Subject:
|
Re: The Blood of Patriots & Tyrants (was Re: Sticking my gun...etc.)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:06:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
945 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
>
> > And we go 'round and 'round. I'm tired but I'm not willing to let you even
> > remotely think you're in the right whilst your fellow citizens are killed in
> > violent gun related homicides. I'm usually pretty willing to be swayed by a
> > good arguement.
>
> You need to do a cost benefit analysis here. Even one homicide or accidental
> death is undeniably tragic, but death, in the long run, is not preventable.
> Everyone dies of something some time.
>
> Weigh those 11,000 or 25.000 (tragic) yearly deaths against the loss of freedom
> of 260+ million. Is it an acceptable cost?
>
> We accept death in a lot of things. We accept it as a cost of producing coal
> because we want electricity. We accept it as a cost of building bridges because
> we need new bridges. We accept much higher yearly death rates due to auto
> accidents in exchange for the freedom of movement that the automobile gives us.
> And on and on and on.
>
> People (might have) died to get you your LEGO. Are you OK with that? Why or why
> not? That oil worker who died in a drilling accident might not have had to die
> if no one wanted any oil for plastic feedstock. That truck driver who died a day
> earlier than he would have from breathing excess carbon monoxide might not have
> had to die if no one wanted any products delivered. And so on.
>
> To merely say "these deaths are tragic" as the be all and end all argument,
> irrefutable and immaculate, suggests you're not actually analysing things, just
> emoting.
Nicely stated Larry.
There was a discusion earlier differentiating between accidents and
homicides--people dying in mining or oil platform accidents is tragic, but is
not the same as willfully taking another life in an act of homicide.
Further, each and every time an accident happens in a mine shaft somewhere, or
lives are lost on an oil rig, there is much scrutiny and investigation, and
procedures are revamped, and new hardware is put in place to lessen the chance
of such lives being lost in the future.
I'm a pretty big fan of TLC and all their shows about 'extreme machines' or ones
on people working in 'hostile environments'--you look at the way that mining is
conducted today, with the operator sitting above ground controlling a remote
operated vehicle to do the actual mining. It must have cost millions of dollars
to develop that type of technology, and yet the only benefit is to prevent loss
of lives. Would it be cheaper and esier just to get the workers down in the
shafts to do the job? Probably, but lives would be in greater danger of being
lost due to accidents. And these off-shore oil platforms--the escape and rescue
units on these things are extemely and thoroughly thought out and
implemented--The cost alone to keep people alive in these areas is astounding.
And lets not forget what NASA's going thru right now with the investigations and
the revamping of policies and procedures, and the countless person-hours to
implement a safer way for getting us into space, due to the lost lives of 7
individuals. Rarely do you hear talk of the loss of equipment, or the loss of
money, but it's the loss of lives due to unforseen accidents that's the focus.
All the time, effort, and millions and millions of dollars is attibuted to
protecting lives.
Is the same amount of time, effort and money put into gun ownership each and
every time some kid takes a gun to school and starts shooting at people?
Someone said earlier in this thread that they should start every discussion
relating to guns with the 2nd. I think I'll start every post with links to
violent gun related homicides conducted since my last post. His wouldn't
change, and would be a few lines long. Mine, however, would be rather large and
changing by the day.
Can we be absolutely certain that 250+ million people will lose their freedom if
there were no private gun owners? Is there documented proof that there would be
anarchy, despotism, and/or tyrany if the average gun owning citizen gave up the
firearm? The reality is that 11,000 (or 25,000) people per year are losing
their freedoms, losing their lives. The reality of the situation will always
trump the hypothetical or conjecture.
Because I find the deaths of these fellow citizens tragic, that in no way
undercuts the arguements presented. The tragic lives lost is not the basis, nor
sole rationale, of the arguement, but it is a 'wake up call' for those who own
guns. It actually shows that the arguement is based on the reality of gun
ownership today--my blinders are off and I can see the concrete results of what
private gun ownership is actually doing to society, opposed to the 'vague hope'
that certain gun owners attribute to their gun possessions.
The reality is that your 'protection of democracy' is the armed forces, whether
it be the law enforcement officers, the armed forces, the federal branches like
the "Feds", and others. Sure they make mistakes. Sure there has been
corruption (as Hoppy pointed out). But these are your fellow citizens, employed
to do a job, and they're prone to the same human failings that the rest of us
are prone to.
The difference is that these people are working in 'well regulated' conditions.
When situations like Hoppy described crop up, procedures are looked into, and
regulations change such that the chances of 'repeat offences' are reduced. Like
the Space, mining and oil industries, time, effort, and money are put into
checking out these systems to improve them. When there are issues with 'hazing'
at West Point (iirc, a while back) policies were changed. When there were 'bad
cops', investigations occured and people were dismissed, and new procedures were
put into place to 'weed out' these people.
We talk of responsibility, we talk of justice, and we talk of freedom. People
who use such adages as "lead in the brain", or "out of my cold, dead hands",
seem to be neither concerned for the safety and freedom of their fellow citizen,
nor for protecting the democracy in which they live. Their only concern, as
stated, is that they want their gun, in defiance of *anything*, to the point
where either the gun taker will be dead, and/or the gun owner will be dead.
What contributes to freedom, safety and democracy is the vigilence of the
average citizen. Not the gun in the house, not the rhetoric, but the
citizens--the people watching what's going on in their society around them, and
using the power of their voices and the power of the vote, to make themselves
heard.(1)
But that's a little too democratic for America. Sorry about that.
Dave K
-Hating the DoS attack on LUGNET--I've tried posting a response to this 3-4
times at various intervals over the last day and a bit, and all were
thwarted--this is the response I like the least--sorry you missed my earlier
expatiation(s).
1- speaking of the power of the voices, my favourite radio DJ, John Derringer on
Q107 in the mornings, is being sued by a judge for, let's see if I can dig it
up...
http://www.torontostar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1064441418395
"
An Ontario judge is seeking $3 million in damages from Q107 morning show host
John Derringer, the radio station and owner for falsely accusing him of being a
"disgrace" to the justice system and society over the sentencing of a man who
pleaded guilty to possession and distributing child pornography.
"
Derringer stated in his show yesterday morning that he is more than willing to
risk his job to make his voice heard. His opinion is that 'a 9 month house
arrest and 200 hours of community service' is far too lenient for "The
20-year-old ... possessing and distributing child pornography"
This DJ is willing to put his job on the line for his beliefs.
Eh, it's a tangent.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
