Gun (Lack of) Control


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby Marlow » Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:02 am

Pego wrote:If somebody sticks a gun between your ribs, your own gun in the pocket will be worth squat.

So, I've been over 21 for 41 years now, including 20 in the US Navy, all over the world many times, and I've had how many occasions to pull a gun? . . . zero. If, however, I had been packing all that time, I bet I could have made myself think I WAS in many situations that could use one. Luckily, I've never owned one. Now, I'm betting any amount that I have MORE self-restraint than the average male adult, so y'all can do the math on why guns are so dangerous. Like alcohol, guns immediately bestow a false bravado on little (psychologically speaking) men that that absolutely can not be trusted with it.
Last edited by Marlow on Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:02 am

Marlow wrote:
preston wrote:Gun use has not come close in cost to life as Alcohol or drugs. That's right, you want to ban both of those, too.

Are logical fallacies becoming pandemic to the pro-gun lobby?
Does my consistency bother you?
As for cars (another logical fallacy argument), we regulate those quite nicely, I think. Seat-belts, anyone?

Actually, preston made a good point. If folks like you feel that further limits need to be put on our Seccind Amendemnt rights because too many people are dying, why wouldn't you advocate more restrictions on our driving privileges since the automobile causes a lot more deaths than guns?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby Marlow » Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:04 am

jazzcyclist wrote:Actually, preston made a good point. If folks like you feel that further limits need to be put on our Seccind Amendemnt rights because too many people are dying, why wouldn't you advocate more restrictions on our driving privileges since the automobile causes a lot more deaths than guns?

What part of 'logical fallacies' are you not getting? There is zero connection between the two. You might as well have said we need to ban water because people drown in it.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:47 am

Pego wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:This reminds me of Plaxico Burress, who was robbed at gunpoint twice outside his home before he made the decison he was going to start packing


If somebody sticks a gun between your ribs, your own gun in the pocket will be worth squat.

That's only if you get caught off guard. My best friend's mother was leaving a mall late one night a few days before Christmas, and heading to her car when a guy strolling through the parking lot started heading towards her. When she saw him, she immediately reversed course and headed back to the entrance of the mall and waited for the man to pass where her car was parked and was a good distance from her car. When she felt he was a safe distance away, she headed to her car, but as she approached her car, the man turned around and started heading towards her, yelling that he needed some directions. At that point, she yelled back that he could ask his question from where he was standing and he didn't need to come any closer, but the man continued walking towards her. As he got closer to her, she did what any sensible woman would do, she pulled her .38 special out of her purse and warned him that if he got any closer she would blow his brains out. At that point, the man turned and started walking away, with my friend's mother keeping a watchful eye on him with her gun still drawn. Once she felt he was a safe distance from her, she immediately rushed to her car, jumped in while throwing all of her packages on the front passenger's seat. As she was backing out of her parking spot, the man ran back towards her car and tried to open the passenger's door as she was driving away, but fortunately, she had locked the doors as soon as she got in.

The lesson here is to keep your eyes and ears open and always be aware of your surroundings whenever you're in a situation where you think that a gun might be necessary.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:52 am

Marlow wrote:What part of 'logical fallacies' are you not getting? There is zero connection between the two. You might as well have said we need to ban water because people drown in it.

All you're doing is throwing up strawmen. I'm not talking about banning cars, just puttiing further restrictions on their usage. Similarly, I'm not talking about banning free speech just putting further restrictions on the First Amendment. Surely, you aren't too obtuse to understand this simple straightforward analogy.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby Marlow » Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:54 am

jazzcyclist wrote:she pulled her .38 special out of her purse and warned him that if he got any closer she would blow his brains out.

Cuz that's the ONLY alternate she had. Oh, except for going back in the mall and calling security. THIS is exactly why we should NOT have guns: People would want to take matters into their own hands. If I am robbed at gunpoint, I give the guy everything. Making him be dead is the LAST thing on my mind (nor would I want it on my conscience). As soon as you can rationalize it as - he started it; he just got what he deserved - we're in the realm of 8-year-old playground mentality.

jazzcyclist wrote:All you're doing is throwing up strawmen. I'm not talking about banning cars, just puttiing further restrictions on their usage. Similarly, I'm not talking about banning free speech just putting further restrictions on the First Amendment. Surely, you aren't too obtuse to understand this simple straightforward analogy.

No dear, that's what you've already done. I'm just pointing it out.
My obtuseness aside, my profession (both as teacher and AP Exam grader) demands that I recognize logical fallacies when I see them.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby TN1965 » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:04 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:Are you unfamiliar with "District of Columbia v. Heller" and "McDonald v. Chicago" in which the Supreme Court ruled that the right to bear arms is constituionally protected?


The Supreme Court also ruled that the federal government had no power to regulate slavery in "Dred Scott v. Smith" and that "separate could be equal" in "Plessy v. Ferguson." Just because they ruled in one way, that is not the final decision that can never be overturned by later decisions.
TN1965
 
Posts: 1184
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:38 pm

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby TN1965 » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:10 pm

jazzcyclist wrote: If folks like you feel that further limits need to be put on our Seccind Amendemnt rights because too many people are dying, why wouldn't you advocate more restrictions on our driving privileges since the automobile causes a lot more deaths than guns?


I personally think that the current limit for BAC is way too lenient. I also think that the driver's license should not be issued to anyone under 18. There are many other restrictions on our driving privileges that I would support in a heartbeat.
TN1965
 
Posts: 1184
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:38 pm

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby odelltrclan » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:31 pm

Marlow wrote:
Pego wrote:If somebody sticks a gun between your ribs, your own gun in the pocket will be worth squat.

So, I've been over 21 for 41 years now, including 20 in the US Navy, all over the world many times, and I've had how many occasions to pull a gun? . . . zero. If, however, I had been packing all that time, I bet I could have made myself think I WAS in many situations that could use one. Luckily, I've never owned one. Now, I'm betting any amount that I have MORE self-restraint than the average male adult, so y'all can do the math on why guns are so dangerous. Like alcohol, guns immediately bestow a false bravado on little (psychologically speaking) men that that absolutely can not be trusted with it.


I don't own a gun though I am not opposed to it. However, I once had someone get ticked off about something on the freeway and chase me for something like 20 miles threatening me, nearly trying to run me off the road. Fortunately I found a copy at the side of the road and pulled up behind him and the guy fled. I know of two people in similar situations who had guns and it saved their lives.

Feel lucky if you never have to use one, which most of us won't. You are more likely to get struck by lightning than to die from something like this. But, some people sleep easier having a gun and power to them.
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:42 pm

TN1965 wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:Are you unfamiliar with "District of Columbia v. Heller" and "McDonald v. Chicago" in which the Supreme Court ruled that the right to bear arms is constituionally protected?


The Supreme Court also ruled that the federal government had no power to regulate slavery in "Dred Scott v. Smith" and that "separate could be equal" in "Plessy v. Ferguson." Just because they ruled in one way, that is not the final decision that can never be overturned by later decisions.

You're right that Brown vs B.O.E. overturned Plessy vs Ferguson, but Dred Scott was decided before the passage of the 13th Amendment, which means that there was nothing unconstutitional about slavery at the time.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby preston » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:45 pm

Marlow wrote:...we're in the realm of 8-year-old playground mentality.

Yet, your sanctimony can't stop you from responding to every post and taking everyone else's posts as a personal crusade against you. If you're not 8, you're easily the most immature or paranoid.

Marlow wrote:My obtuseness aside, my profession (both as teacher and AP Exam grader) demands that I recognize logical fallacies when I see them.

...and that's the other problem. You're not Socrates, you're not "educating" us; we're not your children or your students. I feel for the captive audience that you've found in the children you coach/teach; because you're consistent in your incompleteness of thought, I can only think they would fare better with a more learned coach/teacher.
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:46 pm

Marlow wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:she pulled her .38 special out of her purse and warned him that if he got any closer she would blow his brains out.

Cuz that's the ONLY alternate she had. Oh, except for going back in the mall and calling security.

She went back to the mall the first time he approached her, but that wasn't an option the second time because the would-be perp was between her and the mall entrance.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby jeremyp » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:52 pm

Then there's this from The Atlantic about how they got around the last ban on assault weapons.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics ... les/60197/
jeremyp
 
Posts: 4542
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Florida

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby Marlow » Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:16 pm

preston wrote:your sanctimony can't stop you from responding to every post and taking everyone else's posts as a personal crusade against you. If you're not 8, you're easily the most immature or paranoid. ...and that's the other problem. You're not Socrates, you're not "educating" us; we're not your children or your students. I feel for the captive audience that you've found in the children you coach/teach; because you're consistent in your incompleteness of thought, I can only think they would fare better with a more learned coach/teacher.

Well, didn't take ALL that long for you to take this down in the mud of personal attack. Sorry you feel that overwhelmed with logic, but YET again, we (yes, me too) have overstayed our gh welcome in this charming tête-à-tête (and we were doing so well on the SFH thread!), so peace out for awhile. :D
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby preston » Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:24 pm

Marlow wrote:
preston wrote:your sanctimony can't stop you from responding to every post and taking everyone else's posts as a personal crusade against you. If you're not 8, you're easily the most immature or paranoid. ...and that's the other problem. You're not Socrates, you're not "educating" us; we're not your children or your students. I feel for the captive audience that you've found in the children you coach/teach; because you're consistent in your incompleteness of thought, I can only think they would fare better with a more learned coach/teacher.

Well, didn't take ALL that long for you to take this down in the mud of personal attack. Sorry you feel that overwhelmed with logic, but YET again, we (yes, me too) have overstayed our gh welcome in this charming tête-à-tête (and we were doing so well on the SFH thread!), so peace out for awhile. :D

Why do you think any view that doesn't jibe with your own as a the starting gun to a tête-à-tête? Why do you constantly attack others and then howl in horror if responded to in kind? For someone who constantly rails on others about his heightened sense of morality (drinking, drugs, sex, etc), I'm always struck by how quickly you descend (usually first, unfortunately) into the mud. You should leave that to us unrepentant "sinners". Because, if you're an advertisement for rectitude ...
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby gh » Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:35 pm

and preston's early xmas present is.... a week's vacation from the board.... please rethink the choler of the personal attacks in your recent posts here.

Ad hominem just ain't gonna cut it.
gh
 
Posts: 46327
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Gun (Lack of) Control

Postby Pego » Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:42 pm

gh wrote:and preston's early xmas present is.... a week's vacation from the board.... please rethink the choler of the personal attacks in your recent posts here.

Ad hominem just ain't gonna cut it.


Can't you just lock this thread? Everything possible on the subject has been said, most of it civilized, some came very close to ad hominem (or beyond). The only thing that can happen anymore is to induce people to say bannable things. This was a good thread, but hasta la vista.
Pego
 
Posts: 10199
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests