Subject:
|
Re: Sticking my gun where it doesn't belong...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 16 Sep 2003 01:56:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
865 times
|
| |
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
|
A guns only inherent purpose is to shoot bullets at something.
|
But a guns purpose isnt interently to shoot a person; thats an
inferential purpose.
|
Hence I didnt say that the inherent purpose of a gun is to shoot someone.
However, the usual purpose of a gun *user* is to shoot at someone, either
in an act of defense or in an act of crime. Maybe to scare, maybe to
intimidate, and maybe to kill or maim.
|
Okay, but now were back to guns dont kill people; people kill people.
If you wish to condemn guns based on their intent, then you cant simply
abandon that argument in favor of the users usual purpose. You seem to
be claiming simultaneously that guns are bad because theyre intended to
shoot someont, but the inherent purpose of a gun isnt to shoot someone.
Which is it?
|
I was cutting the other side some slack with my diplomatic wording. Its
called being nice to the other side. It is my personal contention that a guns
main purpose is to kill/main someone else in front of the gun, and I have as yet
to be proven wrong. Other ideas, i.e. hunting and the range, are solved by
leaving the gun at the range/resort. Arguements about protecting the home are
irrelevant due to the very nature of the legal way of storage of said gun
makes protection improbable to impossibe, seeing as how its all locked up.
And if the gun is not locked up in order to facilitate easier protection of the
abode from the criminal, then the gun has a high chance of being stolen or used
wrongly and with grave consequences by a family member.
Beyond that, if you take away the guns you take away gun related crimes.
|
|
And then theres Mike who speaks of people better
be ready for lead in the brain. What kind of society talks like that?
|
Well, I cant speak for the overzealousness of my fellow Americans, but Id
say again that a call for a ban on guns really misses the point. As has been
demonstrated previously, your fine nation has a huge gun:home ratio, but,
despite this fact, Canada has nothing at all like the hideous incidence of
gun violence.
|
Nor do we have, per capita, nearly the amount of guns in homes that you Yankees
do. Compounding the issue is the Outta my cold dead hands and Lead in the
brain mentality that yall got going on down there, which I would imagine is a
huge contributing dactor.
|
|
It is the case--if you lessen the number of guns, you lessen the incidents
with guns. And if you get rid of them all, well that would take a total
change in mindset...
|
Thats two separate arguments, but I agree that a change in mindset would be
remarkably helpful.
|
Then we agree.
|
The problem remains that youre drawing a direct correlation between number
of guns and number of incidents, by which youre assuming that a reduction in
gun-count will yield a corresponding reduction in gun-crimes. But that only
works if you eliminate exactly the guns that would otherwise have been
involved in gun-crime, and theres no way to know that.
|
K, all of you that are going to get cancer from smoking, stop now--the rest of
you, dont worry about that cancer stick--it wont affect you.
Dave K
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Sticking my gun where it doesn't belong...
|
| (...) Okay, but now we're back to "guns don't kill people; people kill people." If you wish to condemn guns based on their "intent," then you can't simply abandon that argument in favor of the user's "'usual' purpose." You seem to be claiming (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
111 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
|
|
|
|