 PM vimesey has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024