British Soldier Beheaded in Street
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-05-2013, 06:00 AM
RE: British Soldier Beheaded in Street
(24-05-2013 02:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  Crazy person with gun =/= Sane person with gun.

This is why there are background checks and licensing.

To get a permit to carry, I had to take a firearms safety course and I was investigated by the local police, the state police, and the FBI.

To purchase a firearm, I have to have another background check. Each time.

Either we try to rid society of firearms or we implement safety measures. Neither of these courses will be perfect.

Please define what you mean by "untrained response".
Response by police does not always work out well, and response by civilians often does.

And yet it makes no difference as you seem to get school massacres almost annualy, since the overall ban on guns we have had a grand total of 0. Guns are very clearly part of the problem, removing them is one of the best solutions. It sure as hell helped here.

Behold the power of the force!
[Image: fgYtjtY.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2013, 03:32 PM
RE: British Soldier Beheaded in Street
(25-05-2013 06:00 AM)FSM_scot Wrote:  
(24-05-2013 02:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  Crazy person with gun =/= Sane person with gun.

This is why there are background checks and licensing.

To get a permit to carry, I had to take a firearms safety course and I was investigated by the local police, the state police, and the FBI.

To purchase a firearm, I have to have another background check. Each time.

Either we try to rid society of firearms or we implement safety measures. Neither of these courses will be perfect.

Please define what you mean by "untrained response".
Response by police does not always work out well, and response by civilians often does.

And yet it makes no difference as you seem to get school massacres almost annualy, since the overall ban on guns we have had a grand total of 0. Guns are very clearly part of the problem, removing them is one of the best solutions. It sure as hell helped here.

Yes, there is a correlation. There have been no mass shootings since 1997.
There are still guns in Scotland, there are still gun deaths in Scotland.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2013, 04:14 PM
RE: British Soldier Beheaded in Street
Since this is now a gun debate, I might as well add my two cents.

Without guns, nobody would be shot. That is true. Just as with no knives, nobody would be stabbed; no cars, nobody would be run over; no sickness, nobody would get malaria; etc. Without the specific mechanisms themselves, these things would not happen. So it's true that guns are "part of the problem".

However, there's something much deeper that we need to be looking at.

Miso: Sound of mind. Owns an assault rifle. Never shot up a school.

Miso's neighbor: Sound of mind. Owns 3 assault rifles. Never shot up a school.

Miso's Dad: Sound of mind. Owns an assault rifle. Never shot up a school.

The guy Miso met that one time at the shooting range: Sound of mind. Owns an assault rifle. 70 years of age and still managed to never shoot up a school.

Miso's gym buddy: Sound of mind. Owns 2 assault rifles. Never shot up a school.

Adam Lanza: Not sound of mind. Owned an assault rifle. Shot up a school.



There is of course a correlation between shootings and guns. As I illustrated earlier, that is a given. But I and many other sound-minded individuals can and do own guns for many years and never shoot up a school. Drop an assault rifle into the hands of a thousand sound-minded individuals and I dare say you will find that none of them shoot up a school. Drop a rifle in the hands of a single unstable individual, however, and you get a mass shooting.

The correlation has been acknowledged. But the causation is being attributed to the wrong mechanism.

Through profound pain comes profound knowledge.
Ridi, Pagliaccio, sul tuo amore infranto! Ridi del duol, che t'avvelena il cor!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Misanthropik's post
25-05-2013, 04:23 PM
RE: British Soldier Beheaded in Street
(25-05-2013 04:14 PM)Misanthropik Wrote:  Since this is now a gun debate, I might as well add my two cents.

Without guns, nobody would be shot. That is true. Just as with no knives, nobody would be stabbed; no cars, nobody would be run over; no sickness, nobody would get malaria; etc. Without the specific mechanisms themselves, these things would not happen. So it's true that guns are "part of the problem".

However, there's something much deeper that we need to be looking at.

Miso: Sound of mind. Owns an assault rifle. Never shot up a school.

Miso's neighbor: Sound of mind. Owns 3 assault rifles. Never shot up a school.

Miso's Dad: Sound of mind. Owns an assault rifle. Never shot up a school.

The guy Miso met that one time at the shooting range: Sound of mind. Owns an assault rifle. 70 years of age and still managed to never shoot up a school.

Miso's gym buddy: Sound of mind. Owns 2 assault rifles. Never shot up a school.

Adam Lanza: Not sound of mind. Owned an assault rifle. Shot up a school.



There is of course a correlation between shootings and guns. As I illustrated earlier, that is a given. But I and many other sound-minded individuals can and do own guns for many years and never shoot up a school. Drop an assault rifle into the hands of a thousand sound-minded individuals and I dare say you will find that none of them shoot up a school. Drop a rifle in the hands of a single unstable individual, however, and you get a mass shooting.

The correlation has been acknowledged. But the causation is being attributed to the wrong mechanism.

I suspect none of you owns an assault rifle - those are selective fire.
You own rifles that the anti-gunners have dubbed "assault weapons" - a poorly defined, emotional, pejorative term.

Adam Lanza did not own one - he stole his mother's.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2013, 04:35 PM
RE: British Soldier Beheaded in Street
(25-05-2013 04:23 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-05-2013 04:14 PM)Misanthropik Wrote:  Since this is now a gun debate, I might as well add my two cents.

Without guns, nobody would be shot. That is true. Just as with no knives, nobody would be stabbed; no cars, nobody would be run over; no sickness, nobody would get malaria; etc. Without the specific mechanisms themselves, these things would not happen. So it's true that guns are "part of the problem".

However, there's something much deeper that we need to be looking at.

Miso: Sound of mind. Owns an assault rifle. Never shot up a school.

Miso's neighbor: Sound of mind. Owns 3 assault rifles. Never shot up a school.

Miso's Dad: Sound of mind. Owns an assault rifle. Never shot up a school.

The guy Miso met that one time at the shooting range: Sound of mind. Owns an assault rifle. 70 years of age and still managed to never shoot up a school.

Miso's gym buddy: Sound of mind. Owns 2 assault rifles. Never shot up a school.

Adam Lanza: Not sound of mind. Owned an assault rifle. Shot up a school.



There is of course a correlation between shootings and guns. As I illustrated earlier, that is a given. But I and many other sound-minded individuals can and do own guns for many years and never shoot up a school. Drop an assault rifle into the hands of a thousand sound-minded individuals and I dare say you will find that none of them shoot up a school. Drop a rifle in the hands of a single unstable individual, however, and you get a mass shooting.

The correlation has been acknowledged. But the causation is being attributed to the wrong mechanism.

I suspect none of you owns an assault rifle - those are selective fire.
You own rifles that the anti-gunners have dubbed "assault weapons" - a poorly defined, emotional, pejorative term.

Adam Lanza did not own one - he stole his mother's.

The point being; a "military style" (whatever that means - I'm trying to speak their language) weapon with a high-capacity magazine. We can call it a "water gun" if we want, but dropping one in the hands of a sane person is not necessarily going to have the same results as dropping it in the hands of an insane person.

Through profound pain comes profound knowledge.
Ridi, Pagliaccio, sul tuo amore infranto! Ridi del duol, che t'avvelena il cor!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2013, 04:40 PM
RE: British Soldier Beheaded in Street
(25-05-2013 04:35 PM)Misanthropik Wrote:  
(25-05-2013 04:23 PM)Chas Wrote:  I suspect none of you owns an assault rifle - those are selective fire.
You own rifles that the anti-gunners have dubbed "assault weapons" - a poorly defined, emotional, pejorative term.

Adam Lanza did not own one - he stole his mother's.

The point being; a "military style" (whatever that means - I'm trying to speak their language) weapon with a high-capacity magazine. We can call it a "water gun" if we want, but dropping one in the hands of a sane person is not necessarily going to have the same results as dropping it in the hands of an insane person.

Yeah, just trying to aid communication.

I currently have a couple of semi-automatic rifles with multiple 20-round magazines.
Over the years, I have owned several. Haven't shot anyone yet.

There are tens of millions of AR-pattern rifles in the hands of civilians in the U.S.
How many have been used in mass shootings? One?
How many in violent crimes? A few?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2013, 04:42 PM
RE: British Soldier Beheaded in Street
(25-05-2013 04:35 PM)Misanthropik Wrote:  
(25-05-2013 04:23 PM)Chas Wrote:  I suspect none of you owns an assault rifle - those are selective fire.
You own rifles that the anti-gunners have dubbed "assault weapons" - a poorly defined, emotional, pejorative term.

Adam Lanza did not own one - he stole his mother's.

The point being; a "military style" (whatever that means - I'm trying to speak their language) weapon with a high-capacity magazine. We can call it a "water gun" if we want, but dropping one in the hands of a sane person is not necessarily going to have the same results as dropping it in the hands of an insane person.

Is gun ownership a net positive to society or a net negative? That is really what it boils down to. After all the personal attacks and emotional arguments do you think we are better off as a society having guns? Personally I think the risks and the costs far outweigh the benefits.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2013, 04:44 PM
RE: British Soldier Beheaded in Street
(25-05-2013 04:42 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(25-05-2013 04:35 PM)Misanthropik Wrote:  The point being; a "military style" (whatever that means - I'm trying to speak their language) weapon with a high-capacity magazine. We can call it a "water gun" if we want, but dropping one in the hands of a sane person is not necessarily going to have the same results as dropping it in the hands of an insane person.

Is gun ownership a net positive to society or a net negative? That is really what it boils down to. After all the personal attacks and emotional arguments do you think we are better off as a society having guns? Personally I think the risks and the costs far outweigh the benefits.

And I believe the opposite.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2013, 04:51 PM
RE: British Soldier Beheaded in Street
(25-05-2013 04:42 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(25-05-2013 04:35 PM)Misanthropik Wrote:  The point being; a "military style" (whatever that means - I'm trying to speak their language) weapon with a high-capacity magazine. We can call it a "water gun" if we want, but dropping one in the hands of a sane person is not necessarily going to have the same results as dropping it in the hands of an insane person.

Is gun ownership a net positive to society or a net negative? That is really what it boils down to. After all the personal attacks and emotional arguments do you think we are better off as a society having guns? Personally I think the risks and the costs far outweigh the benefits.

I don't know. I don't know the statistics on such things. Gun use/ownership is a lifelong hobby of mine. When I'm tending to my rifle or my shotguns, I'm not thinking about shooting up a school. I'm not thinking about how many people do shoot up schools and political rallies with the very types of guns that I'm holding. I'm merely thinking about how lovely the steel shines as I polish it and admiring its aesthetic and practical features - just as a coin collector smiles upon his collection of early 20th century pennies. When I, a sound-minded individual, am holding my guns, nothing bad is happening. That is all that is relevant to me. And quite frankly, I believe it would be terribly unfair to take away something that I am mentally capable of enjoying safely because a few dipshits might not be able to handle it themselves.

And in the end, that's what certain freedoms - or even privileges - are about. A person being free to enjoy himself because he's capable of doing so without hurting anyone. All I ask, as an individual, is that we don't go bug-nutty and start taking away my personal enjoyments because a few less-than-stable characters on the other side of my country can't handle their shit. That's not fair to me; I have done nothing wrong.

Through profound pain comes profound knowledge.
Ridi, Pagliaccio, sul tuo amore infranto! Ridi del duol, che t'avvelena il cor!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Misanthropik's post
25-05-2013, 05:03 PM
RE: British Soldier Beheaded in Street
(25-05-2013 04:51 PM)Misanthropik Wrote:  
(25-05-2013 04:42 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Is gun ownership a net positive to society or a net negative? That is really what it boils down to. After all the personal attacks and emotional arguments do you think we are better off as a society having guns? Personally I think the risks and the costs far outweigh the benefits.

I don't know. I don't know the statistics on such things. Gun use/ownership is a lifelong hobby of mine. When I'm tending to my rifle or my shotguns, I'm not thinking about shooting up a school. I'm not thinking about how many people do shoot up schools and political rallies with the very types of guns that I'm holding. I'm merely thinking about how lovely the steel shines as I polish it and admiring its aesthetic and practical features - just as a coin collector smiles upon his collection of early 20th century pennies. When I, a sound-minded individual, am holding my guns, nothing bad is happening. That is all that is relevant to me. And quite frankly, I believe it would be terribly unfair to take away something that I am mentally capable of enjoying safely because a few dipshits might not be able to handle it themselves.

And in the end, that's what certain freedoms - or even privileges - are about. A person being free to enjoy himself because he's capable of doing so without hurting anyone. All I ask, as an individual, is that we don't go bug-nutty and start taking away my personal enjoyments because a few less-than-stable characters on the other side of my country can't handle their shit. That's not fair to me; I have done nothing wrong.

And we could use the identical argument for 'religion control'. Because there are people who use religion for mass murder, we should ban it.

Yup. Works for me.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: