Poll: Do you support the right to bear arms?
Yes
No
Keep Hunting Rifles Only
Pistols but not AR(s) + 3
Assualt Rifles + 3 & 4
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-04-2014, 12:03 PM (This post was last modified: 28-04-2014 12:08 PM by PoolBoyG.)
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(28-04-2014 11:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(26-04-2014 10:49 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  Well, you can actually. It all just depends on what context you wish to discuss. I smell what you're stepping in though.

I'm not stepping in anything. I have made my position perfectly clear.

Let's try again: Guns do not cause violence. The presence of guns can make violence more deadly.

Jumping in, just going by this comment.

Since guns can destroy so easily, so recklessly, you're going to consider options and take actions you would normally not in an environment without a gun(s).

That means pre-emptive "violence" is the wisest option since if you wait, your life/safety could be utterly and completely forfeit. "Acting" first guarantees safety.

Weapons cause violence. Weapons exacerbate the inevitable violence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2014, 12:10 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(28-04-2014 12:03 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 11:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  I'm not stepping in anything. I have made my position perfectly clear.

Let's try again: Guns do not cause violence. The presence of guns can make violence more deadly.

Jumping in, just going by this comment.

Since guns can destroy so easily, so recklessly, you're going to consider options and take actions you would normally not in an environment without a gun(s).

That means pre-emptive "violence" is the wisest option since if you wait, your life/safety could be utterly and completely forfeit. "Acting" first guarantees safety.

Weapons cause violence. Weapons exacerbate the inevitable violence.

People cause violence, weapons are tools that make the out come of violence worse. If guns were never invented people would use knives. If kinves were never inventer people would use pointy sticks, etc, etc, etc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2014, 12:15 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(28-04-2014 12:10 PM)wazzel Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 12:03 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  Jumping in, just going by this comment.

Since guns can destroy so easily, so recklessly, you're going to consider options and take actions you would normally not in an environment without a gun(s).

That means pre-emptive "violence" is the wisest option since if you wait, your life/safety could be utterly and completely forfeit. "Acting" first guarantees safety.

Weapons cause violence. Weapons exacerbate the inevitable violence.

People cause violence, weapons are tools that make the out come of violence worse. If guns were never invented people would use knives. If kinves were never inventer people would use pointy sticks, etc, etc, etc

You ignored the post.

"Since guns can destroy so easily, so recklessly, you're going to consider options and take actions you would normally not in an environment without a gun(s)."

If the worst someone can do is hit you with a stick, you have more freedom to be civil. You can risk a hit or two. Or risk the person failing in the attack. Or risk escaping or surviving.

But with utterly devastating weapons, you have no leeway. The best outcome is to act first - to act hostilely/violently.

That means pre-emptive "violence" is the wisest option since if you wait, your life/safety could be utterly and completely forfeit. "Acting" first guarantees safety.

"Weapons cause violence. Weapons exacerbate the inevitable violence."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2014, 12:37 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(28-04-2014 12:03 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  Jumping in, just going by this comment.

Since guns can destroy so easily, so recklessly, you're going to consider options and take actions you would normally not in an environment without a gun(s).

That means pre-emptive "violence" is the wisest option since if you wait, your life/safety could be utterly and completely forfeit. "Acting" first guarantees safety.

Weapons cause violence. Weapons exacerbate the inevitable violence.
You are right.

A person at home, in bed at night, wakes up because they hear a noise in their house.

Scenario 1: In a society largely without guns
They get out of bed, and search the house.
They see a dark human shadow moving in their house
They turn on the light and see that it is a drunk unarmed girl
They talk to her, sit her down, give her a warm drink

Scenario 2: In a society largely with guns, gun violence is common, they feel they need guns for self defense
They get out of bed, and search the house.
They see a dark human shadow moving in their house
They yell out "Stop, I have a gun!"
The figure still moves
They shot it
The figure drops to the ground.
They turn on the light and see a dead unarmed girl.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2014, 12:41 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(28-04-2014 12:15 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 12:10 PM)wazzel Wrote:  People cause violence, weapons are tools that make the out come of violence worse. If guns were never invented people would use knives. If kinves were never inventer people would use pointy sticks, etc, etc, etc

You ignored the post.

"Since guns can destroy so easily, so recklessly, you're going to consider options and take actions you would normally not in an environment without a gun(s)."

If the worst someone can do is hit you with a stick, you have more freedom to be civil. You can risk a hit or two. Or risk the person failing in the attack. Or risk escaping or surviving.

But with utterly devastating weapons, you have no leeway. The best outcome is to act first - to act hostilely/violently.

That means pre-emptive "violence" is the wisest option since if you wait, your life/safety could be utterly and completely forfeit. "Acting" first guarantees safety.

"Weapons cause violence. Weapons exacerbate the inevitable violence."

I did not ignore the post. People are the cause of all violence. The lethalness of the weapon my influence how the people react, but the weapon itself does not cause violence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2014, 12:45 PM (This post was last modified: 28-04-2014 12:49 PM by PoolBoyG.)
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(28-04-2014 12:37 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 12:03 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  Jumping in, just going by this comment.

Since guns can destroy so easily, so recklessly, you're going to consider options and take actions you would normally not in an environment without a gun(s).

That means pre-emptive "violence" is the wisest option since if you wait, your life/safety could be utterly and completely forfeit. "Acting" first guarantees safety.

Weapons cause violence. Weapons exacerbate the inevitable violence.
You are right.

A person at home, in bed at night, wakes up because they hear a noise in their house.

Scenario 1: In a society largely without guns
They get out of bed, and search the house.
They see a dark human shadow moving in their house
They turn on the light and see that it is a drunk unarmed girl
They talk to her, sit her down, give her a warm drink

Scenario 2: In a society largely with guns, gun violence is common, they feel they need guns for self defense
They get out of bed, and search the house.
They see a dark human shadow moving in their house
They yell out "Stop, I have a gun!"
The figure still moves
They shot it
The figure drops to the ground.
They turn on the light and see a dead unarmed girl.

To tie the two more closely:

If you know a gun (or any destructive weapon) is present, or very VERY likely that it is present, your actions are going to be more swift and more final. "That shadow could be the end of me instantly, I must act violently now."

If you know that a gun is not present, or is very VERY unlikely of it being present, you have more breathing space, your actions can be more thought out, and you have more options. "That shadow at worst needs to exert effort and time to cause me grave harm, let alone moderate harm. I have have a greater chance to fend off/seek help/survive/take a second look at the shadow/take a leap of faith the shadow is safe"

To recap, my premise is that weapons (the ones that are more deadly and "final" in use) can and do initiate violence. As well as exacerbate violence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes PoolBoyG's post
28-04-2014, 12:49 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(28-04-2014 12:45 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 12:37 PM)Stevil Wrote:  You are right.

A person at home, in bed at night, wakes up because they hear a noise in their house.

Scenario 1: In a society largely without guns
They get out of bed, and search the house.
They see a dark human shadow moving in their house
They turn on the light and see that it is a drunk unarmed girl
They talk to her, sit her down, give her a warm drink

Scenario 2: In a society largely with guns, gun violence is common, they feel they need guns for self defense
They get out of bed, and search the house.
They see a dark human shadow moving in their house
They yell out "Stop, I have a gun!"
The figure still moves
They shot it
The figure drops to the ground.
They turn on the light and see a dead unarmed girl.

To tie the two more closely:

If you know a gun (or any destructive weapon) is present, or very VERY likely that it is present, your actions are going to be more swift and more final. "That shadow could be the end of me instantly, I must act violently now."

If you know that a gun is not present, or is very VERY unlikely of it being present, you have more breathing space, your actions can be more thought, and you have more options. "That shadow at worst needs to exert effort and time to cause me grave harm, let alone moderate harm. I have have a greater chance to fend off/seeking help/ surviving/take a second look at the shadow/take a leap of faith the shadow is safe"

There is another school of through that takes the stance that if a gun is present the situation is less likely to escalate than if one is not present.

Personally I do not think either is correct, since it is all so situational and involves individual personalities.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2014, 01:12 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(28-04-2014 11:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  I'm not stepping in anything. I have made my position perfectly clear.

Sorry Chas, sometimes I forget how old you are. Tongue

Just kidding.

"I smell what you're stepping in" is hip-kid lingo for, "I hear ya", or "I see what you're saying". That was I all I meant.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2014, 01:31 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(28-04-2014 12:41 PM)wazzel Wrote:  I did not ignore the post. People are the cause of all violence. The lethalness of the weapon my influence how the people react, but the weapon itself does not cause violence.
Didn't George Bush go into violent war against Iraq in a preemptive attack because he was scared that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction?

One could say that George was the cause of the war, or one could say that Iraq's possession of certain weapons caused the war.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2014, 01:38 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(28-04-2014 01:31 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 12:41 PM)wazzel Wrote:  I did not ignore the post. People are the cause of all violence. The lethalness of the weapon my influence how the people react, but the weapon itself does not cause violence.
Didn't George Bush go into violent war against Iraq in a preemptive attack because he was scared that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction?

One could say that George was the cause of the war, or one could say that Iraq's possession of certain weapons caused the war.

The US went to war with Iraq becasue the leaders of the US though the leaders of Iraq had WMD's. The WMD (if they even existed - side discussion I know) did not even call anyone a bad name or stick their tougne out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: