|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On December 16 2012 14:21 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:16 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:13 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:
[quote]
Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence.
Your logic is backwards. I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Oh. My God. Society is so fucked if more people think like you. I'm sorry but I think you're beyond reasoning with at this point. I value the criminals life more than I do a fish's life, What reason do you have for me to regard the fetus's life any more than that of a fish's? You're right. A fish has dreams and hopes too and family, friends etc.
No it doesn't, and neither does a fetus. It's not a person yet.
|
On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:18 heliusx wrote:On December 16 2012 13:05 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 12:59 SayGen wrote:
[quote]
1) Shooting is your best line of defense, and therofore my 1st line of defense.
The point of shooting someone is so you don't have to go hand to hand with them and risk personal harm.
If they charge you, you shoot. the situation is likly over unless your using a low caliber gun- then just double tap and you should be good. Also a gun is a deterent. In my own personal experience, some guy attempted to rob me with a knife, I slowly pulled out what he was expecting to be my wallet and soon as he saw the gun he ran. if I pulled out a knife, he may of attmepted to duel me--and I would of lost cuase I don't know anything about knife fighting. A gun is a low skill weapon- aka the great equalizer. No longer can a big thug bully his way through life by oppressing others.
2) Most home shootings occur after a crime has already been committed (usually B&E)
I tend not to feel sorry for criminals, incapitate them and worry about the why later. Safety of law abiding citizens should be our 1st goal. So your answer to a mugging is, hey he want's my wallet, so i'll just execute him? Know what would be better? if no one had to die. What's so wrong about putting your safety above the safety of someone trying to rob you at knife point? There are plenty of gun regulation arguments you can use that are fair enough. Saying he should risk his safety in the spirit of preventing the possibility of having to shoot the person holding him up with a knife is rather stupid. You want to argue guns are bad? That's fine but saying you should put your safety in a knife wielding drug heads hands is not smart, it's stupid. It's not an argument against guns it's just grasping at straws for any reason at all to say guns are bad. Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence. Your logic is backwards. I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later.
Sorry, but if you're mugging me--threatening my life for my money/wallet with a weapon, you fucked up and you better do a good job with what you're doing because there will be no passivity on my part.
|
On December 16 2012 14:21 SayGen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:20 Mallard86 wrote:On December 16 2012 14:06 ControlMonkey wrote:On December 16 2012 14:03 Mallard86 wrote:On December 16 2012 14:00 ControlMonkey wrote:On December 16 2012 13:54 SayGen wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:18 heliusx wrote:On December 16 2012 13:05 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 12:59 SayGen wrote:
[quote]
1) Shooting is your best line of defense, and therofore my 1st line of defense.
The point of shooting someone is so you don't have to go hand to hand with them and risk personal harm.
If they charge you, you shoot. the situation is likly over unless your using a low caliber gun- then just double tap and you should be good. Also a gun is a deterent. In my own personal experience, some guy attempted to rob me with a knife, I slowly pulled out what he was expecting to be my wallet and soon as he saw the gun he ran. if I pulled out a knife, he may of attmepted to duel me--and I would of lost cuase I don't know anything about knife fighting. A gun is a low skill weapon- aka the great equalizer. No longer can a big thug bully his way through life by oppressing others.
2) Most home shootings occur after a crime has already been committed (usually B&E)
I tend not to feel sorry for criminals, incapitate them and worry about the why later. Safety of law abiding citizens should be our 1st goal. So your answer to a mugging is, hey he want's my wallet, so i'll just execute him? Know what would be better? if no one had to die. What's so wrong about putting your safety above the safety of someone trying to rob you at knife point? There are plenty of gun regulation arguments you can use that are fair enough. Saying he should risk his safety in the spirit of preventing the possibility of having to shoot the person holding him up with a knife is rather stupid. You want to argue guns are bad? That's fine but saying you should put your safety in a knife wielding drug heads hands is not smart, it's stupid. It's not an argument against guns it's just grasping at straws for any reason at all to say guns are bad. Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence. We are just gonna have to agree to disagree on that. Criminals can not be tolerated. I tend not to use hollywood material when discussing serious issues but this one is just too good. "Criminals thrive On the indulgence of society's understanding." You know what the crime rate is in Saudi Arabia? Next to nothing, you know why? They don't put up with criminals. You don't punish/deter criminals and they will grow like weeds. Steal- lose a hand. People tend not to steal in Saudi Arabia. They also don't allow women to vote, or until recently, drive. They also don't allow you to choose your own religion, unless it's Islam. Mexico has probably the strictest gun laws in the world. There are around 6,000 legally owned private firearms in the entire country yet it has far and away the highest rates of gun violence in the world. Point is that gun control laws have little to do with controlling gun violence. That would be true if there was no correlation between gun ownership and homicide. Mexico, and Estonia aside, there is a link between homicide and gun ownership. Source You find the same thing that I posted holds true in the US. Connecticut has some of the strictest gun control laws in the US. Didnt help the school shootings. Washington DC has some of the highest gun violence rates in the country yet its strict gun control laws which even the US Supreme Court found unconstitutional has done nothing to curb the violence. Its often the case that gun control comes around when gun violence gets high but just often you find that the gun control does little to stop the violence and that it is a combination of other factors that really stops most violence. aww beat me to it.
The source I posted said the same holds true for States within the US.
|
On December 16 2012 14:24 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:20 bluemanrocks wrote:On December 16 2012 14:13 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:
[quote]
Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence.
Your logic is backwards. I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Oh. My God. Society is so fucked if more people think like you. I'm sorry but I think you're beyond reasoning with at this point. While I understand your issue with the "considering a life" bit, I also buy the cops vs. average joe counter-argument; to my knowledge, cops aren't even supposed to pull weapons unless they are expecting to fire them, and I would venture that a civilian with less training, experience, and ability would not exactly have a cop's judgment, let alone 100% judgment... also, if you don't bother to explain (essentially a "that doesn't even dignify a response"), don't bother to explain THAT you won't bother to explain -- by doing just that you're not contributing you're just saying "I'm right, you're wrong, AND I'm above you." And that doesn't prove your point, disprove the other person's or advance the discussion at all. Cops aren't any more competent at shooting the right target than citizens are. In fact, most citizens have more sense than cops do. Anyone remember the shooting in NYC (where guns are banned btw) and the cops open fired on the guy and shot 9 or 10 innocent bystanders at the same time? http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/08/just-how-many-bystanders-did-new-york-police-shoot/56187/
Problem with the 'lets cops handle it' is that cops have something called a responce time.
Criminals get the element of surprise.
|
On December 16 2012 14:25 Keldrath wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:21 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 14:16 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:13 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:
[quote]
Your logic is backwards.
I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Oh. My God. Society is so fucked if more people think like you. I'm sorry but I think you're beyond reasoning with at this point. I value the criminals life more than I do a fish's life, What reason do you have for me to regard the fetus's life any more than that of a fish's? You're right. A fish has dreams and hopes too and family, friends etc. No it doesn't, and neither does a fetus. It's not a person yet.
You mean it's not a human body yet. If you believe in spirituality, then the fetus is more than just a "hunk of cells put together". If you don't and are an athiest which I'm guessing you are, then of course it's justified because it is in fact just a hunk of cells put together.
|
On December 16 2012 14:25 TMD wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:18 heliusx wrote:On December 16 2012 13:05 Keldrath wrote:
[quote]
So your answer to a mugging is, hey he want's my wallet, so i'll just execute him?
Know what would be better? if no one had to die. What's so wrong about putting your safety above the safety of someone trying to rob you at knife point? There are plenty of gun regulation arguments you can use that are fair enough. Saying he should risk his safety in the spirit of preventing the possibility of having to shoot the person holding him up with a knife is rather stupid. You want to argue guns are bad? That's fine but saying you should put your safety in a knife wielding drug heads hands is not smart, it's stupid. It's not an argument against guns it's just grasping at straws for any reason at all to say guns are bad. Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence. Your logic is backwards. I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Sorry, but if you're mugging me--threatening my life for my money/wallet with a weapon, you fucked up and you better do a good job with what you're doing because there will be no passivity on my part.
Its easy to say that until you are actually put in that situation.
But then again this is just one of the symptoms that correlates with high gun violence. "A deep culture of honor".
|
On December 16 2012 14:25 TMD wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:18 heliusx wrote:On December 16 2012 13:05 Keldrath wrote:
[quote]
So your answer to a mugging is, hey he want's my wallet, so i'll just execute him?
Know what would be better? if no one had to die. What's so wrong about putting your safety above the safety of someone trying to rob you at knife point? There are plenty of gun regulation arguments you can use that are fair enough. Saying he should risk his safety in the spirit of preventing the possibility of having to shoot the person holding him up with a knife is rather stupid. You want to argue guns are bad? That's fine but saying you should put your safety in a knife wielding drug heads hands is not smart, it's stupid. It's not an argument against guns it's just grasping at straws for any reason at all to say guns are bad. Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence. Your logic is backwards. I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Sorry, but if you're mugging me--threatening my life for my money/wallet with a weapon, you fucked up and you better do a good job with what you're doing because there will be no passivity on my part.
Pretty much. Anyone saying you should put your safety in the hands of the robber with a weapon is only saying such a dumb thing because they can't come up with a logical counter to the argument.
|
On December 16 2012 14:28 Keldrath wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:25 TMD wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:18 heliusx wrote:
[quote]
What's so wrong about putting your safety above the safety of someone trying to rob you at knife point? There are plenty of gun regulation arguments you can use that are fair enough. Saying he should risk his safety in the spirit of preventing the possibility of having to shoot the person holding him up with a knife is rather stupid.
You want to argue guns are bad? That's fine but saying you should put your safety in a knife wielding drug heads hands is not smart, it's stupid. It's not an argument against guns it's just grasping at straws for any reason at all to say guns are bad. Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence. Your logic is backwards. I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Sorry, but if you're mugging me--threatening my life for my money/wallet with a weapon, you fucked up and you better do a good job with what you're doing because there will be no passivity on my part. Its easy to say that until you are actually put in that situation. But then again this is just one of the symptoms that correlates with high gun violence. "A deep culture of honor".
So you would just stand there and do what they say? Why do you expect the mugger to stop with your wallet if you give it to them? People get killed in robberies all the time, even when not resisting.
|
On December 16 2012 14:28 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:25 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:21 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 14:16 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:13 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:
[quote]
pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else.
Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Oh. My God. Society is so fucked if more people think like you. I'm sorry but I think you're beyond reasoning with at this point. I value the criminals life more than I do a fish's life, What reason do you have for me to regard the fetus's life any more than that of a fish's? You're right. A fish has dreams and hopes too and family, friends etc. No it doesn't, and neither does a fetus. It's not a person yet. You mean it's not a human body yet. If you believe in spirituality, then the fetus is more than just a "hunk of cells put together". If you don't and are an athiest which I'm guessing you are, then of course it's justified because it is in fact just a hunk of cells put together.
I am indeed an atheist. But even if I wasn't, I wouldn't be arrogant enough to say that because I believe this to be true, you must also bend to my will. But this isn't an abortion discussion so I wont get into that.
|
On December 16 2012 14:28 Keldrath wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:25 TMD wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:18 heliusx wrote:
[quote]
What's so wrong about putting your safety above the safety of someone trying to rob you at knife point? There are plenty of gun regulation arguments you can use that are fair enough. Saying he should risk his safety in the spirit of preventing the possibility of having to shoot the person holding him up with a knife is rather stupid.
You want to argue guns are bad? That's fine but saying you should put your safety in a knife wielding drug heads hands is not smart, it's stupid. It's not an argument against guns it's just grasping at straws for any reason at all to say guns are bad. Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence. Your logic is backwards. I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Sorry, but if you're mugging me--threatening my life for my money/wallet with a weapon, you fucked up and you better do a good job with what you're doing because there will be no passivity on my part. Its easy to say that until you are actually put in that situation. But then again this is just one of the symptoms that correlates with high gun violence. "A deep culture of honor".
lmao. you're getting less and less coherent. and now you're confusing taking your safety in your own hands with "honor".
|
On December 16 2012 14:19 SayGen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:13 bluemanrocks wrote:
Isn't your point about the punishment of crimes in Saudi Arabia kind of self-defeating?? You are saying that the stricter the retaliation (which in SA comes from direct implementation of stricter laws instead of leaving it to the citizens to figure it out themselves) the less the delinquency. Actually, this logic implies that the stricter the policy on gun ownership and use, the less rampant gun violence there might be. Not quite tohugh I do see where your trying to come from. Guns are used since our goverment can not stop crime-by putting in place deterents (not saying we should cut off peoples hands for stealing, but the idea of the strictness is what I'm talking about) When criminals are no longer a threat to our society, you won't need gun laws- I will jsut buy few guns--if any at all. It is because I feel threatened (again I was robbed in real life, and a gun mitigated that situation very quickly as I posted above) that I own weapons to protect myself, my family, my community. So the logic does not imply a pro gun regulation, rather the logic would lead us to solving the need for the guns. Again, crime doens't stop cause guns arn't there. Crime stops because criminals don't commit the unlawful acts. Gotta crawl before you can walk.
I guess the problem is we view the analogy differently?? You see the deterrent itself as the important part, whereas I see the important part as the law as a deterrent. I believe Saudi Arabia is not free of crime because of a cultural/citizen-implemented reactionary campaign (as citizen gun ownership would be -- people operating under the umbrella of law), but because there is a generalized and universal treatment of criminality. The latter view to me speaks to change in policy, not culture. Of course, I believe that stricter laws won't stop everything, and more "good guys" with guns will help as well, but I still am convinced by that the latter logic implies legal action.
|
On December 16 2012 14:28 Keldrath wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:25 TMD wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:18 heliusx wrote:
[quote]
What's so wrong about putting your safety above the safety of someone trying to rob you at knife point? There are plenty of gun regulation arguments you can use that are fair enough. Saying he should risk his safety in the spirit of preventing the possibility of having to shoot the person holding him up with a knife is rather stupid.
You want to argue guns are bad? That's fine but saying you should put your safety in a knife wielding drug heads hands is not smart, it's stupid. It's not an argument against guns it's just grasping at straws for any reason at all to say guns are bad. Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence. Your logic is backwards. I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Sorry, but if you're mugging me--threatening my life for my money/wallet with a weapon, you fucked up and you better do a good job with what you're doing because there will be no passivity on my part. Its easy to say that until you are actually put in that situation. But then again this is just one of the symptoms that correlates with high gun violence. "A deep culture of honor".
Sorry, but some people actually have honor and self-respect and won't bend over and take it in the ass by some worthless scrumbag criminal. If I were to mug someone, they have every right to shoot me or knock me out or kill me.
|
The answer for me is yes and no. I believe people should be able to own and carry weapons but I am against Semi/Automatic types. (Shotguns I'm 60/40 (60 okay, 40 not). It does conflict me about the topic too is with the hunting laws and ways you have to get approval.
From my experiences, there are 3 situations that help back up my premise.
1) Deters/Protects against Home burglaries
A family I know personally had their house robbed three times in a 18 month period. Alarms did not work, guard dogs did not work, or any other high tech instant access deterrent. One day, they decided to get a 9mm handgun. A robbery attempt was made, owner shot the thief in the leg twice, no more crime at the house. Been 7 years since the last break in.
2) Army buddy of mine got drunk and brought out his semi-automatic rifle and aimed it at my chest with a laser sight. Yes, this happened, I called the police and he lost all his stuff and what not, but only got probation. I had to move out for my safety. This was supposed to be a guy we could all "trust" to be able to handle the situation but could not.
3) Buck shot, other shotguns, and hunting rifles. I understand why people need these weapons. Makes hunting easy and can be a deterrent with home defense. But, I feel it could easily fall into my #2. Sure, we should be able to trust hunters with these weapons to use them only for hunting; however, I feel a bit conflicted.
End of the day, I would support a ban on assault type rifles, but not on all firing weapons.
|
On December 16 2012 14:30 Gospadin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:28 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:25 TMD wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:
[quote]
Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence.
Your logic is backwards. I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Sorry, but if you're mugging me--threatening my life for my money/wallet with a weapon, you fucked up and you better do a good job with what you're doing because there will be no passivity on my part. Its easy to say that until you are actually put in that situation. But then again this is just one of the symptoms that correlates with high gun violence. "A deep culture of honor". So you would just stand there and do what they say? Why do you expect the mugger to stop with your wallet if you give it to them? People get killed in robberies all the time, even when not resisting.
Yes, I would give him my wallet, because I don't value my possessions over my life, except for maybe my computer, i might be a tad inconsistent there. And I would report it to the police. If he tried something, I'd fight back, i wouldnt just stand there and let him kill me without a fight, but I would have to have some reason to believe my life is being threatened other than him holding a knife and saying give me yo wallet.
|
On December 16 2012 14:34 Keldrath wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:30 Gospadin wrote:On December 16 2012 14:28 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:25 TMD wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:
[quote]
Your logic is backwards.
I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Sorry, but if you're mugging me--threatening my life for my money/wallet with a weapon, you fucked up and you better do a good job with what you're doing because there will be no passivity on my part. Its easy to say that until you are actually put in that situation. But then again this is just one of the symptoms that correlates with high gun violence. "A deep culture of honor". So you would just stand there and do what they say? Why do you expect the mugger to stop with your wallet if you give it to them? People get killed in robberies all the time, even when not resisting. Yes, I would give him my wallet, because I don't value my possessions over my life, except for maybe my computer, i might be a tad inconsistent there. And I would report it to the police. If he tried something, I'd fight back, i wouldnt just stand there and let him kill me without a fight, but I would have to have some reason to believe my life is being threatened other than him holding a knife and saying give me yo wallet.
LOL. WHAT THE F? Do you actually value your own life or not?
|
On December 16 2012 14:24 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:20 bluemanrocks wrote:On December 16 2012 14:13 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:
[quote]
Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence.
Your logic is backwards. I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Oh. My God. Society is so fucked if more people think like you. I'm sorry but I think you're beyond reasoning with at this point. While I understand your issue with the "considering a life" bit, I also buy the cops vs. average joe counter-argument; to my knowledge, cops aren't even supposed to pull weapons unless they are expecting to fire them, and I would venture that a civilian with less training, experience, and ability would not exactly have a cop's judgment, let alone 100% judgment... also, if you don't bother to explain (essentially a "that doesn't even dignify a response"), don't bother to explain THAT you won't bother to explain -- by doing just that you're not contributing you're just saying "I'm right, you're wrong, AND I'm above you." And that doesn't prove your point, disprove the other person's or advance the discussion at all. Cops aren't any more competent at shooting the right target than citizens are. In fact, most citizens have more sense than cops do. Anyone remember the shooting in NYC (where guns are banned btw) and the cops open fired on the guy and shot 9 or 10 innocent bystanders at the same time? Update: The Guardian is reporting that the nine bystanders who were shot (that didn't include the shooter's target) were all shot by police, and that Jeffrey Johnson never fired on police.http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/08/just-how-many-bystanders-did-new-york-police-shoot/56187/
I know the story, but you'd be hard-pressed to find much more consistent even anecdotal evidence to confirm this, and I certainly doubt any studies (I know of at least one evidencing the opposite conclusion; that the trained are more practically sensible than the untrained). I will edit this post with it once I find it. Furthermore I find that you are moving in the direction of saying generally law enforcement as a force is arbitrary? Perhaps I am expanding too much but it doesn't seem too far-fetched from "citizens are as sensible as police in matters that one might think are police-only" when combined with "equip citizens with police tools".
|
On December 16 2012 14:37 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:34 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:30 Gospadin wrote:On December 16 2012 14:28 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:25 TMD wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:
[quote]
pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else.
Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Sorry, but if you're mugging me--threatening my life for my money/wallet with a weapon, you fucked up and you better do a good job with what you're doing because there will be no passivity on my part. Its easy to say that until you are actually put in that situation. But then again this is just one of the symptoms that correlates with high gun violence. "A deep culture of honor". So you would just stand there and do what they say? Why do you expect the mugger to stop with your wallet if you give it to them? People get killed in robberies all the time, even when not resisting. Yes, I would give him my wallet, because I don't value my possessions over my life, except for maybe my computer, i might be a tad inconsistent there. And I would report it to the police. If he tried something, I'd fight back, i wouldnt just stand there and let him kill me without a fight, but I would have to have some reason to believe my life is being threatened other than him holding a knife and saying give me yo wallet. LOL. WHAT THE F? Do you actually value your own life or not?
his cognitive dissonance is so strong he prefers to just ignore the question 15 times in a row. its actually becoming hilarious to watch this guy do mental gymnastics to dodge the crux of the hypothetical situation.
|
On December 16 2012 14:30 heliusx wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:28 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:25 TMD wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:46 Keldrath wrote:
[quote]
Even if he stole your money, those are just possessions, not lives. lives are irreplacable, and you only get 1 of them. Trying to mug you isnt worthy of a death sentence.
Your logic is backwards. I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Sorry, but if you're mugging me--threatening my life for my money/wallet with a weapon, you fucked up and you better do a good job with what you're doing because there will be no passivity on my part. Its easy to say that until you are actually put in that situation. But then again this is just one of the symptoms that correlates with high gun violence. "A deep culture of honor". lmao. you're getting less and less coherent. and now you're confusing taking your safety in your own hands with "honor".
A deep culture of honor means you put extreme value on personal reputation, family and property.
It's one factor that has been shown to lead to higher gun violence, as is lower average incomes, lack of education, and conservative voter areas.
I'll throw in some things that have been shown to NOT lead to gun violence. Illegal drug use, Neurotic personalities, high levels of unemployment, and high levels of inequality.
|
On December 16 2012 14:37 bluemanrocks wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:24 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 14:20 bluemanrocks wrote:On December 16 2012 14:13 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:52 Esk23 wrote:
[quote]
Your logic is backwards.
I'm curious, are you pro life or pro choice? I know it's off topic but I just want to see your answer. pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else. Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Oh. My God. Society is so fucked if more people think like you. I'm sorry but I think you're beyond reasoning with at this point. While I understand your issue with the "considering a life" bit, I also buy the cops vs. average joe counter-argument; to my knowledge, cops aren't even supposed to pull weapons unless they are expecting to fire them, and I would venture that a civilian with less training, experience, and ability would not exactly have a cop's judgment, let alone 100% judgment... also, if you don't bother to explain (essentially a "that doesn't even dignify a response"), don't bother to explain THAT you won't bother to explain -- by doing just that you're not contributing you're just saying "I'm right, you're wrong, AND I'm above you." And that doesn't prove your point, disprove the other person's or advance the discussion at all. Cops aren't any more competent at shooting the right target than citizens are. In fact, most citizens have more sense than cops do. Anyone remember the shooting in NYC (where guns are banned btw) and the cops open fired on the guy and shot 9 or 10 innocent bystanders at the same time? Update: The Guardian is reporting that the nine bystanders who were shot (that didn't include the shooter's target) were all shot by police, and that Jeffrey Johnson never fired on police.http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/08/just-how-many-bystanders-did-new-york-police-shoot/56187/ I know the story, but you'd be hard-pressed to find much more consistent even anecdotal evidence to confirm this, and I certainly doubt any (I know of at least one evidencing the opposite conclusion; that the trained are more practically sensible than the untrained). I will edit this post with it once I find it. Furthermore I find that you are moving in the direction of saying generally law enforcement as a force is arbitrary? Perhaps I am expanding too much but it doesn't seem too far-fetched from "citizens are as sensible as police in matters that one might think are police-only" when combined with "equip citizens with police tools".
There's nothing cops can do that any normal law-abiding citizen can't do. Any normal person can learn to aim and shoot a gun. I'm against the idea of having government do everything for you and for people to reply completely or even too much on the government for everything. If a robber breaks into your house, who says you can't take care of it yourself if you have to instead of waiting 5-10 mins for the cops to show up hoping they don't acciently shoot instead of the robber.
In a free society everyone should have the right to defend their own lives, they shouldn't have to depend on a group of people we put there in the first place to serve us to save our own lives everytime something happens.
|
On December 16 2012 14:37 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 14:34 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:30 Gospadin wrote:On December 16 2012 14:28 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:25 TMD wrote:On December 16 2012 14:09 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 14:01 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:58 Keldrath wrote:On December 16 2012 13:57 Esk23 wrote:On December 16 2012 13:53 Keldrath wrote:
[quote]
pro choice. and no, before you go there, I don't see the fetus as being a living human being with the same rights as everyone else.
Exactly what I thought. It's so easy to spot how aberrated and flawed your way of thinking and logic is. Care to elaborate? From my view, you value the rights or life of a criminal who seeks to violate the rights/lives of others. Your view on this makes it easier for criminals to get away with things and to do what they do. While at the same time, you devalue the life/rights of an unborn human being. Basically you value the right/life of a criminal more than an unborn human being, and you justify it by "thinking" that an unborn human being is not a person just because it hasn't developed to the extent we have yet. Just seems completely irrational to me. I value life, I don't view a clump of cells developing inside a fetus a life. whereas a criminal is still a person, with hopes, dreams, experiences, family, friends, etc. Killing someone who is alive is a lot different from terminating a pregnancy of something that isn't even alive yet. at best you could call it a potential human life. So yes I do value the life of the criminal more than the life of a fetus. Lethal force is a last resort, not the first option, unless you are fighting in a war against enemy combatants. and the exception there isn't even an exception, that's always a life or death situation. We give people jail time for mugging, we don't execute them. And you shouldn't either, even in a situation where you feel your life may be threatened, you should first attempt to incapacitate them, not jump straight to execution. Which is one reason we allow cops to carry guns, they can deal with those situations, average joes will shoot first and ask questions later. Sorry, but if you're mugging me--threatening my life for my money/wallet with a weapon, you fucked up and you better do a good job with what you're doing because there will be no passivity on my part. Its easy to say that until you are actually put in that situation. But then again this is just one of the symptoms that correlates with high gun violence. "A deep culture of honor". So you would just stand there and do what they say? Why do you expect the mugger to stop with your wallet if you give it to them? People get killed in robberies all the time, even when not resisting. Yes, I would give him my wallet, because I don't value my possessions over my life, except for maybe my computer, i might be a tad inconsistent there. And I would report it to the police. If he tried something, I'd fight back, i wouldnt just stand there and let him kill me without a fight, but I would have to have some reason to believe my life is being threatened other than him holding a knife and saying give me yo wallet. LOL. WHAT THE F? Do you actually value your own life or not?
Of course I do, you think if I did I would try to fight with a person holding a knife trying to steal my wallet? For a mugger the last thing he wants to do is add murder to his list of offenses. if he had a gun you think I want to take the risk that i can whip out my gun and shoot him before he fires? not likely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
