64
   

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

 
 
Val Killmore
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2012 10:46 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:

Drewdad's analogy may have been absurdism but it was hardly a strawman since he dealt directly with LaPierre's argument. You on the other hand argued against an argument that DrewDad didn't make. That makes yours a strawman.

It seems you don't play well.


A straw man is when you take someone's argument and misrepresent it then attack it.
Drewdad's argument is a straw man. Drewdad was using his analogy to misrepresent LaPierre's statement by taking it to absurdity.

And what matters if my argument is relevant or not when the argument made by the opponent is a straw man?
A straw man with a straw man makes a straw baby. You won't get it, it's a hayzing ritual.
Val Killmore
 
  0  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2012 10:50 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Haven't you noticed? Val has a very good imagination, and most of his responses are based on nothing more than what he sees. That's the reason why his arguments are strawman; nobody else even thought of what he comes out with. My imagination isn't that well developed. Mr. Green Drunk Drunk Drunk


Sober up, with such consumption you'll kill your brain before you kill your liver.
Try again when you're sober and you may have better luck coming up with a good comeback.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2012 11:29 pm
@Val Killmore,
I am still laughing as tonight or yesterday now I went to the last showing of the Red Dawn remake and as I was talking to the ticket taker he was having all the young ladies oven their pocketbooks for him to look into.

When I ask him why he told me that recently they had a problem with an armed man in the theater and now they was doing checks.

First I ask him if the guy they had the problem with had a CC license and he said no and then I ask him if he wish me to surrender my firearm however I think he thought I was kidding him so I went in and enjoy the movie.

After the movie I again talk to the ticket agent and stated that given there was a million legally arm citizens in Florida if they do not wish people to bring in firearms they should had a sign by the door to that affect.

I love human nature as a old middle class man is not seen as a threat of any kind but young women are and even when you tell someone you are arm it does not matter.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2012 11:46 pm
@Val Killmore,
First, let me say that I find it absurd to be arguing this issue with someone who uses a screen name of "kill more."

Second, I find LaPierre's position, and the NRA position, and the gun-nut position that "more guns will make us safer" to be an absurd proposition, which is what I pointed out.

I did not suggest banning guns, however, which makes your response a strawman.



(Do you have a persecution complex, and that's why having a gun makes you feel safe?)
cicerone imposter
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2012 11:57 pm
@Val Killmore,
See? More imagination from killmore.

Code:Sober up, with such consumption you'll kill your brain before you kill your liver. Try again when you're sober and you may have better luck coming up with a good comeback.


You shouldn't worry about my liver; you should, however, worry about your brain that is already calcified, and I'm not sure there's any cure for it.







Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 12:22 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Swiss people are able to own their own private weapons in addition to any weapons that the government issues to them, and a great many of them do so.
Yes. But those privately owned are actually less than those in other European countries ...
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 12:26 am
@Val Killmore,
Val Killmore wrote:

The problem in America which makes it different from Switzerland on the the subject of guns is the large illegal drug industry in America. Another big difference is its unique defense system consisting of all able males conscripted into a national militia of sorts with recruits continuing training intermittently through the years.
America can learn a lot from Switzerland. I'm ok with a program setup so that only responsible individuals are allowed to own fire arms, such as a license regime to own a gun, not just for concealed carry (so long as it doesn’t infringe on the right to keep and bear arms). I'm also ok with a program which requires individuals to take and pass a test, and mandatory training, intermittently throughout the years to keep the license for concealed carry or open carry.
So you would agree that the USA gets the same gun and weapon restricting laws as they've got in Switzerland?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 02:17 am
@McTag,
McTag wrote:


The only surprise is, some people are surprised.

This is going to go on happening, again and again, in different ways, in different places.

Isn't it?
No; it is -- the same as traffic accidents.
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 02:25 am
@Lustig Andrei,
Lustig Andrei wrote:
In Connecticut yet, where they have fairly strict gun laws.

In Connecticut, the murderers always obay the laws.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 02:36 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Until everyone is running around with a gun, in body armor?
It is too cumbersome; running probably is un-necessary.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 02:44 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Given that he was crazy; it is MIND-BOGGLING
that he 'd bear malice toward such innocent young children.
I can't help but wonder by WHAT depraved reasoning
he deemed himself better off if he harmed THEM.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 04:13 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDavid says:
Quote:
No; it is -- the same as traffic accidents


Of course people have spent a century making cars safer, inventing countless things to make sure people survive accidents better and putting them on cars, establishing rules of the road so people know what to expect from other people, setting up penalties, which can be really punitive if you screw up to insure compliance, educating drivers more and more thoroughly, and banning you from the benefits if you screw up badly enough, not to mention requiring insurance to compensate others for damage you may cause them.

On the other hand, people have spent six centuries making guns more lethal.
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 04:26 am
@McTag,

Quote:
Maybe I could sum this up as follows: the USA could

1. Maintain the status quo,
2. Increase gun supply, or
3. Reduce gun supply

These options are

1. Intolerable, as evidenced this week and on many recent painful occasions.
2. Plainly crazy, ask any competent person.

and that leaves option 3.


That's a fair point to make, McTag. Any country that's awash with small arms and ammunition, and having more than its fair share of crazies, is an accident, many accidents, waiting to happen.
Setanta
 
  5  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 04:39 am
@McTag,
Upon what basis do you assert that the United States has "more than its fair share of crazies?" We don't have a lot of people who blow themselves up in order to take out a few others. I don't recall that we've had a subway bombing incident recently. In fact, when to comes to bombings, at least until about a decade or two ago, you folks bore the bell away.

I agree with your attitude towards guns, but it gets tedious to be labelled a nation of crazies by the self-righteous of the world who, in fact, have a damned good share of crazies themsevles.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 06:14 am
@McTag,
It might be important to realise Mac that the supporters of the NRA and its versions of freedom, civil rights and Constitutional rectitude will make this issue their No 1 priority in deciding where to cast their votes. They have said so often enough.

On the other hand opponents of the NRA are unorganised and will cast their votes on the basis of their economic self interest. Their concern for the safety of kids being merely a fleeting emotional response the energy of which will dissipate just as soon as the bodies are buried and the incident drops out of the news. It may even be that the incident provides opportunities to be "holier than thou" and to demonstrate knowledge of tin-pot psychiatry, or, to be more cynical still, to sell more guns. If the gun shops are being cleaned out then it is likely that manufacturers are on overtime and that discounts are not being offered at the sales point. Economies of scale coupled with no discounts will create a substantial increase in profits which feed into pension funds and other investments. " We all have a share", Minderbinder said.

Politicians, being politicians, will take note of such considerations and, as Oralloy keeps reminding us, will not commit political suicide by supporting any significant restrictions on guns.

The end result will be that all the hand-wringing and emotional hot air being expended by the anti-gun rabble, and it is a rabble as this thread proves to anybody who can read it sensibly, causes a large increase in gun sales and is self-defeating.

It might be said that the US is a union of 50 separate states which cannot do what a British cabinet can do. If 50 separate states is too extreme a view a few separate blocs is not.

Mr Obama has authorised a lot more drone strikes than Mr Bush ever did and we take the assertion that they killed "terrorists" as read because we have no way of knowing any different. I dare say Mr Obama's drones have killed and maimed a lot more kids than the number in Newtown. And, if the lives of kids in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen etc have not the same value as the kids of Newtown then I think we have racism.

If I lived in the US I would have a gun. If there were a similar number of guns here, (60 million), one, at least, would be mine.

The two situations are not comparable. The Australian solution is not available in the US.

H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 06:59 am
@spendius,
https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/75554_404314219649254_828259871_n.jpg
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 07:07 am
@spendius,
Dont worry spendi, noone will confuse your peevishness with insight. Trying to remain dispassionately"Clever" doesnt fit well here spendi.Perhaps you ought to think about how youd feel if your own little kids would be murdered (if youve had any kids)

I see that the Pa Bureau of Education is having a special "pre New Year" get together to discuss, organize and create some ideas that adress one of the areas I had brought up in this thread, that being the "retrofitting of schools" with security entrances and perimeter surveillance. Thats a start.

Maybe someone in Harrisburg was reading this stuff.

BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 08:06 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
see that the Pa Bureau of Education is having a special "pre New Year" get together to discuss, organize and create some ideas that adress one of the areas I had brought up in this thread, that being the "retrofitting of schools" with security entrances and perimeter surveillance. Thats a start.


You do know that Newtown have security entrances now do you not?
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 08:37 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
So you would agree that the USA gets the same gun and weapon restricting laws as they've got in Switzerland?


I'd posted this on another thread some time ago ...
Walter Hinteler wrote:

This is from an official brochure (here copied from the issue, published by the canton [state] Basel-Landschaft [Basel-Country]). Though it's in German, you easily can guess what kind of weapons are forbidden to be owned in Switzerland:
http://i45.tinypic.com/2rxwf47.jpg

You can get any of those weapons ["besides purchase as well: barter, donation, inheritance or loan"] only with a state or federal approval ... and have to give reasons why you want them, e.g. because it's used as a sports weapon or because you need it for your profession (knives).
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2012 08:43 am
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
Of course people have spent a century making cars safer, inventing countless things to make sure people survive accidents better and putting them on cars, establishing rules of the road so people know what to expect from other people, setting up penalties, which can be really punitive if you screw up to insure compliance, educating drivers more and more thoroughly, and banning you from the benefits if you screw up badly enough, not to mention requiring insurance to compensate others for damage you may cause them.



And yet these 'safe' & 'modern' vehicles kill men, women & children each and every day.

As for guns, safety devices such as body armor make sure people survive accidents better, but few civilians have body armor.

Maybe the private sector needs to focus on civilian friendly and affordable body armor for the masses.

 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 06/01/2024 at 08:03:42