|
|
Random Politics & Religion #00
By Jassik 2015-10-27 15:11:23
We could argue about the point of self defense all day, we will disagree nonetheless but it's at least a meaningful discussion. Denying a gun is an object intended for violence is demented though.
There is no reasoning with you sometimes.
So you would be fine with Iran getting nukes, they just want to defend themselves against countries with nukes! 
Winnar!
Not really. If having weapons prevents violence, what's wrong with everyone having them, since you can't outlaw the weapon because some people might misuse it.
The issue is that you aren't willing to discuss the subject honestly. You know there is a problem with the current gun culture in this country, but you cannot admit that guns are a factor. Everything must be binary and because it's impossible that guns aren't awesome.
Guns ARE awesome in the past 22 years we've had the most guns out there in the country and the murder rate by them has fallen 30% since the 90s.
Quote: Despite these trends, most U.S. adults think gun crimes have increased. In our 2013 survey, more than half (56%) of Americans said the number of gun crimes had gone up compared with 20 years ago. Another 26% said the number of gun crimes had remained the same, and just 12% said gun crimes had declined.
The only problem we have with guns is a media problem, and of course the whole idea and promotion of "gun free zones" which actually prompt gun violence instead of deter it.
Yeah, more guns is the only that changed in the last 22 years besides liberal media...
Have you ever heard of the Donohue-Levitt hypothesis?
 Bahamut.Milamber
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2015-10-27 15:11:56
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »By the way if you can't see every purpose of a gun is tied in some way to violence then you are truly hopeless.
It doesn't matter if it is a deterrent, it is because it is a threat of violence. Everything to do with a gun is linked to violence. Target shooting is about as tied to violence as archery or dart throwing.
[+]
 Bahamut.Ravael
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-10-27 15:17:03
Not really. If having weapons prevents violence, what's wrong with everyone having them, since you can't outlaw the weapon because some people might misuse it.
The issue is that you aren't willing to discuss the subject honestly. You know there is a problem with the current gun culture in this country, but you cannot admit that guns are a factor. Everything must be binary and because it's impossible that guns aren't awesome.
So, you accuse Nausi of being binary, while presenting an extreme as an argument in the first paragraph?
No, it's not an extreme. I just used his own argument to show perspective. You of all people, who claims to be so critical of every "fact" you hear and you are defending a guy who can't even get his own opinion straight.
I'm not defending his every word by any stretch of the imagination, but using his common belief to present a "perspective" that is extreme (don't even pretend that it isn't) and then calling him binary immediately after is just hypocritical.
Ragnarok.Nausi
サーバ: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2015-10-27 15:17:59
Yes it's violent behaviour. No, it isn't
This is just PC-liberal BS. The ultimate goal being to equate having a gun to shooting a gun (let alone shooting someone dead with it). Where did you even read/hear/see such garbage? How did you ever formulate that opinion?
Have you ever even fired a gun? I can assure as someone who has that there's a big difference in having one, to holding one, to firing one, to firing one at someone.
Bahamut.Milamber
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2015-10-27 15:18:50
We could argue about the point of self defense all day, we will disagree nonetheless but it's at least a meaningful discussion. Denying a gun is an object intended for violence is demented though.
There is no reasoning with you sometimes.
So you would be fine with Iran getting nukes, they just want to defend themselves against countries with nukes!
Winnar!
Not really. If having weapons prevents violence, what's wrong with everyone having them, since you can't outlaw the weapon because some people might misuse it.
The issue is that you aren't willing to discuss the subject honestly. You know there is a problem with the current gun culture in this country, but you cannot admit that guns are a factor. Everything must be binary and because it's impossible that guns aren't awesome.
Guns ARE awesome in the past 22 years we've had the most guns out there in the country and the murder rate by them has fallen 30% since the 90s.
Quote: Despite these trends, most U.S. adults think gun crimes have increased. In our 2013 survey, more than half (56%) of Americans said the number of gun crimes had gone up compared with 20 years ago. Another 26% said the number of gun crimes had remained the same, and just 12% said gun crimes had declined.
The only problem we have with guns is a media problem, and of course the whole idea and promotion of "gun free zones" which actually prompt gun violence instead of deter it.
Yeah, more guns is the only that changed in the last 22 years besides liberal media...
Have you ever heard of the Donohue-Levitt hypothesis? Gun crimes is a pretty general term. You can have a decrease in gun crimes, and an increase in mass shootings.
Similar to the way you could have a decrease in car accidents, and an increase in multi-car pileups.
 Valefor.Sehachan
サーバ: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 24219
By Valefor.Sehachan 2015-10-27 15:19:24
I think I've expressed my opinion on the matter extensively already, I don't know what kind of new information you're seeking from what I think about this.
By Jassik 2015-10-27 15:20:05
Not really. If having weapons prevents violence, what's wrong with everyone having them, since you can't outlaw the weapon because some people might misuse it.
The issue is that you aren't willing to discuss the subject honestly. You know there is a problem with the current gun culture in this country, but you cannot admit that guns are a factor. Everything must be binary and because it's impossible that guns aren't awesome.
So, you accuse Nausi of being binary, while presenting an extreme as an argument in the first paragraph?
No, it's not an extreme. I just used his own argument to show perspective. You of all people, who claims to be so critical of every "fact" you hear and you are defending a guy who can't even get his own opinion straight.
I'm not defending his every word by any stretch of the imagination, but using his common belief to present a "perspective" that is extreme (don't even pretend that it isn't) and then calling him binary immediately after is just hypocritical.
Do you think I'm actually arguing for everyone having nukes? Nobody is that dense. I pointed out the inherent lunacy of his statement and then repackaged that lunacy into a more digestible format by calling it binary.
If you can't tell the difference between that and hypocrisy, you're either trying too hard or I'm wasting my time even acknowledging you.
Bahamut.Ravael
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-10-27 15:22:22
Not really. If having weapons prevents violence, what's wrong with everyone having them, since you can't outlaw the weapon because some people might misuse it.
The issue is that you aren't willing to discuss the subject honestly. You know there is a problem with the current gun culture in this country, but you cannot admit that guns are a factor. Everything must be binary and because it's impossible that guns aren't awesome.
So, you accuse Nausi of being binary, while presenting an extreme as an argument in the first paragraph?
No, it's not an extreme. I just used his own argument to show perspective. You of all people, who claims to be so critical of every "fact" you hear and you are defending a guy who can't even get his own opinion straight.
I'm not defending his every word by any stretch of the imagination, but using his common belief to present a "perspective" that is extreme (don't even pretend that it isn't) and then calling him binary immediately after is just hypocritical.
Do you think I'm actually arguing for everyone having nukes? Nobody is that dense. I pointed out the inherent lunacy of his statement and then repackaged that lunacy into a more digestible format by calling it binary.
If you can't tell the difference between that and hypocrisy, you're either trying too hard or I'm wasting my time even acknowledging you.
You repackaged his "lunacy" into an argument that was far more extreme. That's par for the course around here, though. If you can't handle the actual argument, make sure to repackage it into something even crazier.
[+]
Valefor.Sehachan
サーバ: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 24219
By Valefor.Sehachan 2015-10-27 15:22:32
More ***, less guns!
By Jassik 2015-10-27 15:22:43
Gun crimes is a pretty general term. You can have a decrease in gun crimes, and an increase in mass shootings.
Similar to the way you could have a decrease in car accidents, and an increase in multi-car pileups.
Most definitely. My point was that one factor alone means nothing. Hence the mention of donohue-levitt. In a vacuum, it's a respectable hypothesis, but it assumes that nothing else happened in that timeframe. Linking the number of guns in circulation to a reduction in violent crime is like linking moon phases to fuel economy.
Ragnarok.Nausi
サーバ: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2015-10-27 15:23:48
Not really. If having weapons prevents violence, what's wrong with everyone having them, since you can't outlaw the weapon because some people might misuse it.
The issue is that you aren't willing to discuss the subject honestly. You know there is a problem with the current gun culture in this country, but you cannot admit that guns are a factor. Everything must be binary and because it's impossible that guns aren't awesome.
So, you accuse Nausi of being binary, while presenting an extreme as an argument in the first paragraph?
No, it's not an extreme. I just used his own argument to show perspective. You of all people, who claims to be so critical of every "fact" you hear and you are defending a guy who can't even get his own opinion straight.
I'm not defending his every word by any stretch of the imagination, but using his common belief to present a "perspective" that is extreme (don't even pretend that it isn't) and then calling him binary immediately after is just hypocritical.
Do you think I'm actually arguing for everyone having nukes? Nobody is that dense. I pointed out the inherent lunacy of his statement and then repackaged that lunacy into a more digestible format by calling it binary.
If you can't tell the difference between that and hypocrisy, you're either trying too hard or I'm wasting my time even acknowledging you.
No, you didn't. You simply piled onto the strawman in an attempt to change the topic from "nausi thinks guns serve a purpose that isn't to kill things" to "therefore nausi thinks Iran should have nukes".
Ragnarok.Nausi
サーバ: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2015-10-27 15:25:53
We could argue about the point of self defense all day, we will disagree nonetheless but it's at least a meaningful discussion. Denying a gun is an object intended for violence is demented though.
There is no reasoning with you sometimes.
So you would be fine with Iran getting nukes, they just want to defend themselves against countries with nukes!
Winnar!
Not really. If having weapons prevents violence, what's wrong with everyone having them, since you can't outlaw the weapon because some people might misuse it.
The issue is that you aren't willing to discuss the subject honestly. You know there is a problem with the current gun culture in this country, but you cannot admit that guns are a factor. Everything must be binary and because it's impossible that guns aren't awesome.
Guns ARE awesome in the past 22 years we've had the most guns out there in the country and the murder rate by them has fallen 30% since the 90s.
Quote: Despite these trends, most U.S. adults think gun crimes have increased. In our 2013 survey, more than half (56%) of Americans said the number of gun crimes had gone up compared with 20 years ago. Another 26% said the number of gun crimes had remained the same, and just 12% said gun crimes had declined.
The only problem we have with guns is a media problem, and of course the whole idea and promotion of "gun free zones" which actually prompt gun violence instead of deter it.
Yeah, more guns is the only that changed in the last 22 years besides liberal media...
Have you ever heard of the Donohue-Levitt hypothesis? Gun crimes is a pretty general term. You can have a decrease in gun crimes, and an increase in mass shootings.
Similar to the way you could have a decrease in car accidents, and an increase in multi-car pileups. Now we're getting somewhere.
If gun crimes have gone down and mass shootings have gone up, lets take a closer look at mass shootings to further investigate. I wonder if they as a group share anything specific in common...
By Jetackuu 2015-10-27 15:26:01
By Jassik 2015-10-27 15:26:38
You repackaged his "lunacy" into an argument that was far more extreme. That's par for the course around here, though. If you can't handle the actual argument, make sure to repackage it into something even crazier.
The actual argument was addressed directly in my previous post. We can't have an actual conversation about guns in this country because nobody on the "guns are awesome" side will admit that they are just a thing that exists. You constantly defend every moronic raving of anyone who spouts out GOP taglines without any critical analysis. It's exactly the thing you claim you don't do and scold others for doing. It's like exponential hypocrisy.
By Jetackuu 2015-10-27 15:27:48
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »
One could ask which is more dangerous I suppose.
As usual, depends on where it's aimed.
Bahamut.Milamber
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2015-10-27 15:29:03
Not really. If having weapons prevents violence, what's wrong with everyone having them, since you can't outlaw the weapon because some people might misuse it.
The issue is that you aren't willing to discuss the subject honestly. You know there is a problem with the current gun culture in this country, but you cannot admit that guns are a factor. Everything must be binary and because it's impossible that guns aren't awesome.
So, you accuse Nausi of being binary, while presenting an extreme as an argument in the first paragraph?
No, it's not an extreme. I just used his own argument to show perspective. You of all people, who claims to be so critical of every "fact" you hear and you are defending a guy who can't even get his own opinion straight.
I'm not defending his every word by any stretch of the imagination, but using his common belief to present a "perspective" that is extreme (don't even pretend that it isn't) and then calling him binary immediately after is just hypocritical.
Do you think I'm actually arguing for everyone having nukes? Nobody is that dense. I pointed out the inherent lunacy of his statement and then repackaged that lunacy into a more digestible format by calling it binary.
If you can't tell the difference between that and hypocrisy, you're either trying too hard or I'm wasting my time even acknowledging you.
No, you didn't. You simply piled onto the strawman in an attempt to change the topic from "nausi thinks guns serve a purpose that isn't to kill things" to "therefore nausi thinks Iran should have nukes". The rationale that you use for having a gun is the same rationale used by countries which wish to acquire nukes.
It is hypocritical to say that the rationale is valid in one circumstance and not the other.
Why is it lunacy for everyone to have nukes, and not lunacy for everyone to carry a guns? Where is that line drawn? Why?
[+]
By Jassik 2015-10-27 15:29:26
No, you didn't. You simply piled onto the strawman in an attempt to change the topic from "nausi thinks guns serve a purpose that isn't to kill things" to "therefore nausi thinks Iran should have nukes".
Another gem. I gave you an example of why your argument is paper thin and you call it a strawman. I'm out of here, this is so far from productive use of my time, I could be re-alphabetizing my DVD's.
Bahamut.Ravael
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-10-27 15:30:37
You repackaged his "lunacy" into an argument that was far more extreme. That's par for the course around here, though. If you can't handle the actual argument, make sure to repackage it into something even crazier.
The actual argument was addressed directly in my previous post. We can't have an actual conversation about guns in this country because nobody on the "guns are awesome" side will admit that they are just a thing that exists. You constantly defend every moronic raving of anyone who spouts out GOP taglines without any critical analysis. It's exactly the thing you claim you don't do and scold others for doing. It's like exponential hypocrisy.
Lol, keep up the personal attacks. Maybe when they're even remotely true I'll start to feel bad. In the meantime, we have people on the "BAN ALL GUNS!!!1!" side who seem to get a pass from you when such a thing isn't even remotely feasible. You want an actual conversation? Present an actual argument for a law that would actually address the problem instead of focusing on how crazy you think everyone else is.
Bahamut.Milamber
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2015-10-27 15:30:38
We could argue about the point of self defense all day, we will disagree nonetheless but it's at least a meaningful discussion. Denying a gun is an object intended for violence is demented though.
There is no reasoning with you sometimes.
So you would be fine with Iran getting nukes, they just want to defend themselves against countries with nukes!
Winnar!
Not really. If having weapons prevents violence, what's wrong with everyone having them, since you can't outlaw the weapon because some people might misuse it.
The issue is that you aren't willing to discuss the subject honestly. You know there is a problem with the current gun culture in this country, but you cannot admit that guns are a factor. Everything must be binary and because it's impossible that guns aren't awesome.
Guns ARE awesome in the past 22 years we've had the most guns out there in the country and the murder rate by them has fallen 30% since the 90s.
Quote: Despite these trends, most U.S. adults think gun crimes have increased. In our 2013 survey, more than half (56%) of Americans said the number of gun crimes had gone up compared with 20 years ago. Another 26% said the number of gun crimes had remained the same, and just 12% said gun crimes had declined.
The only problem we have with guns is a media problem, and of course the whole idea and promotion of "gun free zones" which actually prompt gun violence instead of deter it.
Yeah, more guns is the only that changed in the last 22 years besides liberal media...
Have you ever heard of the Donohue-Levitt hypothesis? Gun crimes is a pretty general term. You can have a decrease in gun crimes, and an increase in mass shootings.
Similar to the way you could have a decrease in car accidents, and an increase in multi-car pileups. Now we're getting somewhere.
If gun crimes have gone down and mass shootings have gone up, lets take a closer look at mass shootings to further investigate. I wonder if they as a group share anything specific in common... Besides access to a gun, of course.
[+]
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-10-27 15:32:22
Why is it lunacy for everyone to have nukes, and not lunacy for everyone to carry a guns? Where is that line drawn? Why?
It is lunacy for everyone to own a gun. Show me one place where Nausi actually said that he believes literally everyone should be allowed to carry a gun.
By Jassik 2015-10-27 15:32:40
You repackaged his "lunacy" into an argument that was far more extreme. That's par for the course around here, though. If you can't handle the actual argument, make sure to repackage it into something even crazier.
The actual argument was addressed directly in my previous post. We can't have an actual conversation about guns in this country because nobody on the "guns are awesome" side will admit that they are just a thing that exists. You constantly defend every moronic raving of anyone who spouts out GOP taglines without any critical analysis. It's exactly the thing you claim you don't do and scold others for doing. It's like exponential hypocrisy.
Lol, keep up the personal attacks. Maybe when they're even remotely true I'll start to feel bad. In the meantime, we have people on the "BAN ALL GUNS!!!1!" side who seem to get a pass from you when such a thing isn't even remotely feasible. You want an actual conversation? Present an actual argument for a law that would actually address the problem instead of focusing on how crazy you think everyone else is.
Do you also not understand what personal attacks are? Calling out someone for doing exactly what they chastise others for isn't. Also, you started it by that metric. I'm done, k bye.
Random Politics & Religion is for topics that aren't thread worthy on their own and do not have their own existing thread.
Rules and Guidelines
Forum Rules and P&R Section Guidelines still apply.
Satire is tolerated.
If your topic covers a story over 6 months old (Watergate, Benghazi, 2012 Election, etc.) post it here.
Discussions on racism, homophobia, transphobia, and the like are allowed, targeted insults based on these will not be tolerated.
Political debates get heated and are meant to be intense, if you take offense to being called or proven wrong, you don't belong here.
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen; if you prove you can't handle the criticism you bring upon yourself in this thread, you may be removed from it. You are responsible for what you post.
Along those lines, heat is fine, but sustained, clearly personal hostility is not okay. The personal attack rules still apply. Attack positions, not posters. Failure to adhere to this will result in your removal from the thread.
This thread is NOT the Flame Core.
These rules are subject to change and modification where and when needed.
Random Politics & Religion may be mained or demained depending on the activity within at a Moderator's discretion.
With that out of the way, let the debates begin!
/bow
|
|
