RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is

RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

PeonForHer -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 5:16:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Well you sure fooled me. I must have misunderstood just about every post you've made on the topic. Here's some more fun reading for you to ignore. The United States is often seen from abroad as a relatively lawless society, with murders and gun-related crimes aplenty. But a recent series of Gallup surveys in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States suggests that the image may be somewhat distorted... Britons appear to have the least confidence in their police, while Canadians have the most. Britons are also the most likely to say that they live near an area where they would be afraid to walk alone at night. ~Gallup The chief inspector of constabulary says some police are failing to class all acts of violence as crimes... Mr O'Connor said: "It's a very high error rate on a small sample. For us as the regulator, it's a matter of concern..." based on the HMIC's own figures, a repeat of the flaw across all forces could mean that police in England and Wales annually failing to record up to 6,000 acts of violence resulting in injury... Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: "All of this just further undermines confidence in the crime figures and in the criminal justice system." ~BBC K. No, I didn't fool you, Kirata, because you know perfectly well what my position is on guns. It's not hard to remember because mine is actually the standard, non American position on guns. And figures on fear of violence are meaningless. A little old lady living in a sleepy village in Devon is apt to be frightened at the mere sight of a youth with an alarmingly short haircut. She probably won't have even seen a gun in her lifetime, (outside of the weapons carried by the Home Guard during WW2, if she's that old). Jesus. Get real, please. You might as well be comparing Earth to Mars.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 5:18:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Did you want to comment on how banning guns reduced homicides in "civilized" Britain? Not really, Kirata. We're so primitive here in Britain that we don't have either enough guns nor enough homicides for me to want to argue about the matter. Well you sure fooled me. I must have misunderstood just about every post you've made on the topic. Here's some more fun reading for you to ignore. The United States is often seen from abroad as a relatively lawless society, with murders and gun-related crimes aplenty. But a recent series of Gallup surveys in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States suggests that the image may be somewhat distorted... Britons appear to have the least confidence in their police, while Canadians have the most. Britons are also the most likely to say that they live near an area where they would be afraid to walk alone at night. ~Gallup The chief inspector of constabulary says some police are failing to class all acts of violence as crimes... Mr O'Connor said: "It's a very high error rate on a small sample. For us as the regulator, it's a matter of concern..." based on the HMIC's own figures, a repeat of the flaw across all forces could mean that police in England and Wales annually failing to record up to 6,000 acts of violence resulting in injury... Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: "All of this just further undermines confidence in the crime figures and in the criminal justice system." ~BBC K. I think you missed the point peon was making. You are quoting general violence as opposed to gun-related crimes which we see aplenty in the US. As for quoting the "up to 6,000 acts of violence resulting in injury", that is a mere drop in the ocean compared to actual deaths by gun-related crime in the US. So it's not really a sensible comparison. They are as different as chalk and cheese and really shouldn't be compared at all.

jlf1961 -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 5:22:18 PM)
Hate to tell you people this, but there are more murders committed with blunt objects, knives and Body weapons combined than by guns. Say you get all the guns, except for the ones used by criminals, what are you going to do then, put troops on every corner in every town and city in the country, because that is exactly what is going to have to be done to end gun violence and violent crime in the United States. I find it incomprehensible that anti gun extremists are after legal firearms but will not answer the simple question, what the fuck are you going to do about all the guns used by criminals?

TAFKAA -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 7:20:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Dude, don't use psychological terms such as 'projection' when you clearly have no idea what they mean. I know exactly what it means, and don't fucking call me "Dude". Oh really? Fine then dude, explain in your own words exactly what psychological projection is and how it applies in this case. Failure to do so will be recognised as an acknowledgement you were talking nonsense about things you clearly do not understand and were doing so because ad hominem is your only defense to reasoned argument. quote: quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA I note your inability to summon a counter-argument. The problem is your inability to recognize one. K. Oh, I see. So your counter-arguments rely on your opponents to turn off their intellect and buy the nonsense you spout, do they? Yes, I understand, perfectly. You've got to produce a semblance of an argument before you can make that claim. Seeing as most of your nonsense is derived from the NRA playbook and demonstrates little in the way of independent thought, your claims about the reasoning capacity of others can be pretty much taken with a grain of salt. Especially given all your posturing is mere avoidance of the issue.

tazzygirl -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 7:29:08 PM)
quote: Hate to tell you people this, but there are more murders committed with blunt objects, knives and Body weapons combined than by guns. No there isnt. Total firearms: 8,583 Knives or cutting instruments 1,694 Blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.) 496 Personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.) 728 http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

TAFKAA -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 7:35:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I find it incomprehensible that anti gun extremists are after legal firearms but will not answer the simple question, what the fuck are you going to do about all the guns used by criminals? The criminal argument is nonsense. Once again, I make the point about vaccination. If you reduce the armament level amongst the populace, criminals become more fucking obvious because they're the ones carrying the guns. Instead of carrying a gun being a normal part of life, it becomes an exception to the rule. With gun availability dropping through the floor it becomes more difficult to procure a gun and you have to rely on black-market channels. Which drives the price up. How many petty thieves have the money to buy black-market guns at high prices? And why should they when the general population isn't carrying guns anyway? And added to the realisation that every search and seizure will have the potential to confiscate and destroy illegal weapons, you suddenly realise how much more difficult it becomes for petty criminals - the most common class - to procure one. You set in motion an economic and social effect which has repercussions on the necessity and economics for a criminal to carry a gun. It's not perfect, but it sure as shit won't resemble the no-gun criminal apocalypse the NRA constantly predicts.

jlf1961 -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 7:46:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I find it incomprehensible that anti gun extremists are after legal firearms but will not answer the simple question, what the fuck are you going to do about all the guns used by criminals? The criminal argument is nonsense. Once again, I make the point about vaccination. If you reduce the armament level amongst the populace, criminals become more fucking obvious because they're the ones carrying the guns. Instead of carrying a gun being a normal part of life, it becomes an exception to the rule. With gun availability dropping through the floor it becomes more difficult to procure a gun and you have to rely on black-market channels. Which drives the price up. How many petty thieves have the money to buy black-market guns at high prices? And why should they when the general population isn't carrying guns anyway? And added to the realisation that every search and seizure will have the potential to confiscate and destroy illegal weapons, you suddenly realise how much more difficult it becomes for petty criminals - the most common class - to procure one. You set in motion an economic and social effect which has repercussions on the necessity and economics for a criminal to carry a gun. It's not perfect, but it sure as shit won't resemble the no-gun criminal apocalypse the NRA constantly predicts. Uh, the illicit drug trafficking in the US makes drug dealers and suppliers billions, or did you not know that?

TAFKAA -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 7:48:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Uh, the illicit drug trafficking in the US makes drug dealers and suppliers billions, or did you not know that? How many billionaires rob people at gunpoint?

jlf1961 -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 7:51:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Uh, the illicit drug trafficking in the US makes drug dealers and suppliers billions, or did you not know that? How many billionaires rob people at gunpoint? How many drug traffickers worth millions order the shooting of an individual, usually in a drive by situation. Lets see, got the target, and a half dozen innocent bystanders. Oh I forgot, the people living in ghettos or lower income areas are drug addicts, hookers and drug dealers, they dont count.

hlen5 -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 7:53:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 How many billionaires rob people at gunpoint? They do that in Congress.

tazzygirl -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 7:54:33 PM)
Along with killing a great number of people.

TAFKAA -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 7:54:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Uh, the illicit drug trafficking in the US makes drug dealers and suppliers billions, or did you not know that? How many billionaires rob people at gunpoint? How many drug traffickers worth millions order the shooting of an individual, usually in a drive by situation. Lets see, got the target, and a half dozen innocent bystanders. Oh I forgot, the people living in ghettos or lower income areas are drug addicts, hookers and drug dealers, they dont count. Exactly. The whole point is your lower echelon - which constitute the vast majority of criminals - can source a gun easily because K-Mart gives the damn things away. As soon as a gun becomes a higher priced item, your most common class of criminal has vastly reduced access to them. Sure, someone with money can source a gun, but they can source a fucking rocket launcher if they choose. And when guns are hard to come by, then actually using one with any degree of accuracy becomes an experience most people don't have. Beginning to get the picture?

jlf1961 -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 7:59:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Uh, the illicit drug trafficking in the US makes drug dealers and suppliers billions, or did you not know that? How many billionaires rob people at gunpoint? How many drug traffickers worth millions order the shooting of an individual, usually in a drive by situation. Lets see, got the target, and a half dozen innocent bystanders. Oh I forgot, the people living in ghettos or lower income areas are drug addicts, hookers and drug dealers, they dont count. Exactly. The whole point is your lower echelon - which constitute the vast majority of criminals - can source a gun easily because K-Mart gives the damn things away. As soon as a gun becomes a higher priced item, your most common class of criminal has vastly reduced access to them. Sure, someone with money can source a gun, but they can source a fucking rocket launcher if they choose. And when guns are hard to come by, then actually using one with any degree of accuracy becomes an experience most people don't have. Beginning to get the picture? Actually, most of the higher echelon equip their troops, the troops do not buy their own guns. And when the troops do buy guns, they either go to a dealer that does not care about the law, or some dude on the street that can get them heavy artillery. They do not go to kmart, walmart or Big 5 sporting goods.

Kirata -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 8:01:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Dude, don't use psychological terms such as 'projection' when you clearly have no idea what they mean. quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata I know exactly what it means, and don't fucking call me "Dude". Oh really? Fine then dude, explain in your own words exactly what psychological projection is and how it applies in this case. Failure to do so will be recognised as an acknowledgement you were talking nonsense about things you clearly do not understand and were doing so because ad hominem is your only defense to reasoned argument. Projection is perceiving rejected and denied aspects of oneself -- attitudes, emotions, intentions -- in others when in fact the others do not harbor those attitudes, emotions, or intentions. People who are projecting tend to either break off contact or become abusive when called on it, because acknowledging the projection poses a threat to their ego. I think you could easily figure out how that applies in this case. But I don't think you will. K.

TAFKAA -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 8:02:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Actually, most of the higher echelon equip their troops, the troops do not buy their own guns. Of course. Because guns are cheap and easily available. So equipping them is low-cost. quote: And when the troops do buy guns, they either go to a dealer that does not care about the law, or some dude on the street that can get them heavy artillery. They do not go to kmart, walmart or Big 5 sporting goods. Again, they could go anywhere, but the price from the illegal gun dealer is low because of the heavy prevalence of weapons. Once you make a gun a rare commodity, the price inevitably rises in concert with laws of supply and demand. And once your legal supply is tightly constrained, it becomes extremely high value for law-enforcement to go after illegal supply from the top down. And it also becomes easier to spot and target.

TAFKAA -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 8:08:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Dude, don't use psychological terms such as 'projection' when you clearly have no idea what they mean. quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata I know exactly what it means, and don't fucking call me "Dude". Oh really? Fine then dude, explain in your own words exactly what psychological projection is and how it applies in this case. Failure to do so will be recognised as an acknowledgement you were talking nonsense about things you clearly do not understand and were doing so because ad hominem is your only defense to reasoned argument. Projection is perceiving rejected and denied aspects of oneself -- attitudes, emotions, intentions -- in others when in fact the others do not harbor those attitudes, emotions, or intentions. People who are projecting tend to either break off contact or become abusive when called on it, because acknowledging the projection poses a threat to their ego. I think you could easily figure out how that applies in this case. But I don't think you will. K. Spoken like someone who's just consulted Wikipedia. Well done, at least now you're on the same page. Given that I don't possess guns, don't harbour designs on possessing one and have no problem with my level of personal power, your claim is errant nonsense. Instead, like most people who have no argument, you toss out claims of 'projection' anytime you run into an argument for which you have no ready-made counter argument. I suspect the NRA haven't yet told you what to think on this one. Never fear, if enough people point it out, I suspect they'll have their people draft up a response. So you'll be able to try and counter this one in due time. Just not right now.

Kirata -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 8:11:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 I think you missed the point peon was making. You are quoting general violence as opposed to gun-related crimes which we see aplenty in the US. Of course I'm quoting general violence. That's my point. Outlawing guns doesn't reduce violence, it just provides criminals with a ready stock of defenseless vicitims. K.

jlf1961 -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 8:12:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Actually, most of the higher echelon equip their troops, the troops do not buy their own guns. Of course. Because guns are cheap and easily available. So equipping them is low-cost. quote: And when the troops do buy guns, they either go to a dealer that does not care about the law, or some dude on the street that can get them heavy artillery. They do not go to kmart, walmart or Big 5 sporting goods. Again, they could go anywhere, but the price from the illegal gun dealer is low because of the heavy prevalence of weapons. Once you make a gun a rare commodity, the price inevitably rises in concert with laws of supply and demand. And once your legal supply is tightly constrained, it becomes extremely high value for law-enforcement to go after illegal supply from the top down. And it also becomes easier to spot and target. Man, for felons guns ARE a rare commodity, and if it comes down to it, you dont think the big boss aint going to supply his runners and dealers with firepower? <sentence removed for TOS violations> There is estimates of hundreds of thousands to millions of guns in the criminal population. It is rather hard to determine just how many since they refuse to register their weapons. And lest we forget, AK47's are dirt cheap, those things were made by the millions in every warsaw pact country and the Soviet Union. That is why even the poorest "revolutionary" army can buy the damn things. And we are not talking semi automatics either. They aint popular cause they are the best, they are popular cause they are so plentiful and cheap. Then of course there are the guns seized by law enforcement reported destroyed then the show up a couple of years later intact. Not to mention the military grade weapons reported as LOST. Tell you what, give me 10 grand and name a large city, I will get you a nice little arsenal that will cause you to shit bricks.

Kirata -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 8:20:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Spoken like someone who's just consulted Wikipedia. You don't have to run to Wikipedia when you know what you're talking about. quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA I suspect the NRA haven't yet told you what to think on this one. See what I mean about becoming abusive? K.

TAFKAA -> RE: The conversation we ought to have, instead of guns is (1/26/2013 8:27:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Spoken like someone who's just consulted Wikipedia. You don't have to run to Wikipedia when you know what you're talking about. Exactly. Which is why your wording so resembles the Wikipedia entry. Own words, my ass. quote: quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA I suspect the NRA haven't yet told you what to think on this one. See what I mean about becoming abusive? K. Well you've yet to construct an independent argument and certainly have no counter to mine beyond ridiculous ad hominem so you might want to take the log out of your own eye first, Chuckles.

Page: << < prev 6 7 8 [9] 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625