0
   

Is It Better to be HELPLESS ?

 
 
Reply Sun 30 Mar, 2008 11:40 am
Assume that u were in Columbine
or in Virginia Tech when the murderer arrives and opens up
on your class:

wud u wish to have a defensive revolver

or

wud u prefer to be unarmed ?




David
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 806 • Replies: 11
No top replies

 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Mar, 2008 12:08 pm
Are you talking about guns, David?
No, not you - it can't be, can it?
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Mar, 2008 09:07 pm
Some people say they carry guns for the same reason they carry condoms in their pockets.

They'd rather have one and not need it than need it and not have it.

I'd be lying if I said that I wouldn't like to be able to defend myself in the event you describe.

However I am wondering if a gun would be the best defense in this situation.
At best, it is a last resort.
At the point where the kid gets a gun and starts waving it around, there are no winners or losers to that fight. There is just tragedy, and even if I were to have a weapon and kill instead of being killed, it would still be just tragedy.

My point is that a good defense removes the need to use force. The defense against this incident you refer to didn't fail the day the victims didn't have guns to shoot back. It failed the day the idea of bringing a gun to school entered the mind of the one who did it. It continued to fail as those around him didn't pick up on his growing internal conflict and unease. Communication and respect for everyone are far better defenses against violence than any tool of destruction will ever be.

In this context, to use such an example to promote the freedom to carry guns is to accept failure.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Mar, 2008 09:49 pm
Cyracuz wrote:

My point is that a good defense removes the need to use force. The defense against this incident you refer to didn't fail the day the victims didn't have guns to shoot back. It failed the day the idea of bringing a gun to school entered the mind of the one who did it. It continued to fail as those around him didn't pick up on his growing internal conflict and unease. Communication and respect for everyone are far better defenses against violence than any tool of destruction will ever be.

In this context, to use such an example to promote the freedom to carry guns is to accept failure.


well put.
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Mar, 2008 11:18 pm
If I'm reading right, you're saying even if he's stopped, killed by a defensive firearm before he does any harm to others it's a tragedy. I guess, but do you think keeping the guy from getting a gun would make him a model citizen? We'd have the pleasure of his company but he'd be eating up resources and polluting (not my primary concern, just an example that human life is not a moral absolute relative to say nature, freedom, and dignity) probably not contributing, and if he did it wouldn't be his thing, so why enslave him? See I'm thinking the intrinsic 'no-win' situation that we must strive to eliminate is a pleasant fiction. Nobody that turns the key in an ignition has that luxury, nobody that gets bored and does 95 to work wants it, and if we could have it as such we'd merely be the most hideous of animals. It's good policy, like don't start no **** there won't be no ****, but you can live it without legislating it.

Stop the tragedy by creating a loving society without guns or lunatics, but that's exactly what we'd be doing if the CCCP had won and the show Barney still got made... Try to pull it off by legislating morality or disarming the populace and it's fascism pure and simple.

To save the inevitable victims even if he's stopped by a defensive-carrier of course, would be, hehe, a good reason to collect 'em up and melt 'em down - but if you want people to be harmless restraints and dope are in order. If we're going to draw the line somewhere, (and I'm against drawing lines, but we're being rhetorical, and this is a magic line that coincides with reality somehow) let's put it where the paraplegics have a chance and nobody gets told to hand anything in that makes 'em feel safe.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 31 Mar, 2008 01:49 am
Cyracuz wrote:
Some people say they carry guns for the same reason they carry condoms in their pockets.

They'd rather have one and not need it than need it and not have it.

I'd be lying if I said that I wouldn't like to be able to defend myself in the event you describe.

Yeah;
makes sense to me.





Quote:
However I am wondering if a gun would be the best defense in this situation.
At best, it is a last resort.

U mean like a spare tire in the trunk
is a LAST resort if u get a flat ?
I agree to that.
I never put on spare tires unless I get a flat FIRST.





Quote:

At the point where the kid gets a gun and starts waving it around,
there are no winners or losers to that fight.

I beg to differ.
He who survives intact is a winner.
He who does not is a loser; he or she lost his life.
That is an important criterion.
I urge u not to ignor it.




Quote:
There is just tragedy,
and even if I were to have a weapon and kill instead of being killed,
it would still be just tragedy.

Well, the tragedy can be reduced and mitigated,
if the good guys kill the bad guy fast enuf.
If u disagree,
I hope that u 'll tell me Y ??






Quote:

My point is that a good defense removes the need to use force.
The defense against this incident you refer to didn't fail the day the
victims didn't have guns to shoot back. It failed the day the idea of
bringing a gun to school entered the mind of the one who did it.

Many years n decades ago,
when I was 8, I began taking a .38 revolver with me
everywhere I went. No harm ever came of it,
in school, nor elsewhere.
Does that have an influence on your thesis ?








Quote:
It continued to fail as those around him didn't pick up
on his growing internal conflict and unease.

Meaning no disrespect,
does that require ESP ?

If I may ask,
what 'd U do
if u believed that your neighbor felt uneasy ?





Quote:
Communication and respect for everyone are far better defenses
against violence than any tool of destruction will ever be.

Will u agree that it wud take quite a lot of respect
to quiet Cho down, after he opened up on the class ?






Quote:
In this context, to use such an example to promote the freedom to carry guns is to accept failure.

Failure at WHAT ?
At what goal ?




David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 31 Mar, 2008 01:50 am
CalamityJane wrote:
Are you talking about guns, David?
No, not you - it can't be, can it?

I cannot tell a lie.
I confess; u cawt me.

I did it.




David
0 Replies
 
SerialCoder
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 09:14 pm
I'd have to go with indifference. I guess that goes with the unarmed and defenseless lamb answer. I have to agree with the post about the failure of society to address the neurosis of the psychos that are intent on harm. It would indeed be cool if we could all care about each other and help to resolve our individual problems with big collective hugs. Until we get there, I will just wait for someone to go nuts and blow my brains out.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 09:44 pm
SerialCoder wrote:
I'd have to go with indifference. I guess that goes with the unarmed and defenseless lamb answer. I have to agree with the post about the failure of society to address the neurosis of the psychos that are intent on harm. It would indeed be cool if we could all care about each other and help to resolve our individual problems with big collective hugs. Until we get there, I will just wait for someone to go nuts and blow my brains out.

I find that interesting.

In many societies, it is deemed that the most severe penalty is death.
Many folks say that death is TOO severe to be inflicted.

Is it accurate that if u were falsely convicted of a capital offense
and sentenced to death,
that this wud only be a negligible and insignificant triviality to u ?
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 09:55 pm
Given that the chance of one of my daughters getting ahold of said firearm is much greater than the chance of ever being in such a situation, I'd have to go with I'd rather not have a firearm.

Of course, I don't consider myself to be helpless without a gun, either.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 10:06 pm
DrewDad wrote:
Given that the chance of one of my daughters
getting ahold of said firearm is much greater than the chance of ever
being in such a situation, I'd have to go with I'd rather not have a firearm.

Of course, I don't consider myself to be helpless without a gun, either.

Have u considered teaching them to be safe and proficient
with firearms ?

Annie Oakley said that when she was 9,
her mother put an old rifle into her hands
and told her not to return without lunch.

( referring to HUNTING game, not to knocking over a grocery store )
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 07:54 am
Dude, they're two and four.

A bit young for a Glock in the Christmas stocking.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is It Better to be HELPLESS ?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/23/2021 at 04:01:48