The stupidity of limiting ammunition
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-04-2013, 10:08 AM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(30-04-2013 10:04 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  
(30-04-2013 09:55 AM)TheBlackKnight Wrote:  You are silly. Everyone knows you can make crazy and criminal people less capable. You just take everything away.

When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail...

So are you both saying that the only reason you own guns is because they can?


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-04-2013, 10:17 AM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(30-04-2013 10:08 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(30-04-2013 10:04 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail...

So are you both saying that the only reason you own guns is because they can?

I think of it like classic cars. Sure, the reason you own can be given as "transportation" but there is also an aspect of collecting to go along with it. Some people own guns to hunt, some for self-defense, but I would argue that they all own them just to own them too. Doesn't mean they don't have other purposes in mind, and other reasons, but they can, so they do.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-04-2013, 10:27 AM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(30-04-2013 10:17 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(30-04-2013 10:08 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  So are you both saying that the only reason you own guns is because they can?

I think of it like classic cars. Sure, the reason you own can be given as "transportation" but there is also an aspect of collecting to go along with it. Some people own guns to hunt, some for self-defense, but I would argue that they all own them just to own them too. Doesn't mean they don't have other purposes in mind, and other reasons, but they can, so they do.

Yea I can see that. It's actually a serious question too. I owned one gun...Just one...and it was more than enough for me. I don't understand people who own lots of guns (and rarely hunt).


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-04-2013, 10:56 AM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(30-04-2013 10:08 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(30-04-2013 10:04 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail...

So are you both saying that the only reason you own guns is because they can?

Not at all. Two of my guns are leftovers from my hunting days and one is strictly for protection. I have no interest whatever in guns, outside their use for self defense. I also have no use for a lot of other things, but I'm not qualified to tell someone else what his or her interests should be, so I don't do so.

My point with the hammer comment is that almost everyone is raised in a top down authoritarian household and the result is a society that thinks the only way people can be "controlled" is by pointing guns at them (Which on a side note, is a bit of irony, given that the topic of conversation is gun violence). This is also why I said that violence, not gun violence, suicide, not gun suicide and mass murder, not mass gun murder are the problems.

Most people want a new law every time something bad happens but new laws don't stop parents from raising violent, mentally unstable children so, new laws don't stop people from doing others harm.

If you care to look at the problem from a purely rational perspective rather than an emotional one, you'll see that taking guns away from everyone but the state (that's fodder for an entirely different discussion) will not stop disturbed people from acting out. In fact, if you did manage to disarm the populace, those would be spree shooters would simply go online and learn how to make bombs, which is quite easy to do. Most don't do it now because it takes more effort to learn how to build a bomb than it does to steal a gun from a family member or even buy one legally. But let's examine the destruction one can do with a home made bomb as opposed to the destruction one can do with a firearm... need I go into detail? You don't have to aim a bomb. You don't even have to be present for a bomb to do its job and you cannot control who a bomb kills and who it doesn't kill, within the proximity of its detonation. Of course, not every would be killer would build a bomb. We've just recently seen an incident where a knife was used.

In the end, if we truly do want to stop this sort of violence, the answer is not in writing new opinions on paper and then pointing guns at every person who happens to defy those opinions. The answer is also not in public executions of those who do others harm and the answer is not in attempting to force already mentally injured adults into state run "rehab" programs that are at best, ineffectual on the whole.

As bad as I hate legislation, I have to agree with the 29 countries that have banned corporal punishment of children. In each of those countries where data has been collected, violent crime rates have dropped in the years after these laws have gone into effect. It isn't the entire answer but it is at a move in the right direction. At least in those countries, the guns of the state are being trained on people who are actually harming other human beings.

In simple terms, society will never, ever stop violent crime until it starts treating children like human beings.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-04-2013, 11:10 AM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(30-04-2013 10:03 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(30-04-2013 09:25 AM)Chas Wrote:  Yes, fine, but problem definitions really require more specificity.

I could come up with a list of problems that may need addressing as a starting point.

You are asking me to take a complex series of problems, and generate a series of simple definitions from it. The problems and the interactions between them, are not simple.

Einstein said it best, "everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." I think you are asking for oversimplified definitions that would necessarily define the problem incorrectly.


No, I'm not oversimplifying. I quite agree that the problems are complex and inter-related.
And so are the solutions.

My objection to many of the 'solutions' put forth is that they are not directed at defined problems.
I'm not saying that the definitions are simple or simply stated.

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
30-04-2013, 11:57 AM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(30-04-2013 10:56 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  
(30-04-2013 10:08 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  So are you both saying that the only reason you own guns is because they can?

Not at all. Two of my guns are leftovers from my hunting days and one is strictly for protection. I have no interest whatever in guns, outside their use for self defense. I also have no use for a lot of other things, but I'm not qualified to tell someone else what his or her interests should be, so I don't do so.

My point with the hammer comment is that almost everyone is raised in a top down authoritarian household and the result is a society that thinks the only way people can be "controlled" is by pointing guns at them (Which on a side note, is a bit of irony, given that the topic of conversation is gun violence). This is also why I said that violence, not gun violence, suicide, not gun suicide and mass murder, not mass gun murder are the problems.

Most people want a new law every time something bad happens but new laws don't stop parents from raising violent, mentally unstable children so, new laws don't stop people from doing others harm.

If you care to look at the problem from a purely rational perspective rather than an emotional one, you'll see that taking guns away from everyone but the state (that's fodder for an entirely different discussion) will not stop disturbed people from acting out. In fact, if you did manage to disarm the populace, those would be spree shooters would simply go online and learn how to make bombs, which is quite easy to do. Most don't do it now because it takes more effort to learn how to build a bomb than it does to steal a gun from a family member or even buy one legally. But let's examine the destruction one can do with a home made bomb as opposed to the destruction one can do with a firearm... need I go into detail? You don't have to aim a bomb. You don't even have to be present for a bomb to do its job and you cannot control who a bomb kills and who it doesn't kill, within the proximity of its detonation. Of course, not every would be killer would build a bomb. We've just recently seen an incident where a knife was used.

In the end, if we truly do want to stop this sort of violence, the answer is not in writing new opinions on paper and then pointing guns at every person who happens to defy those opinions. The answer is also not in public executions of those who do others harm and the answer is not in attempting to force already mentally injured adults into state run "rehab" programs that are at best, ineffectual on the whole.

As bad as I hate legislation, I have to agree with the 29 countries that have banned corporal punishment of children. In each of those countries where data has been collected, violent crime rates have dropped in the years after these laws have gone into effect. It isn't the entire answer but it is at a move in the right direction. At least in those countries, the guns of the state are being trained on people who are actually harming other human beings.

In simple terms, society will never, ever stop violent crime until it starts treating children like human beings.

I couldn't agree more. We prolong childhood in so many ways (like drinking age), but if they commit a crime...suddenly they're not a child and can be treated like an adult.


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-04-2013, 12:21 PM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(30-04-2013 11:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-04-2013 10:03 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  You are asking me to take a complex series of problems, and generate a series of simple definitions from it. The problems and the interactions between them, are not simple.

Einstein said it best, "everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." I think you are asking for oversimplified definitions that would necessarily define the problem incorrectly.


No, I'm not oversimplifying. I quite agree that the problems are complex and inter-related.
And so are the solutions.

My objection to many of the 'solutions' put forth is that they are not directed at defined problems.
I'm not saying that the definitions are simple or simply stated.

Then I see no issue with the definitions I have provided for my problems.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-04-2013, 01:20 PM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(30-04-2013 12:21 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(30-04-2013 11:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  No, I'm not oversimplifying. I quite agree that the problems are complex and inter-related.
And so are the solutions.

My objection to many of the 'solutions' put forth is that they are not directed at defined problems.
I'm not saying that the definitions are simple or simply stated.

Then I see no issue with the definitions I have provided for my problems.


I think they are too general. I'm working on an example list.

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
30-04-2013, 01:40 PM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(30-04-2013 01:20 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-04-2013 12:21 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Then I see no issue with the definitions I have provided for my problems.


I think they are too general. I'm working on an example list.

I'd like to see your list, I'll try to compile what I can think of here

Problem #1. The frequency of mass shootings in this country (The discharging of firearms multiple times by one or more parties into a group of unarmed victims) is something on the order of 1 every 2 weeks. This frequency is absurdly high.

Problem #2. The murder rate via the use of firearms in this country, is higher than other developed nations (chiefly those in Europe, Japan, Australia). This murder rate is too high.

Problem #3. The rate of suicides by firearm is also alarmingly high. Couple this with a success rate of ~90% when a firearm is involved, vs ~10% by all other means, and you have an absurdly elevated number of suicides, and even further still, an absurd number of suicides by gun.

Problem #4. Our understanding of how to identify, track, and prevent mass shooters and suicides is lacking. We need better ways of understanding how to identify and prevent these occurrences.


I'll keep thinking, but these are certainly 4 I have serious concerns over.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
30-04-2013, 01:43 PM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition




And, who needs to carry their own gun, when you can just take the one given to you by your assailant?

In all seriousness, that guy has balls. I would have just given him my wallet.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: