|
igor2003 -> RE: Good Points on Firearms (2/10/2015 2:37:11 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: joether
Finally....someone talks on the nature of the thread. Took us 70 posts....
quote:
ORIGINAL: igor2003
You have said, at least a couple of times, that the guy in the video had brought up several "good" points. Most all of what I saw in viewing the whole (wasted time) video was him attempting to be humorous using the same old talking points that anti-gun people have been bringing up over and over again. How about if you tell us which points it is that he is making that you think is so important, or at least tell us at what point in the video he makes the points that you would like to discuss?
The guy comes up with a very large number of good points. But its how he delivers the points is both funny and truthful. Yes, he is a comedian. Comedians are suppose to get us to laugh at stuff. Yet a number of comedians have used concepts and topics in everyday lives that bring forth a point. South Park, if you get past all the immature crap, usually had a good moral viewpoint. The Daily Show with John Stewart often shows many examples of things in daily life that are wrong, but in an amusing manner. That is because delivering information in a normal manner is not entertaining to us humans. More people tune into Mr. Stewart than NPR (which does give out really good information without the opinion). But NPR is (yawn), boring.
0:43= Jim talks about the biggest massacre in his country, and that to this day, it hasn't been beaten. Do we....really....have to have something more hellish than Sandy Hook?
That in the time after they took the guns away, there haven't been any massacres since. I haven't done the research to clarify if that is true or not. But he makes the point that since all the firearms were taken away, nothing bad has happen.
Clarification: I'm not for taking all the firearms away. That there is tough for some to understand.
It is true that there haven't been any "massacres" since the guns were confiscated. I'm not sure how many they had BEFORE that. You need that kind of comparison to really see how effective it was. Also, I really don't like comparing things country to country, simply because their histories from day one are different. As I believe I mentioned in a different thread, you might as well compare the U.S. to Jamaica...a country with stricter gun laws and higher firearm homicide rate.
2:07= "Fuck off, I like guns" Yes, that is the only argument to have one. Why are there no Protection Rifles? Plenty of Assault Rifles.
No, that is definitely NOT the only argument to have one. If you (or he) thinks it is, then you are sadly misinformed.
3:27= That he actually got attacked while naked. That there was no were he could have had the firearm, or that he should be fully ready for the attack without knowing the attack would originate from a certain window.
Most firearm owners, at home, rarely carry a firearm on their person. But they will know where it (they) are for quick acquisition. Personally, I have two pistols, both of which are loaded and easily accessed. I also have one rifle and one shotgun, neither of which is loaded. The pistols are in separate locations and can be accessed quickly, even though I'm disabled and do not move around quickly. That way, I don't have to sit and stare at a window waiting for someone to break in. But if it ever happens, I will be able to defend myself in short order. I don't anticipate ever actually needing to defend myself in such a manner, but I do live in a fairly high crime neighborhood, and I would rather have the guns and not need them, than to need them and not have them. I also have a CWP, and have been a hunter all my life, starting when I was about 12. Before that I had a BB gun, and was taught from a very young age how to handle and use firearms.
Do you go to home security conventions? Read Padlock Monthly? Got that facebook picture of you behind a secured door looking badass with your gun? Yeah, try to say 'yes' with a straight face....
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with anything. I've never been to a home security convention. I have no idea what Padlock Monthly is. And have never had or even considered a Facebook picture or any other kind of picture thinking I'm looking like a "badass" because I'm holding a gun. To me, a gun is a tool, not a toy. As with any tool there is a proper way to use it, and proper times to use it. I know the difference. Do you?
4:18=That he makes the example of some guy wanting to steal your TV not hurt anyone in your house. "How many fucking enemies do you have?"
There have been many instances throughout history of someone breaking into someone's home to steal something only to find out that the person or people that live there can, for whatever reason, identify them. The "home burglary" then turns into a homicide in hopes that the burglar won't be caught and identified. Just because someone wants your TV doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to defend yourself.
I could keep going, but that's enough to start....
quote:
ORIGINAL: igor2003
As I said, throughout the whole video it seemed to be the same old talking points that people have been arguing about, hashing, and rehashing, since forever. I did come up with a few points that I thought were worth mentioning.
That's the nice thing with comedians; they can take the ordinary and make it something worth laughing at. That you couldn't laugh at this stuff makes me ask: Can you laugh in a healthy manner or reasoning? Did you ever laugh at stuff Robin Williams spoken on?
Sorry if my not seeing this particular video as humorous bothers you. I definitely enjoyed many of Robin Williams things, especially back in his "Mork" days. Not so much later in his career. I'm sure there are things that I would find humorous that you would not. Does that mean that I should question your mental health?
quote:
ORIGINAL: igor2003
(1) At about the 7:20 mark in the video he starts a bit about the percentage of people that don't agree with him. He mentions that of the 50% that don't agree with him there is about 10% that seethe about what he has to say. If guns are so bad, and people (Americans) are so crazy, and 10% of those gun owners (what would equal about 5% of the American population, using his estimates) absolutely hate him...why is he so NOT afraid to rile them? Wouldn't he be afraid of being shot by some gun-crazed American? Maybe guns and gun owners aren't as bad as some people want to try to make them seem to be.
Who says he not afraid to rile that 10%? Maybe he is afraid, but through humor, defuses things. If that guy was shot by some gun crazed American; could you imagine the windfall for the gun controllers in the nation? Would be like Sandy Hook all over again. That person (doing the shooting) is against freedom of speech of anyone that doesnt agree with them. And willing to act in a deadly manner to accomplish it. Why do you think many on the right breathed a sigh of relief when it was found the movie theater and gabby giffords guys were insane and NOT, gun nuts? Because the fallout would have been huge! Or if that guy that killed the kids in Sandy Hook was fiften or twenty years older, had tea party material in his bedroom, and all sorts of 'I hate America' and gun materials/books? Sandy Hook was...BAD. Try to imagine the hell if those things were in there.
I'm not saying this with glee or 'I hope I wish'. Fuck no! I say with dread and hoping it...DOESNT....happen.
Maybe he's not afraid. I don't know. But if he thinks that the 10% he speaks of actually gets as angry as he tries to make them look, then in my opinion he is not too bright. You don't go poking a bee's nest, then think you won't eventually get stung. The mental issues with some of the people you use as an example speaks more toward the mental health issues in this country than the gun issues. Why don't we work on that instead of trying to lay blame on inanimate objects?
quote:
ORIGINAL: igor2003
(2) At about the 9:00 mark he clearly states that Australia (where he is from) has a constitution, but he has no idea what it says. Yet he knows all about the U.S. constitution, and argues about his own interpretation as to what it says. Isn't it wonderful that our constitution is more important to him than his own?
He's going to a host country. What do the Australians think on when they think of America? Guns. Lots of Guns. An that the gun culture to those outside the nation is as much a fascination to them, as all the accents found in the British Isles to us. So he learns about it. Studies it. Figures out good material. And speaks on it.
He always knows his audience is in Boston and open to many different ideas. Not like a Tea Party rally....
It always seems strange to me that there are SO many people that are so afraid of those "gun toting Americans", yet they visit here in droves. That makes their fascination with guns simply another talking point rather than a real issue. If it was as much of an issue as they try to make it sound, they would NEVER come within shouting (shooting?) distance of our coasts.
By the way...the fact that you mention something about a Tea Party rally makes me wonder if you think I'm some right winger. I'm not. Even though I live in a very conservative state (Idaho) I do tend to lean somewhat more to the left. As with the majority of the people in this state that do lean to the left, this is a very hunter/gun friendly state, and even the Democrats here tend to be gun owners. We have open carry without the necessity of a permit, and the legislature is considering doing away with the need of a permit for concealed carry. The fact of the matter is that I DON'T agree with the idea of no permit for concealed carry, though I really don't think it would make too much difference. If a criminal wants to carry a concealed weapon, then he isn't likely going to worry about acquiring that permit, and most law abiding people won't really be a problem.
And just as a matter of curiosity...when I was taking the class to get my CWP, the officer told us that carrying a loaded shotgun down the street under a long overcoat is NOT considered carrying a concealed weapon. I just find that strange.
quote:
ORIGINAL: igor2003
(3) And lastly, at about the 13:00 mark, he argues about how in Australia it costs $34,000 on the black market to buy a Bushmaster rifle, and that anyone with that kind of money doesn't need to be a criminal. Okay, he was trying to make a point by using what he considers humor. The fact of the matter is, if a criminal wants a Bushmaster (or any other type of hard to get gun), he is likely either going to find a way to steal it, or he will raise the money through other criminal activities such as dealing drugs, burglary, and/or theft of some other nature. Making something more difficult to buy will, IN MY OPINION, likely cause an over all increase in illegal activities.
An yet the rate of violence with firearms in that country compared to ours is staggering small. Would you drive your brand new car into a demolition derby? Or that clunker you got for $250 that barely operates? The point is, that if that criminal can afford a $34,000 gun, would he be so quick to use it? Verse obtaining one that cost $1,000? Because acquiring items of high price tag value does attract law enforcement attention. Particularly firearms.
When was the last time you saw an M-60 used in a bank robbery In the United States?
First, since in most bank robberies an M-60 would actually be of no value, I can easily see why one has never (to my knowledge) been used. To want to use one, the value of the expected "loot" would have to be many times more than the cost or trouble of getting the M-60 in the first place. How likely is that to happen? If a person thought that driving a brand new car in a demolition derby would give them an advantage, and if the benefit of using that brand new car outweighed the cost of getting it, then I think people could and would get those brand new cars for that purpose. You see that kind of thing all the time in TV and movies. New cars will be wrecked because the wreckage of that brand new car is believed to add enough value to the picture to make it worthwhile. If a criminal thought he needed a $34,000 gun, then I can see where they might do whatever is necessary to get it,especially if a $1000 gun won't accomplish what is needed or expected.
quote:
ORIGINAL: igor2003
Anyway, I would like to know exactly which points you think he is making in the video that are not simply a rehash of the various talking points already covered many, many times in the forums.
I'll have to look at the video again, the make other observations.
And as I mentioned, pretty much all of what was mentioned in the video has been hashed and rehashed many many times. Just because it has been done in a fashion that some people find humorous doesn't make it anything worth bringing up again.
|
|
|
|
