Subject:
|
We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 28 Feb 2003 06:26:49 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
713 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
>
> > If ther are no guns, either in homes or in the streets (read in the hands of
> > criminals) then there can be no gun related violence. No hidden meaning, no
> > fallacy at all.
>
> Tell you what. I'll concede that... if you can *completely* eliminate guns
> from the surface of the earth, no one will be killed with guns any more, or
> at least not until the aliens come.
Yeah, that's the dreamer part of me... but it's completely true.
> But I'll ***only*** concede that in return for a concession on your part,
> namely, IF you concede that:
>
> 1) there's no way to actually do that, so there will still be some guns
>
> and
>
> 2) if there still are some guns, but citizens can't have them, outlaws(1)
> will have them more than citizens will.
>
> 1 - either civilian thugs or military thugs, depending
I like how you do away with the rest of the logically constructed arguement,
that if you *reduce* the number of guns, you will reduce the number of gun
related cases of violence. But you won't concede that part.
> Bet you won't admit it though, will you? It shreds your argument completely.
> That's not hiding behind old paper, that's not fallacy, that's just the way
> the world is. You're a self admitted dreamer, out of touch with reality.
Dreamers aren't necessarily out of touch with reality--I like this--weak
willed and out of touch with reality--what else can you possibly call me
during this debate?
I plainly, clearly, and straight forwardly said that removing guns from the
criminals as well as the citizens will reduce the gun related violence.
Less guns = less gun related violence. Truth. Deal with it.
>
> But this is a distraction, it's plowed ground, and it's off topic for this
> thread. There is another active thread you can hang your fallacy on (and
> your ducking the issue that the second amendment isn't about crime, it isn't
> about hunting, it's about the final check and balance we chose to have) if
> you want, OK? I started it just for you.
Thank you, and I changed the name of the thread--sorry that I didn't do it
earlier. And the 2nd, as most gun owners have said, is about the right to
own a gun and keep it in their house--it has nothing to do with providing a
'check' on the political institution. I never hear gun owners, besides you
and others here, ever say to me that their reason for gun ownership is to be
able to overthrow a corrupt gov't. They say it is to make them feel safer
against criminals. That is all. Your justificatoin for the 2nd and owning
guns, logically, would suppose that the citizens should have the same power
as the gov't. Well, the gov't has nukes. I would say that if we go by your
reasoning for the 2nd, then the 2nd is archaic and should be stricken. If
we goby other peoples interpretation of the 2nd--that we have the rught to
own guns just for protection from criminals and such, that the 2nd is
harmful, for guns in houses is statistically unsafe. And if we follow the
rules properly, irrelevent--a gun locked away in a cabinet/safe/whatever,
and ammo locked away somewhere else in the house, like the rules say--"Just
hold here a sec Mr. Criminal--I have to unlock this safe for my gun and then
run downstairs for the ammo..."
Again, guns are irrelevant to the political process in the 21st century, not
like they were in the 18th century, and reducing hte number of guns will
reduce gun related violence.
>
> Please leave it off this one. This one is about Dan Rather being an idiot.
> Since everyone seems to agree, we're done, right?
Well, much like George Dubya being a moron--I'd rather say that Dubya does
and says morinic things, and Rather did an idiotic thing--not taking
advantage of an opportunity to affect true 'hard hitting' journalism, but I
won't make a fuss if we reduce it to Rather being an idiot.
Dave K
-whose boycott of CBS is now into its second day.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
| (...) Tell you what. I'll concede that... if you can *completely* eliminate guns from the surface of the earth, no one will be killed with guns any more, or at least not until the aliens come. But I'll ***only*** concede that in return for a (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
92 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
