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
15-08-2012, 07:23 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sib-bKfAm...ature=plcp

Such GREAT healthcare system we have... Just one example out of many, but one shouldn't have to rely 100% on your job to get treatment.

Better without God, and happier too.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 07:59 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(14-08-2012 08:57 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  The pro-gun arguments are probably the stupidest, most worthless, bullshit arguments a person can force out of their asshole and throw against a wall.

You really need to stop tricking yourself into thinking there is any reason behind having guns, or better yet, a reason for supporting gun ownership, other than people, most likely yourself specifically, liking guns. It's as simple as you liking guns and wanting to own them. It's a selfish desire like gambling, shopping for shit you don't need, doing drugs, cutting your wrists, getting a boob job, etc. It really only comes down to the desire of someone to own a device designed to inflict damage and end life, period. The power/feeling gained through ownership of a device that opens the possibility for you to blow something's head clean off if given the chance.

I had to vote no, because I don't support people owning guns, especially as a right. It's not because I care if people own guns, because I really don't care if they do, but on the other hand, I really don't care if people get shot to death or kill themselves either. I just can't say I support that. Also, I don't really think those two things (caring if/supporting people own guns and caring if/supporting people get shot) are separable. Guns aren't really made as limited, rare collectors items. Your Walmart 9mm isn't really a Babe Ruth signed baseball that you can get upset about if the kids take it to the sandlot. You would have to have some nerve to tell someone they couldn't use something for what it was designed to do, while at the same time supporting and/or encouraging the ownership of said item.

I think it's funny when people conveniently forget that, in general, guns are made to kill things, and in some instances, they are designed specifically for killing human beings, then start making arguments.

You can really start telling that people are on a needless search for justification when they bring up things like car, knife, etc. deaths. I need to start remembering that automatic weapons, that were made for killing, are statistically superior, so I can start driving my fucking tank to work and using my AK-47 for buttering my toast and cutting up fruits and vegetables. That way I can cut down on accidents.

The 'I need a gun because I might need, more like want, to use it' argument (commonly self-defense) is fine until you, again, go trying to needlessly justify it. When someone is trying to make an argument and support policies to prevent people from being shot, it's not, at all, good to argue for increasing the probability of, and/or opportunity for, people being shot. In that situation, just don't act like you have an argument, because you are just playing a wolf with a sheep's outfit half zipped up in the back. You could very well like the idea of being able to kill someone who comes into your house uninvited, being the superhero to the villain that threatens a Batman movie, or trying to overthrow the government and kill politicians that disagree with you, but using that to try to argue that you should have the right to own a gun is stupid. The solution to one idiot with a gun, will never be two idiots with guns. Concede the argument if you have to do so, but at least be honest with everyone and especially yourself.

You want guns, because you like guns. You don't think guns should be taken away, regulated, etc. because you fundamentally disagree with the idea of people in a society telling other people what they can and can't do. That, or you selfishly, hypocritically cherry-picked that fundamental position for guns. Probably the latter.

Pro-gun people have to keep in mind that they are in the same boat as any other right-wing, or religious, bullshit idea, and they need to stop acting like they have an explanation for why God exists and Jesus is him/his son. The majority of the people on the left are approaching the problem in the same way they approach all problems. They are sitting down as intelligent, rational, thinking individuals. When they do so on the issue of guns, they come to the conclusion that as intelligent, highly civilized, modern, rational beings, that their practical uses for guns are ranging from little to none. This could be ignoring how others feel, but it's not like all of them are for anything but ideologically limiting the ownership/usage of guns to the bare minimum. Very few of the anti-gun people want to, in reality, completely do away with the rights of average citizens to own guns. At least it's a lot less than you would assume given the polarization on the pro-gun side.

I really think the pro-gun group needs to just adopt the same approach as the rest of the camp and stop trying to use rationale and logic. God exists because faith, homosexuality and abortion should not be allowed in society because of God, other groups of people are inferior because they are/look different, and guns should be allowed because blowing someone's head clean off would make my day. Just keep it what it is.

I feel like you're making some very bold statements based simply on opinions on this one issue. As a person who's seen homes broken into and innocent citizens slaughtered in their own homes with no form of protection, I believe that people should be allowed to protect their homes and families in whatever way necessary.

I agree with your statement about guns being designed primarily to destroy life. That is a guns primary purpose and nothing can change that. Guns were designed to kill. However, the interesting dichotomy of this situation is that sometimes are used to take life in order to save and protect life.

You are completely entitled to your opinion, as I am entitled to mine. My opinion comes from experience (not saying yours doesnt, of course). My experiences have included death threats, threats against my family and home, and the lives of my children. So you could say that my opinion on this is based slightly on a paranoia that has developed after many years of traumatic stress related to my career in law enforcement. But until I hear a better option, I'll stick to my guns (no pun intended).

publius2k4

"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." Carl Sagan
[Image: tumblr_lvj8iyIABB1r2fzujo1_500.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes publius2k4's post
15-08-2012, 09:22 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(15-08-2012 05:01 AM)Red Celt Wrote:  
(14-08-2012 11:42 PM)tnt4philly Wrote:  LOL. Never mind that we have the absolute best healthcare in the world.

Congratulations on missing that point, entirely. It isn't the best in the world if it isn't available to all.
I didn't miss the point at all. It is illegal for hospitals to refuse treatment for any reason. Access is not an issue. Coverage for some is and I admit there are some people who fall into gaps.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 09:25 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(15-08-2012 05:08 AM)Red Celt Wrote:  
(15-08-2012 12:57 AM)tnt4philly Wrote:  I am absolutely serious. Our quality of healthcare is the best in the world and is easily accessed by the majority of our citizens.

World Health Organization ranking of health systems. Well, if the "best in the world" equates to 37th, then yes, you're not even slightly wrong... or deluded. Absolutely.

I could care less what WHO says. I bet tat people are not flocking to the 36 countries that listed above us as much as people are here.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 09:28 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(15-08-2012 07:23 AM)Azaraith Wrote:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sib-bKfAm...ature=plcp

Such GREAT healthcare system we have... Just one example out of many, but one shouldn't have to rely 100% on your job to get treatment.

Yeah, far be it that anyone would have to work for something. Either way, being the best does not mean it is perfect. I admit there are flaws in our system regarding coverage, but the quality of our healthcare is absolutely the best in the world.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 10:13 AM (This post was last modified: 15-08-2012 10:17 AM by Red Celt.)
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(15-08-2012 09:25 AM)tnt4philly Wrote:  I could care less what WHO says. I bet tat people are not flocking to the 36 countries that listed above us as much as people are here.

You could care less about what the WHO says? Well, then why ignore their... oh, wait a minute. Do you mean that you couldn't care less?

If you care a great deal, then you can always care less.

If you don't care at all, then you can never care less.

So the correct terminology is "I couldn't care less".

Y'welcome.

edit: and the USA isn't the only country that people from less prosperous places want to migrate to. No, honestly, we have borders and customs control and everything. Try reading some news from a different country. Absolutely.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 10:47 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(14-08-2012 09:15 AM)Chas Wrote:  Your diatribe is irrational for the very arguments you use to ascribe irrationality to those who support gun ownership.

Did you actually read any of the posts that give legitimate reasons for gun ownership?
We who live in rural areas have practical uses for firearms. They are tools.

No, I didn't have to read the posts, nothing I said in my post required it. I really only made one point, and that point didn't require me giving a shit about you thinking your bullshit reasons are legitimate. I addressed that.

My point is that guns are made for killing, and I'm sick and tired of people making arguments, bringing up pointless and irrelevant statistics and trying to justify their stance in ways that end up being distracting clumps of shit stuck to a wall. It's always going to boil down to you wanting a gun.

The practical use of guns is killing, and that is what they are made for: they make killing things a hell of a lot easier. If you made an argument that went against my point, I'm sorry I missed it, but I assume the only reason you need guns in a rural area is to kill. That would only equal you wanting an easy way to kill, because there was a time prior to guns in which people did kill things. That was in a time with pretty much all rural areas, horrible technology, without the high level of organization and government, etc. Making a gun today a necessity more so for ease and quick convenience, or it is just how you want to do things.

I could bring up things like rural areas aren't the only areas, there could be other ways to handle the same problems that a gun would just make easier, or you could come up with solutions collectively...oh, forget it.. it's pointless. I still don't see you going past the threshold of my point.

I added in: "It's not because I care if people own guns"....... And: "This could be ignoring how others feel, but it's not like all of them are for anything but ideologically limiting the ownership/usage of guns to the bare minimum. Very few of the anti-gun people want to, in reality, completely do away with the rights of average citizens to own guns."

Should I have added, "including myself", to the second part. Either way, I though that kind of handled the disagreement. Did you read my post?

(15-08-2012 07:59 AM)publius2k4 Wrote:  I feel like you're making some very bold statements based simply on opinions on this one issue. As a person who's seen homes broken into and innocent citizens slaughtered in their own homes with no form of protection, I believe that people should be allowed to protect their homes and families in whatever way necessary.

I agree with your statement about guns being designed primarily to destroy life. That is a guns primary purpose and nothing can change that. Guns were designed to kill. However, the interesting dichotomy of this situation is that sometimes are used to take life in order to save and protect life.

You are completely entitled to your opinion, as I am entitled to mine. My opinion comes from experience (not saying yours doesnt, of course). My experiences have included death threats, threats against my family and home, and the lives of my children. So you could say that my opinion on this is based slightly on a paranoia that has developed after many years of traumatic stress related to my career in law enforcement. But until I hear a better option, I'll stick to my guns (no pun intended).

I don't know how much of an "opinion" it was. I know how people like to use the word "opinion".

Quote:"I agree with your statement about guns being designed primarily to destroy life. That is a guns primary purpose and nothing can change that. Guns were designed to kill."

There is our agreement.

Quote:"The interesting dichotomy of this situation is that sometimes are used to take life in order to save and protect life."


And my point leads to here, or something similar, for where I want the pro-gun argument.

The thing is I might think ideologically or fantasize about a perfect world, but I'm completely serious when it comes to being practical about real world problems and solutions. I would just like to see that same seriousness from the other side. You want a gun to keep open the possibility that you can easily kill someone, or thing, and I don't really like all of the distracting shit being thrown out to prevent a discussion about whether or not that is necessary, and to what extent it is, or not, necessary.

If 'if someone has to die, someone has to die' is going to be the argument, keep that the argument, so we can have the discussion. That might also allow for a discussion to be raised about how we can more effectively limit situations in our society where someone has to die.

I could do without all of the stuff dealing with breaking in, making threats, etc. Those need to be discussed when we are answering "whether or not that is necessary, and to what extent it is, or not, necessary". It shouldn't be used as a distraction from getting any types of regulation, limitations and other solutions in effect, or as a distraction for the fundamental reason for gun ownership. I really can't say in which part of the conversation you are trying to bring that up, but I see it all too often where people will mention regulating guns and all of those types of things will come flying out from the other side until the conversation is basically filibustered.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 12:50 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(15-08-2012 10:13 AM)Red Celt Wrote:  
(15-08-2012 09:25 AM)tnt4philly Wrote:  I could care less what WHO says. I bet tat people are not flocking to the 36 countries that listed above us as much as people are here.

You could care less about what the WHO says? Well, then why ignore their... oh, wait a minute. Do you mean that you couldn't care less?

If you care a great deal, then you can always care less.

If you don't care at all, then you can never care less.

So the correct terminology is "I couldn't care less".

Y'welcome.

edit: and the USA isn't the only country that people from less prosperous places want to migrate to. No, honestly, we have borders and customs control and everything. Try reading some news from a different country. Absolutely.

LOL, when your argument get's weak, attack grammar and spelling.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 12:59 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
The majority of gun violence is due to the failed "war on drugs." Take the control of drugs away from the criminal and put it in the hands of the Government and violent crimes will drop dramatically. I am not a huge fan of Government control, but they do a decent job with alcohol. Only when alcohol was banned did we see the violent crimes rise the way they have under the current prohibition on drugs. The shooting spree are horrible and make the headlines when they do happen, but they account for a very small amount of the violent crimes in the US.

For those that live in the US and want guns banned, would you be willing to put a sign in your front yard proclaiming your stance on gun control that also states that there are no guns in your house?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes tnt4philly's post
15-08-2012, 01:25 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(15-08-2012 12:50 PM)tnt4philly Wrote:  LOL, when your argument get's weak, attack grammar and spelling.

Oh no, my argument isn't weak. The logic lesson was just a bonus... think of it as a little present for you. And it was logic, not grammar, nor spelling.

Logic.

A useful thing to grasp when you are in a debate.

Which you've already lost.

As I said; y'welcome.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: