Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

The liberal press

is a misnomer. America has one of the most right wing Media outlets in the developed world.

3 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Number Two Obama Objective: Destroy the Republican Party

I'm beginning to think that is the Number one objective of the Republican Party!

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

I consider America to have a quite extreme left-wing Media.

Here's a start in examining "freedom"--

Quote:

In American political discourse, freedom is often spoken of in terms of its inherent rationality or divine origins and is conceptualized as nothing more than a set of concrete institutions coupled with individual rights. By way of Tocqueville's Democracy in America, I will attempt to broaden our political vocabulary by constructing a psychology of freedom. According to Tocqueville, the American consciousness is largely a product of two conflicting tendencies: Cartesian rationality and Pascalian existential angst. Out of the tensions created by the interplay of these two elements Tocqueville demonstrates that the motivations to sustain freedom, as well as the institutions and practices crucial for the maintenance of it, result from a complex psychological mixture of self-interest, vanity, and a desire for solitude.

The target shooter is alone with his gun and the target whether in reality or in fantasy. "You should be made to wear earphones"--(Ballad of a Thin Man).

The vanity of "it is" or "no it isn't" speaks for itself.

Self interest is a calculus involving fortune telling and probability. Imagining remote probability as reality is paranoia. Media generates paranoia on purpose.

A gun is an extension of the egos control field and thus sadistic. So is a knife but to nowhere near the same extent. The control field with a knife is a few inches greater than the arm. With a gun it can be hundreds of yards.

A crushed ego will react by seeking such extensions. A free person would not even think of doing so. An ideal free person couldn't even think of freedom at all. His language would not even contain the concept of freedom.

On a sliding scale the more obsessed a person is with freedom the more unfree he must be.

Hypochondria results from knowledge of our biology. The more we know about our biology the more we worry about it. The more unfree we are of its dictatorial powers. The more we know about money power the more unfree of it we feel.

Freedom is entirely a negative thing. It means freedom from something. Obsessing about it means that the something/s are pressing down on us.

Mercury's "I wanna be free" is as plaintive a cry as Theo's "I want a woman" in Amarcord.

I feel sorry for freedom lovers. I like cradle to the grave nannying I'm afraid.

1 Reply

@spendius,

I think the fact that only 4.7 million households in America can watch Al Jazeera speaks volumes.

4 Replies

@izzythepush,

A person who has ready access to as much drink as he wants would never think of thirst. A person in the desert whose water bottle emptied two days ago can think of nothing but thirst.

A person obsessed with freedom must be in a place devoid of freedom and continually expressing a yearning for it.

Imagining you are making your own way in the world as a lonesome ego is a pure madness cut off from reality.

The freedom concept is the product of ego crushing urban civilised life. Civilisation is the terminal stage in a culture's history. The urban mindset is besotted with freedom because it doesn't have any.

The city tourism sales-pitch is a "getting away from it all" temptation.

We are born free and progressively lose freedom as we grow older.

Maybe our gun nuts were strapped too tightly in their prams.

0 Replies

A few things that is sadly amusing is one the government is going after the first amendment as well as the second amendment in claiming video games is also at fault and need to be control the hell with the first amendment.

It would seems that freedoms is far to dangerous for us to have and the government will be our parents in all regards down to how large of a soda container we can order.

Second long before assault rifles and video games existed mass murder peak in the year 1929.

But then facts are unimportant at least compared to emotions.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

Owl Gore is now Oil Gore

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzyBullshit!

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

They'd be just as dead if they were murdered with knives.

And your silly statement is still just as wrong no matter how many times you repeat it.

Some simple facts about homicide that are true in the US and true worldwide.
Guns kill more people than knives.
Guns kill more people than blunt objects
In the majority of worldwide data sets Guns kill more people than all other ways combined. (Russia and China seem to be missing from the data sets we can see.)

3 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

Guns kill more people than knives.

So what once more time if someone wished to kill someone and could not get a gun they would forget about the matter instead of turning to some other means?

2 Replies

@parados,

For anyone that wants to try to argue that gun laws make no difference please explain away these stats. Almost every red state with loose gun laws has a gun death rate higher than the country's average.

Figure 4. Firearm Death Rates per 100,000 Population, by State and Intent, 2005 – 2007

Source: CDC Wonder

The original can be found here:
www.uphs.upenn.edu/ficap/resourcebook/pdf/monograph.pdf

2 Replies

@BillRM,

If you decide to kill by means other than using a firearm, more personal bravery is required. (Not using poison or arson, of course.)

Using a gun is simpler for a coward. You can keep your distance from your victim.

3 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Quote:
Guns kill more people than knives.

So what once more time if someone wished to kill someone and could not get a gun they would forget about the matter instead of turning to some other means?

So, you are arguing that people use guns because they are not as efficient or effective as other ways of killing?

Let's all agree that guns are the most effective way of killing someone.
Can you at least do that?

3 Replies

@McTag,

Quote:

If you decide to kill by means other than using a firearm, more personal bravery is required. (Not using poison or arson, of course.)

Or IEDs for that matter.

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

Let's all agree that guns are the most effective way of killing someone.
Can you at least do that?

No IEDs are more effective and safer for the murderer then guns in many situations.

Compounds for which you can buy at most drug stores, pool supply stores and hardware stores with maybe a radio shack thrown in.

Details plans can be found on the internet by way of google.

2 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Let's all agree that guns are the most effective way of killing someone.
Can you at least do that?

No, not all of us can't agree with your statement.

0 Replies

@McTag,

McTag wrote:

Using a gun is simpler for a coward. You can keep your distance from your victim.

Personal experience?

0 Replies

@parados,

If gun control works then all big cities in Blue states should have zero gun deaths.
Blue state cities have the strictest gun control laws in the country and they don't work.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Let's all agree that guns are the most effective way of killing someone.
Can you at least do that?

You're a bit too focused on method instead of motive, the latter of which is the important aspect.
Anyway, the part that you suggest that guns being the most "effective" way of killing someone is a matter of opinion. My opinion regard to "mass murders" is that there are more effective ways than guns, such as home made bombs, or the use of biological toxins or infectious agents that are highly infective, highly virulent, with a non-availability of vaccines, and availability of an effective and efficient delivery system. And also don't forget the mass murder by our own government with the use of Nuclear weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which is safe to say, highly "effective."

3 Replies

@BillRM,

yeah, sure, BillRM, that's why the Mafia, the Cosa Nostra, the Crips, the Bloods have always used IEDs to off their opponents. That's why New York's Stop and Frisk program targets IEDs as a source of mayhem.

Actually you've made our point: the reason the above criminal organizations and, for that matter, angry ex-husbands, tough guys of all sorts and wannabe gangbangers use guns to kill people here in the USA is that the country is flooded with guns. They are so much easier to get than chemicals and timers and whereas an IED can, with a lot of work, be made to target specific individuals, nothing beats a Glock with a laser pointer.

Tell you what, let's you and I pick three days. During those three days we will try to kill one another. I will use guns, you will be limited to IEDs.

How do you think that would work out?

Joe(make a will)Nation

3 Replies

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know