Subject:
|
Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 19 Jun 2003 00:28:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2465 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
| |
What it does do is reduce the number of fatalities/injuries from bullets.
|
Lots of things can kill you -- like automobiles for example. We keep
dangerous things around because they are useful -- like automobiles for
example. People can be taught to use dangerous yet useful things without
harm to anyone, or at least with greatly reduced risk to others -- like
automobiles for example.
How is a gun any different?
|
What’s the purpose of a car--to get me to my job, to get me home, to wash on
Saturday and watch it rained upon on Sunday. What’s the purpose of a knife?
To open boxes, cut my food, chop the cabbage I threw into my crock pot
yesterday. What’s the primary purpose of a bat? To hollow out and put cork
in it, to hit a little ball out of a park, to beat my carpet and get the
dust/dirt out of it. What’s the primary function of wsooden chopsticks--to
eat east Asian food, to build log cabins whilst waiting for the food to
arrive.
What’s the purpose of a gun? What’s the *primary* purpose of a gun? What’s
the intent of the gun owner when he’s weilding a gun. What is it? To look
good? My uncle has a musket from our little war b/w our two countirs
displayed on his mantle. So yeah, I guess a purpose of a gun is to look
good. However, I rather doub that my uncles gun could be used to shoot
someone (considering it’s been rendered inoperative after sitting under the
water that long, as well as the fact that it has concrete in the barrel.)
Protection? Tell that to the neighbour who just had his wife shot by the
gun stolen out of your house. Oh wait, then we’re back to the primary
function of a gun, and that is to *shoot* something--target, animal, person.
|
Yes. Protection. Why do you give an example of an unintended use of a gun?
By that reasoning we should ban driving due to all of the auto related
fatalities (far more BTW than deaths by handguns...)
|
Reading comprehension 101--the purpose of a car is not to cause any harm. The
purpose of a gun is. If you want to weigh in on *accidental* deaths of
automobiles, then we’re off on a differnt topic. Shooting someone with a gun is
not an accident. Protection? By doing what? Oh right, shooting the culprit.
Give your idea of an ‘intended’ use of a gun that doesn’t have a bullet going
thru or near a person.
| |
| |
Stop with the “Well axes kill.” It’s not germaine. It’s a straw man, it’s
whatever you want to call it--an axe is used to hew wood, cut rope,
whataveyou. Axe manufacturers aren’t thinking that, “hey, we’re making these
axes to cause bodily harm on people”. Guns, well, that’s their *intended*
use.
|
By the same token, gun manufacturers aren’t thinking that, “hey we’re making
these guns but somebody might steal one and use it to cause bodily harm on
people.” The intended use is deterrent. Protection. Nobody wants to kill
anyone. Just mind your own business and things will be fine.
|
THey are thinking that thse things fire bullets intended to strike a target.
That’s what the *primary* use of a gun is. And when you have your personal hand
gun in your purse/duffelbag/holster and you’re carrying it around with you--why?
For your obtuse idea of protection. If someone down the street who also has a
gun decided to shoot you, what protection is your gun? Take away the guns and
you don’t need to worry about your flawed idea of protection. Nobody wnats to
kill anyone? Then why are you carrying around a gun? ‘If someone wrongs me,
I’ll shoot ‘em!’ Sounds to me like the sheer act of just having a gun strikes
your reason--oh right, your reason is flawed in the first place.
| |
| |
| |
You might argue that the apparent utility of the gun does not compensate
sufficiently for it’s supposed danger to others -- but that’s about all you
can say about it. We would rate it’s utility differently -- and that is
the crux of the disagreement. You cannot imagine a use for a gun that
outweighs its risk to others. I believe that the mere presence of guns in
the hands of the many keeps fascism and totalitarianism at bay, while at
the same time protecting people in their homes.
|
|
God help me, I’m siding with Hop-Frog! :-/ ;-)
| |
I don’t have to try to imagine utility of a gun outweighing the danger--it
doesn’t exist. In not one instance does the utility outweigh the danger.
Specific examples “Hey, I shot that guy before he shot my wife!” But if the
guy didn’t have a gun in the first place... that’s all I’m saying.
|
This is reality, Dave. There will always be guns no matter how hard you try
to destroy them all.
|
Because there will always be obtuse, short-sighed people who cling to a
‘security blanket’ a la Linus VanPelt. For those of us who have grown up and
have entered a more civilized world outside the schoolyard, we realize that
there are better ways of dealing with problems.
| |
| |
As long as you cannot guarantee that the gun will stay in law abiding hands,
then all guns outta the pool.
|
Again, your wish is pure fantasy. All your efforts to control guns will only
result in the disarming of law-abiding citizens, that’s it!
|
No, if there are less guns in ‘law abiding’ homes, there will be less chance for
guns to get into the hands of crooks. If there are no guns in stores, then
there’s no way for guns to get on the black market that way. It’s irrefutable,
but you won’t listen to it ‘cause you don’t want to hear it. You want to cover
your ears and natter, “I’m not listening!!!” and we’re back to schoolyard
schemes.
| |
| |
| |
Freed slaves learned quickly that freemen beared arms. While it is said
that many slaves lived good lives as slaves, let’s not forget that putting
a slave to the whip or selling off his/her loved ones was not an uncommon
practice. How could such a thing happen? Because we allowed the existence
of a class of persons for whom civil liberties did not exist. When they
were freed, they learned that they sometimes had to back up their newfound
freedoms with exclamation point provided by a gun or rifle.
|
True, but that’s history--Israelites were freed from Egypt--I don’t see them
carrying around bronze spears.
|
I believe the weapon of choice today is the Uzi;-)
| |
History is great, but know that it’s history
and times change. Symbols of freedom are great, but then we’re elevating
the gun to a symbol. This is rhetoric that fails to take in account the
evolution of society. Now freedom is covered by law, not by the gun,
therefore the gun is not needed. The idea that the ruling power can take
away your freedom is also irrelevant--they could take away your freedom
whether you have a gun or not.
|
You are hopelessly naive and simply a clueless idealist.
|
Ahh, no refuting the point--how so unlike you, John. Your concepts about guns
is obtuse.
| |
| |
There was a time when gold was the currency of choice because it was worth
something. Gradually, paper money was used in lieu of gold, but there was
gold to back it up. Today there is only money, and the ‘belief’ in
ourselves that this money is worth what it is--‘real’ gold is no longer
needed to back it up. The time for guns, like gold as official currency, has
passed.
|
See previous statement.
|
Again, no refuting...
| |
| |
| |
I understand your arguments about guns, and I am not without sympathy.
Sadly we live in a world where guns mean freedom -- the last hope of
preventing political enslavement.
|
Guns != freedom. Guns=death. Cute fuzzy rhetoric doesn’t change
reality--reality is that guns kill people--that’s their intended function.
Take away the guns and the gun related homicides stop.
|
Once again, Dave, reality is that guns will never go away! That is
reality. Deal.
|
When you grow up, we’ll be here. The ‘dreamers’ got to the moon first, they got
to the other planets first, they, well, basically got everywhere first and
dragged the unbelievers, kicking and screaming, along. Now we have Teflon ;)
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
161 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
