RE: Part of the problem with guns,

RE: Part of the problem with guns, (Full Version)

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

Message

PeonForHer -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 3:21:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Besides ignoring any data that contradicts the cherished opinions those who function on a higher intellectual plane than ordinary mortals, is your post also intended to imply that there was no such post? Gun ownership in the UK has, since the 1930s, been so tiny that attributing any social change to a small change in the gun laws in the 1990s is ridiculous. You might as well draw some inference about homicide rates from the fact Marathon bars were rebranded as Snickers during the same period. It was a pointless legal tool, trumpeted loudly, by a government that wanted to look as though it had A Solution to a rare horror here in the UK. Please just cite that post of mine, Kirata. That would be helpful. And, for God's sake, stop mewling at me about my supposed pompousness or other kind of air of superiority. That really doesn't sit at all well coming from you, of all people, and I can't believe you're as ignorant as you appear of the idea of psychological projection.

dcnovice -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 3:27:58 PM)
quote: Marathon bars were rebranded as Snickers during the same period. Say it isn't so!

PeonForHer -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 3:36:50 PM)
They were. 'Snickers' just sounds like 'sniggers' to us in the UK. I liked marathon bars. I felt like a twat eating a 'snickers', though.

Kirata -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 3:44:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Gun ownership in the UK has, since the 1930s, been so tiny that attributing any social change to a small change in the gun laws in the 1990s is ridiculous... Please just cite that post of mine, Kirata. That would be helpful. A "small change" in the gun laws, eh? As for the post, sure. You got called on your shit by Powergamz1: quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Except that only one of us is trying to derail useful discourse on a complex matter with demands that rational analysis of all factors be ignored in favor of 'obvious', magical, single-solution thinking. Your reply was: quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer It's a paradoxical thing, Powergamz, but it's a time-honoured theme in politics: a simple problem, with its simple solution, is quite frequently drowned in a sea of supposed complexities. Obfuscation is the aim, of course. Those who love such obfuscation the most - and most want to avoid the obvious (though painful) solution - will frequently pontificate about the superior intellectual plane in which their thinking takes place. Suddenly, all the 'I'm a real, straight-shootin', real life livin', to hell with your pissant pinko faggot books, yessirree!' crap is out of the window. Nutty gun fans abruptly drop the John Wayne image and, rarely for them, try on the bearded intellectual thing instead. It's hilarious! Yeah really. The chutzpah of fools who try to pretend they're intelligent by actually looking at the data, when it's so patently "obvious" that it's a "simple problem" with a "simple solution". Fucking hilarious. http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4359333 K.

Yachtie -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 4:02:17 PM)
[sm=popcorn.gif] ... needs more butter

PeonForHer -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 4:05:23 PM)
quote: quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Gun ownership in the UK has, since the 1930s, been so tiny that attributing any social change to a small change in the gun laws in the 1990s is ridiculous... Please just cite that post of mine, Kirata. That would be helpful. A "small change" in the gun laws, eh? Yes, it was a small change in the gun laws. Most of the guns that had been around before WW1 were swept away afterwards. The changes in the 1990s were indeed tiny, and affected a tiny number of people in the UK. quote: As for the post, sure. You got called on your shit by Powergamz1: quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Except that only one of us is trying to derail useful discourse on a complex matter with demands that rational analysis of all factors be ignored in favor of 'obvious', magical, single-solution thinking. Your reply was: quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer It's a paradoxical thing, Powergamz, but it's a time-honoured theme in politics: a simple problem, with its simple solution, is quite frequently drowned in a sea of supposed complexities. Obfuscation is the aim, of course. Those who love such obfuscation the most - and most want to avoid the obvious (though painful) solution - will frequently pontificate about the superior intellectual plane in which their thinking takes place. Suddenly, all the 'I'm a real, straight-shootin', real life livin', to hell with your pissant pinko faggot books, yessirree!' crap is out of the window. Nutty gun fans abruptly drop the John Wayne image and, rarely for them, try on the bearded intellectual thing instead. It's hilarious! Yeah really. The chutzpah of fools who try to pretend they're intelligent by actually looking at the data, when it's so patently "obvious" that it's a "simple problem" with a "simple solution". Fucking hilarious. http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4359333 K. I love that Stetson-wearing, straight-shootin' phrase 'called on your shit'. [:D] How could I match that, when I don't even ride a horse, never mind a white one? Well, Powergamz may well have observed that my rectum contains faecal matter, Kirata, but - yes - I did indeed feel that gun-fans in America suddenly do come over all soft-psychology and 'let's look at the woolly stuff' when it comes to murders and guns. I'm sorry, but I find myself still suffering from that intellectual chutzpah with, no doubt, lots of British superiority and stuff thrown in. But I can't help thinking, still, and in my pompous English way, that there would indeed be fewer killings by guns if there were fewer guns. I've tried very hard not to oppress any Americans in this post.

Kirata -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 4:17:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Gun ownership in the UK has, since the 1930s, been so tiny that attributing any social change to a small change in the gun laws in the 1990s is ridiculous. But things weren't always so (thanks for prompting me to look deeper)... The rights of English subjects, and, after 1707, British subjects, to possess arms was recognised under English Common Law... After the Jacobite rebellions of 1715 and 1745, harsh laws providing, amongst other things, for disarming the Highlands of Scotland, were enacted by the Parliament of Great Britain: the Disarming Acts of 1716 and 1725, and the Act of Proscription 1746. Can't have those pesky Scots getting out from under Ye Olde Thumb. The Gun Licence Act 1870 was created to raise revenue. It required a person to obtain a licence to carry a gun outside his own property for any reason. A licence was not required to buy a gun. Governments love revenue! The Firearms Act of 1920 was partly spurred by fears of a possible surge in crime from the large number of firearms available following World War I and in part due to fears of working class unrest in this period. It's so terribly inconvenient when a subjugated and an unhappy populace is armed. The 1937 Firearms Act incorporated various modifications to the 1920 Act based on the recommendations of a 1934 committee chaired by Sir Archibald Bodkin... The same year, the Home Secretary ruled that self-defence was no longer a suitable reason for applying for a firearm certificate, and directed police to refuse such applications on the grounds that "firearms cannot be regarded as a suitable means of protection and may be a source of danger". The later 1997 acts drove the final nail into the coffin. You have finally achieved a government that denies to its citizens an effective means of defending themselves. Good luck. Reference: Wikipedia K.

Yachtie -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 4:30:34 PM)
[sm=popcorn.gif] ... Thanks for the added butter.[:D]

Kirata -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 4:35:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie [sm=popcorn.gif] ... Thanks for the added butter. Glad to help... care for a little salt? [:)] Britons have lowest confidence in their police K.

BamaD -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 4:45:04 PM)
quote: I love that Stetson-wearing, straight-shootin' phrase 'called on your shit'. [:D] How could I match that, when I don't even ride a horse, never mind a white one? Well, Powergamz may well have observed that my rectum contains faecal matter, Kirata, but - yes - I did indeed feel that gun-fans in America suddenly do come over all soft-psychology and 'let's look at the woolly stuff' when it comes to murders and guns. I'm sorry, but I find myself still suffering from that intellectual chutzpah with, no doubt, lots of British superiority and stuff thrown in. But I can't help thinking, still, and in my pompous English way, that there would indeed be fewer killings by guns if there were fewer guns. I've tried very hard not to oppress any Americans in this post. quote: Right see to it that only bad guys have guns and less of them will be killed.

Kirata -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 4:52:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer But I can't help thinking, still, and in my pompous English way, that there would indeed be fewer killings by guns if there were fewer guns. That's a nice dance step, but the question at issue is gun ownership versus homicide rates. Not gun ownership versus gun homicides. K.

Yachtie -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 4:55:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer But I can't help thinking, still, and in my pompous English way, that there would indeed be fewer killings by guns if there were fewer guns. That's a nice dance step, but the question at issue is gun ownership versus homicide rates. Not gun ownership versus gun homicides. K. Play fair K. Let the Wookie win[8D]

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 5:00:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven as described in the Denver Post,; that city people can't see any use for guns except to kill people, while for rural Americans, guns are a tool just like a hammer or a wrench. Well, I for one concur with Denver. I use (and keep) my guns for killing people. (Generally speaking, of course).

deathtothepixies -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 5:09:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata The later 1997 acts drove the final nail into the coffin. You have finally achieved a government that denies to its citizens an effective means of defending themselves. Good luck. Reference: Wikipedia K.[/font][/size] I wake up every morning knowing that the chances of being shot are infintessimal and I am very very happy with that. How many Americans can say that? Good luck

PeonForHer -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 5:10:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer But I can't help thinking, still, and in my pompous English way, that there would indeed be fewer killings by guns if there were fewer guns. That's a nice dance step, but the question at issue is gun ownership versus homicide rates. Not gun ownership versus gun homicides. K. No, the question at issue is gun ownership versus gun homicides. You dance better in your Stetson than I do in my bowler, I'll give you that. [;)]

Kirata -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 5:18:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata That's a nice dance step, but the question at issue is gun ownership versus homicide rates. Not gun ownership versus gun homicides. No, the question at issue is gun ownership versus gun homicides. Well there's an enlightened point of view on the value of human life. K.

deathtothepixies -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 5:34:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata That's a nice dance step, but the question at issue is gun ownership versus homicide rates. Not gun ownership versus gun homicides. No, the question at issue is gun ownership versus gun homicides. Well there's an enlightened point of view on the value of human life. K. from the site you used earlier. in the UK the annual rate of homicide by any means is 1.2/100,000 in the US the annual rate of homicide by any means is 5.1/100,000 who exactly has the enlightened point of view of the value of human life?

Kirata -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 5:40:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies who exactly has the enlightened point of view... Well for starters, that would have to be someone who knows what a non-sequitur is. K.

deathtothepixies -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 5:43:02 PM)
[8\|]

Nosathro -> RE: Part of the problem with guns, (3/6/2013 5:43:32 PM)
Just out of curiosity can we support this it is even by a Republication? http://news.yahoo.com/senators-seek-tougher-gun-background-checks-mentally-ill-010354773.html

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875