Subject:
|
Re: We love our guns!!-- was Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 28 Feb 2003 17:13:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
850 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
>
> > Is this the same
> > logic used with 'red light cameras cause accidents'?
>
> You're not very good at staying on thread, are you? Nor are you very good at
> paying attention. Go dig up the red light threads and reread them before you
> blather further.
>
> But assuming you won't, or won't be able to analyse what was said, for your
> convenience:
>
> The assertion was that the tendency for goverments to install these cameras
> and use them as a revenue source encouraged behaviour by drivers that
> actually caused the rate of accidents at particular intersections to go up.
> There's a chain of causality there. No one refuted it. We just saw a lot of
> flailing around, as I recall.
Refutation--the camera itself didn't cause the accident--the camera didn't
change the timing of the lights.
Saying something like there's causality between the camera and the accidents
is like saying thre's causality between people waking up and the sun rising.
Sure--there's an inference, but I didn't wake up in thie morning *because*
the sun peeked above the horizon.
The timing change of the lights *causes* the accidents--whether or not
there's a camera at the same intersection is irrelevant--you change the
timing on *any* red light, you'll create the accidents.
You're the proponent of *critical thinking* but what I see is you justifying
all your wants and desires and not at all coming to terms with what is best
for your fellow citizen. She's in a hospital with a bullet in her. Why do
I dislike guns in the hands of the 'citizen'? Right there. Causality--the
guy had a gun, he got upset because of a snowball fight--hopped in his car
and did a *drive by* shooting. He didn't even have the courage to get out
of his car--there's a coward. If he didn't have access to a gun, and he
wanted to do something this drastic, what would he have to do? He'd get a
knife (pipe, axe, whatever) and actually have to get out of his car to do
anything to anybody in that playground. And I know I can better defend
myself against some guy coming at me with an axe, then I can defending
myself against some coward driving by, shooting a gun at me.
I like how you compartmentalize things as well--that one thing doesn't
reflect on another thing. Sure the red light cameras are not related to gun
control, but your stance for both is a valid issue to raise--they both defy
logic and retionality. Come up with a coherent and cohesive rational
arguement that takes into account the safety and concern of your fellow man,
Larry. So far you're speaking falsehoods and posting links of very slanted
articles with their own agenda.
Take care of your fellow person.
>
> > She's a kid that has a bullet in her because of a snowball fight she wasn't
> > even in.
> >
> > Yeah, I'll keep worrying about the safety of your fellow citizens whilst you
> > keep worrying about your archaic piece of paper and your 'false security'
> > from your gun.
>
> I'm glad you put 'false security' in quotes. Putting something in quotes is
> a rhetorical device used to show disagreement. Meaning that you assert it's
> not false security but *real* security that's provided.
Nice.
>
> And you're right. No matter whether Joe Sixpack thinks guns are so he can go
> kill Bambi and maybe stop a stickup at the 24 hour store, the truth is those
> are nice to haves but irrelevant to the intent of our Founding Fathers. That
> intent was to provide the check to prevent things like Tien An Min square.
Yeah, 21st century America is exactly the same as China. Glad you have the
guns to stop your oppresive regime. If you're so scared about your
oppresive regime, why are you so quick to force it on other countries.
Yeah, is amazing how everything kinda relates and that one's opinion about
red light cameras reflects on one's opnion about what's going on halway
around the world--society is a complex and interwoven thing.
>
> But I bet you didn't mean to actually do that quoting did you?
>
> No matter how many times you prattle about archaic pieces of paper (I've
> noted yet another slur against our constitution, thank you very much), you
> just can't refute the intent of the founders because you haven't done the
> research and aren't capable of thinking it through anyway. Debating you is a
> waste of time, really.
I'd like to point out that there have been certain sections of the
constitution that have been found archaic, and have subsequently been
changed/modified/ignored. So call it slander/slur/what you will--it isn't,
I'm just saying that there is another part of the Constitution that is
archaic and should be modified/changed/stricken. And speaking of slander,
defend 'weak willed' and 'no hold on reality'. Take the plank out of your
eye before you go try removing hte speck out of mine. That goes for your
country as well--before you go thinking that Iraq would like "The American
Dream" (after all, according to Dubya, it is Gods gift to "human-mankind",
start taking the plank out of your own eyes--Lets tally themm up--Saddam is
a bad man who runs an oppresive regime and has killed his people. Yes we
should work at doing somehting about that, and we are. How many people,
today, in the United States, have died due to violence, homelessness, or any
other way that the gov't could have prevented? "Let us focus on something
across the other side of the world while ignoring the bad situation at home."
Amazing how things and POV's are interrelated. Amazing how complex
societies issues really are, and it'll take more than our little sound bites
here to help rectify the problems--but to start, looking after our fellow
citizens is a good place.
>
> By the way do you live in Missisauga?
> http://www.nationalreview.com/frum/diary022803.asp
Nope, Hamilton--down the street. But trust me, I was offended and sent a
letter off, demanding her resignation--Derringer (the DJ I listen to in the
morning on Q107 (www.q107.com) had her as 'Tool of the Day') If she said
"Oh those Pakistani's--those bastards!" or "Oh those Chinese, those
bastards", she'd be out so fast that it'd make her head spin. But "America
bashing" seems to be the "sport of choice". She was wrong and should resign.
I'm not bashing--you may think that, but is not true. I'm making
obervations and points that should make you rethink how you treat your
fellow citizens, and how your actions (or inactions) impact on those around
you. These are the points I wish to convey. If my ideas and ideals come
across as something else, then I'm either not making my points clearly
enough (and I really am genuinely trying to make the points as clear as
possible), or you're so indoctorined in your POV that you can't see the
forest thru the trees.
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
