Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

Guns, again.

klkl47
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.
lemonice
Posts: 9
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/10/2014 3:30:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Yeah, guns make it easier. But it's still the person who's doing the killing (with the help of a weapon).
BodiSatva
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/10/2014 9:58:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

Pupils die in Japan knife massacre

http://news.bbc.co.uk...
klkl47
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/10/2014 9:58:52 PM, BodiSatva wrote:
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

Pupils die in Japan knife massacre

http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Still kind of have to get pretty close, which gives people a fight or flight choice at least. The tragedy about guns is no choice for the victims, it's a total coward way of killing.

I wonder if we could ever have a thoughtful discussion that straddles the fence of why people think guns are necessary and whether having them is only causing societal tragedy.

I have heard the argument of self defense. Has anyone proven that having guns creates an advantage there? Are we talking about a distopian future?
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 8:08:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

Here you go again...
Unknown_player
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/10/2014 9:58:52 PM, BodiSatva wrote:
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

Pupils die in Japan knife massacre

http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Still kind of have to get pretty close, which gives people a fight or flight choice at least. The tragedy about guns is no choice for the victims, it's a total coward way of killing.

You don't have a choice of fighting if you don't see it coming and all of the sudden a knife goes through your back.

I wonder if we could ever have a thoughtful discussion that straddles the fence of why people think guns are necessary and whether having them is only causing societal tragedy.

Hunting, corrupt society, second amendment, protect against tyranny, etc.

I have heard the argument of self defense. Has anyone proven that having guns creates an advantage there? Are we talking about a distopian future?

Most people run from guns even if they have one, especially in the case of home invasions or robberies. As you have said, you don't need to get close to somebody to shoot them. That's quite an advantage.
I'll put something here later...
Crescendo
Posts: 470
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 2:16:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

There are still:

1. Crossbows (can be purchased at many stores)
2. Bows (can also be purchased at many stores)
My View of the World:
http://www.debate.org...

My Greatest Debate (As of so far):
http://www.debate.org...
klkl47
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/10/2014 9:58:52 PM, BodiSatva wrote:
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

Pupils die in Japan knife massacre

http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Still kind of have to get pretty close, which gives people a fight or flight choice at least. The tragedy about guns is no choice for the victims, it's a total coward way of killing.

You don't have a choice of fighting if you don't see it coming and all of the sudden a knife goes through your back.

I wonder if we could ever have a thoughtful discussion that straddles the fence of why people think guns are necessary and whether having them is only causing societal tragedy.

Hunting, corrupt society, second amendment, protect against tyranny, etc.

I have heard the argument of self defense. Has anyone proven that having guns creates an advantage there? Are we talking about a distopian future?

Most people run from guns even if they have one, especially in the case of home invasions or robberies. As you have said, you don't need to get close to somebody to shoot them. That's quite an advantage.

The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.
Unknown_player
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 4:17:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/10/2014 9:58:52 PM, BodiSatva wrote:
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

Pupils die in Japan knife massacre

http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Still kind of have to get pretty close, which gives people a fight or flight choice at least. The tragedy about guns is no choice for the victims, it's a total coward way of killing.

You don't have a choice of fighting if you don't see it coming and all of the sudden a knife goes through your back.

I wonder if we could ever have a thoughtful discussion that straddles the fence of why people think guns are necessary and whether having them is only causing societal tragedy.

Hunting, corrupt society, second amendment, protect against tyranny, etc.

I have heard the argument of self defense. Has anyone proven that having guns creates an advantage there? Are we talking about a distopian future?

Most people run from guns even if they have one, especially in the case of home invasions or robberies. As you have said, you don't need to get close to somebody to shoot them. That's quite an advantage.


The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

http://www.isdagram.com...

We hadn't even gone passed New Jersey when we made it..... Taking a good study on history before you post something of the past that's actually supposed to help you. We made the second amendment to protect ourselves from the government ever turning on the citizens, for hunting because that's how they got meat, and they had no standing military.
I'll put something here later...
klkl47
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:36:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 4:17:14 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/10/2014 9:58:52 PM, BodiSatva wrote:
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

Pupils die in Japan knife massacre

http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Still kind of have to get pretty close, which gives people a fight or flight choice at least. The tragedy about guns is no choice for the victims, it's a total coward way of killing.

You don't have a choice of fighting if you don't see it coming and all of the sudden a knife goes through your back.

I wonder if we could ever have a thoughtful discussion that straddles the fence of why people think guns are necessary and whether having them is only causing societal tragedy.

Hunting, corrupt society, second amendment, protect against tyranny, etc.

I have heard the argument of self defense. Has anyone proven that having guns creates an advantage there? Are we talking about a distopian future?

Most people run from guns even if they have one, especially in the case of home invasions or robberies. As you have said, you don't need to get close to somebody to shoot them. That's quite an advantage.


The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

http://www.isdagram.com...

We hadn't even gone passed New Jersey when we made it..... Taking a good study on history before you post something of the past that's actually supposed to help you. We made the second amendment to protect ourselves from the government ever turning on the citizens, for hunting because that's how they got meat, and they had no standing military.

I think we did for exactly the reasons I said. Indian conflicts were still a problem . I think it's okay to superimpose common sense and situational analysis. Oh yeah, and none of us were there. This was a frontier land.
Unknown_player
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 10:09:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:36:16 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:17:14 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

http://www.isdagram.com...

We hadn't even gone passed New Jersey when we made it..... Taking a good study on history before you post something of the past that's actually supposed to help you. We made the second amendment to protect ourselves from the government ever turning on the citizens, for hunting because that's how they got meat, and they had no standing military.

I think we did for exactly the reasons I said. Indian conflicts were still a problem . I think it's okay to superimpose common sense and situational analysis. Oh yeah, and none of us were there. This was a frontier land.

It doesn't matter what you think.... It matters what's historically correct. Indians were another reason, but like I said, we had no standing army to fight the Indians; thus, we created the second amendment. It really doesn't matter anyway. I was being semi-sarcastic with that certain statement in the first place.
I'll put something here later...
klkl47
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/14/2014 11:38:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 10:09:26 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:36:16 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:17:14 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

http://www.isdagram.com...

We hadn't even gone passed New Jersey when we made it..... Taking a good study on history before you post something of the past that's actually supposed to help you. We made the second amendment to protect ourselves from the government ever turning on the citizens, for hunting because that's how they got meat, and they had no standing military.

I think we did for exactly the reasons I said. Indian conflicts were still a problem . I think it's okay to superimpose common sense and situational analysis. Oh yeah, and none of us were there. This was a frontier land.

It doesn't matter what you think.... It matters what's historically correct. Indians were another reason, but like I said, we had no standing army to fight the Indians; thus, we created the second amendment. It really doesn't matter anyway. I was being semi-sarcastic with that certain statement in the first place.

It doesn't matter what you think....

Well that's why we keep repeating the same mistakes...in society. And as to historical 'correctness' L O L, that people actually think there is such a thing.

Common sense is all there is.
XLAV
Posts: 13,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/14/2014 12:26:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 2:16:53 PM, Crescendo wrote:
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

There are still:

1. Crossbows (can be purchased at many stores)
2. Bows (can also be purchased at many stores)

People kill, not guns. However, when people kill, guns are more efficient and deadlier.
Unknown_player
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/14/2014 6:56:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/14/2014 11:38:36 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 10:09:26 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:36:16 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:17:14 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

http://www.isdagram.com...

We hadn't even gone passed New Jersey when we made it..... Taking a good study on history before you post something of the past that's actually supposed to help you. We made the second amendment to protect ourselves from the government ever turning on the citizens, for hunting because that's how they got meat, and they had no standing military.

I think we did for exactly the reasons I said. Indian conflicts were still a problem . I think it's okay to superimpose common sense and situational analysis. Oh yeah, and none of us were there. This was a frontier land.

It doesn't matter what you think.... It matters what's historically correct. Indians were another reason, but like I said, we had no standing army to fight the Indians; thus, we created the second amendment. It really doesn't matter anyway. I was being semi-sarcastic with that certain statement in the first place.

It doesn't matter what you think....

Well that's why we keep repeating the same mistakes...in society. And as to historical 'correctness' L O L, that people actually think there is such a thing.

Common sense is all there is.

Ummm.... Yeah.... Whatever floats your boat I guess 0_o . Let's just burn our history books and not pay attention to anything that has ever happened.

Common sense knows that history is very important...
I'll put something here later...
klkl47
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2014 7:24:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/14/2014 6:56:52 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/14/2014 11:38:36 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 10:09:26 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:36:16 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:17:14 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

http://www.isdagram.com...

We hadn't even gone passed New Jersey when we made it..... Taking a good study on history before you post something of the past that's actually supposed to help you. We made the second amendment to protect ourselves from the government ever turning on the citizens, for hunting because that's how they got meat, and they had no standing military.

I think we did for exactly the reasons I said. Indian conflicts were still a problem . I think it's okay to superimpose common sense and situational analysis. Oh yeah, and none of us were there. This was a frontier land.

It doesn't matter what you think.... It matters what's historically correct. Indians were another reason, but like I said, we had no standing army to fight the Indians; thus, we created the second amendment. It really doesn't matter anyway. I was being semi-sarcastic with that certain statement in the first place.

It doesn't matter what you think....

Well that's why we keep repeating the same mistakes...in society. And as to historical 'correctness' L O L, that people actually think there is such a thing.

Common sense is all there is.

Ummm.... Yeah.... Whatever floats your boat I guess 0_o . Let's just burn our history books and not pay attention to anything that has ever happened.

Common sense knows that history is very important...

Well my grade school history book showed us gleefully enjoy turkey with Indians. So.......
Unknown_player
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2014 8:05:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/15/2014 7:24:40 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/14/2014 6:56:52 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/14/2014 11:38:36 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 10:09:26 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:36:16 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:17:14 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

http://www.isdagram.com...

We hadn't even gone passed New Jersey when we made it..... Taking a good study on history before you post something of the past that's actually supposed to help you. We made the second amendment to protect ourselves from the government ever turning on the citizens, for hunting because that's how they got meat, and they had no standing military.

I think we did for exactly the reasons I said. Indian conflicts were still a problem . I think it's okay to superimpose common sense and situational analysis. Oh yeah, and none of us were there. This was a frontier land.

It doesn't matter what you think.... It matters what's historically correct. Indians were another reason, but like I said, we had no standing army to fight the Indians; thus, we created the second amendment. It really doesn't matter anyway. I was being semi-sarcastic with that certain statement in the first place.

It doesn't matter what you think....

Well that's why we keep repeating the same mistakes...in society. And as to historical 'correctness' L O L, that people actually think there is such a thing.

Common sense is all there is.

Ummm.... Yeah.... Whatever floats your boat I guess 0_o . Let's just burn our history books and not pay attention to anything that has ever happened.

Common sense knows that history is very important...

Well my grade school history book showed us gleefully enjoy turkey with Indians. So.......

So....you're contradicting yourself? That's one example. There were plenty of Indians and settlers that didn't get along at all.
I'll put something here later...
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2014 11:45:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

Well, yeah, people made guns so that they can use them, not just create them, then talk about them.

The fact is that, one way or another, guns exist. So, until humans are no longer as irrational and violent as they've been throughout history, we will just have to deal with their existence. Pretending that they no longer exist isn't going to fix anything.

I do believe they should be harder to get, but ultimately, I don't think about it too much. You see, murders happened before the advent of guns, and if every gun on the planet disappeared this very moment, I'm sure a murder would shortly follow the event.
klkl47
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2014 9:01:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/15/2014 8:05:55 AM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/15/2014 7:24:40 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/14/2014 6:56:52 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/14/2014 11:38:36 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 10:09:26 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:36:16 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:17:14 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

http://www.isdagram.com...

We hadn't even gone passed New Jersey when we made it..... Taking a good study on history before you post something of the past that's actually supposed to help you. We made the second amendment to protect ourselves from the government ever turning on the citizens, for hunting because that's how they got meat, and they had no standing military.

I think we did for exactly the reasons I said. Indian conflicts were still a problem . I think it's okay to superimpose common sense and situational analysis. Oh yeah, and none of us were there. This was a frontier land.

It doesn't matter what you think.... It matters what's historically correct. Indians were another reason, but like I said, we had no standing army to fight the Indians; thus, we created the second amendment. It really doesn't matter anyway. I was being semi-sarcastic with that certain statement in the first place.

It doesn't matter what you think....

Well that's why we keep repeating the same mistakes...in society. And as to historical 'correctness' L O L, that people actually think there is such a thing.

Common sense is all there is.

Ummm.... Yeah.... Whatever floats your boat I guess 0_o . Let's just burn our history books and not pay attention to anything that has ever happened.

Common sense knows that history is very important...

Well my grade school history book showed us gleefully enjoy turkey with Indians. So.......

So....you're contradicting yourself? That's one example. There were plenty of Indians and settlers that didn't get along at all.

No...my point is be careful believing everything you read. People in the US are lazy about history and it's easier to believe we were all happy, happy sharing thanksgiving than what really happened to the indians in America. I am just glad some people think through things themselves.
Unknown_player
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2014 9:12:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/16/2014 9:01:43 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/15/2014 8:05:55 AM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/15/2014 7:24:40 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/14/2014 6:56:52 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/14/2014 11:38:36 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 10:09:26 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:36:16 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:17:14 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

http://www.isdagram.com...

We hadn't even gone passed New Jersey when we made it..... Taking a good study on history before you post something of the past that's actually supposed to help you. We made the second amendment to protect ourselves from the government ever turning on the citizens, for hunting because that's how they got meat, and they had no standing military.

I think we did for exactly the reasons I said. Indian conflicts were still a problem . I think it's okay to superimpose common sense and situational analysis. Oh yeah, and none of us were there. This was a frontier land.

It doesn't matter what you think.... It matters what's historically correct. Indians were another reason, but like I said, we had no standing army to fight the Indians; thus, we created the second amendment. It really doesn't matter anyway. I was being semi-sarcastic with that certain statement in the first place.

It doesn't matter what you think....

Well that's why we keep repeating the same mistakes...in society. And as to historical 'correctness' L O L, that people actually think there is such a thing.

Common sense is all there is.

Ummm.... Yeah.... Whatever floats your boat I guess 0_o . Let's just burn our history books and not pay attention to anything that has ever happened.

Common sense knows that history is very important...

Well my grade school history book showed us gleefully enjoy turkey with Indians. So.......

So....you're contradicting yourself? That's one example. There were plenty of Indians and settlers that didn't get along at all.

No...my point is be careful believing everything you read. People in the US are lazy about history and it's easier to believe we were all happy, happy sharing thanksgiving than what really happened to the indians in America. I am just glad some people think through things themselves.

I am legitimately confused by your point and what side you are on.... It's too bad there aren't primary documents in most history books of what happened in history by the people who were there. Wait a second.....
I'll put something here later...
mrsatan
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2014 9:36:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/10/2014 9:58:52 PM, BodiSatva wrote:
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

Pupils die in Japan knife massacre

http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Still kind of have to get pretty close, which gives people a fight or flight choice at least. The tragedy about guns is no choice for the victims, it's a total coward way of killing.

I wonder if we could ever have a thoughtful discussion that straddles the fence of why people think guns are necessary and whether having them is only causing societal tragedy.

I have heard the argument of self defense. Has anyone proven that having guns creates an advantage there? Are we talking about a distopian future?

Guns aren't necessary in and of themselves. It's a circular necessity. Guns are necessary because guns exist. Or rather, because there are people who have guns and are willing to use them in ways most would deem to be immoral. The bad thing about guns is the same as the good thing about guns. They make it easier to kill things. But they are a tool, they have no inherent goodness or badness to them. They can be used as a defense when one finds themselves in the dangers of this world, or they can be used to make a person one of those dangers. The solution to the "problem" of guns is to lessen, or eliminate (which likely won't ever happen), the things which bring people to the point where they feel they need to use them in the latter way.

Guns are not a problem of society. They are a tool through which societies problems sometimes manifest. When person A shoots person B, the problem isn't that person B got shot. That's a result... an unfortunate result. But the problem? The problem is whatever made person A feel that person B needed to be shot.
To say one has free will, to have chosen other than they did, is to say they have will over their will... Will over the will they have over their will... Will over the will they have over the will they have over their will, etc... It's utter nonsense.
Heterodox
Posts: 293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2014 9:17:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/10/2014 9:58:52 PM, BodiSatva wrote:
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

Pupils die in Japan knife massacre

http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Still kind of have to get pretty close, which gives people a fight or flight choice at least. The tragedy about guns is no choice for the victims, it's a total coward way of killing.

You don't have a choice of fighting if you don't see it coming and all of the sudden a knife goes through your back.

I wonder if we could ever have a thoughtful discussion that straddles the fence of why people think guns are necessary and whether having them is only causing societal tragedy.

Hunting, corrupt society, second amendment, protect against tyranny, etc.

I have heard the argument of self defense. Has anyone proven that having guns creates an advantage there? Are we talking about a distopian future?

Most people run from guns even if they have one, especially in the case of home invasions or robberies. As you have said, you don't need to get close to somebody to shoot them. That's quite an advantage.


The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

Laws change when they are changed (amended). Good luck trying to take guns away from Americans though. I would rather be a criminal by having a gun than be a law abiding citizen without one. Most especially when defending myself against a criminal with a gun intent on doing me harm.
klkl47
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2014 6:29:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/16/2014 9:12:49 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/16/2014 9:01:43 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/15/2014 8:05:55 AM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/15/2014 7:24:40 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/14/2014 6:56:52 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/14/2014 11:38:36 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 10:09:26 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:36:16 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:17:14 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

http://www.isdagram.com...

We hadn't even gone passed New Jersey when we made it..... Taking a good study on history before you post something of the past that's actually supposed to help you. We made the second amendment to protect ourselves from the government ever turning on the citizens, for hunting because that's how they got meat, and they had no standing military.

I think we did for exactly the reasons I said. Indian conflicts were still a problem . I think it's okay to superimpose common sense and situational analysis. Oh yeah, and none of us were there. This was a frontier land.

It doesn't matter what you think.... It matters what's historically correct. Indians were another reason, but like I said, we had no standing army to fight the Indians; thus, we created the second amendment. It really doesn't matter anyway. I was being semi-sarcastic with that certain statement in the first place.

It doesn't matter what you think....

Well that's why we keep repeating the same mistakes...in society. And as to historical 'correctness' L O L, that people actually think there is such a thing.

Common sense is all there is.

Ummm.... Yeah.... Whatever floats your boat I guess 0_o . Let's just burn our history books and not pay attention to anything that has ever happened.

Common sense knows that history is very important...

Well my grade school history book showed us gleefully enjoy turkey with Indians. So.......

So....you're contradicting yourself? That's one example. There were plenty of Indians and settlers that didn't get along at all.

No...my point is be careful believing everything you read. People in the US are lazy about history and it's easier to believe we were all happy, happy sharing thanksgiving than what really happened to the indians in America. I am just glad some people think through things themselves.

I am legitimately confused by your point and what side you are on.... It's too bad there aren't primary documents in most history books of what happened in history by the people who were there. Wait a second.....

I am sorry you are confused.
Unknown_player
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 12:56:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/19/2014 6:29:59 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/16/2014 9:12:49 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/16/2014 9:01:43 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/15/2014 8:05:55 AM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/15/2014 7:24:40 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/14/2014 6:56:52 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/14/2014 11:38:36 AM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 10:09:26 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:36:16 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:17:14 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/13/2014 4:04:54 PM, klkl47 wrote:
At 6/11/2014 1:48:29 PM, Unknown_player wrote:
At 6/11/2014 6:52:38 AM, klkl47 wrote:
The only argument I think is bogus is the 2nd amendment. When we assume laws don't change. They do. The 2nd was written when the west was wild and law and order were not codified everywhere. That's not a good enough reason for guns.

http://www.isdagram.com...

We hadn't even gone passed New Jersey when we made it..... Taking a good study on history before you post something of the past that's actually supposed to help you. We made the second amendment to protect ourselves from the government ever turning on the citizens, for hunting because that's how they got meat, and they had no standing military.

I think we did for exactly the reasons I said. Indian conflicts were still a problem . I think it's okay to superimpose common sense and situational analysis. Oh yeah, and none of us were there. This was a frontier land.

It doesn't matter what you think.... It matters what's historically correct. Indians were another reason, but like I said, we had no standing army to fight the Indians; thus, we created the second amendment. It really doesn't matter anyway. I was being semi-sarcastic with that certain statement in the first place.

It doesn't matter what you think....

Well that's why we keep repeating the same mistakes...in society. And as to historical 'correctness' L O L, that people actually think there is such a thing.

Common sense is all there is.

Ummm.... Yeah.... Whatever floats your boat I guess 0_o . Let's just burn our history books and not pay attention to anything that has ever happened.

Common sense knows that history is very important...

Well my grade school history book showed us gleefully enjoy turkey with Indians. So.......

So....you're contradicting yourself? That's one example. There were plenty of Indians and settlers that didn't get along at all.

No...my point is be careful believing everything you read. People in the US are lazy about history and it's easier to believe we were all happy, happy sharing thanksgiving than what really happened to the indians in America. I am just glad some people think through things themselves.

I am legitimately confused by your point and what side you are on.... It's too bad there aren't primary documents in most history books of what happened in history by the people who were there. Wait a second.....

I am sorry you are confused.

Thanks for the clarification.....
I'll put something here later...
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 5:42:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The Fool: The pro-gun arguments are about as Reasonable and well worked out as Religious/Ideological arguments on here.

Against The Ideologist

A matter of blind faith for the sake of it.

<(8D)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
SemperVI
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2014 1:16:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/10/2014 3:30:22 PM, lemonice wrote:
Yeah, guns make it easier. But it's still the person who's doing the killing (with the help of a weapon).

And I mispelt these werds wit da help of mi keyboard
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2014 6:03:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/14/2014 12:26:24 PM, XLAV wrote:
At 6/11/2014 2:16:53 PM, Crescendo wrote:
At 6/10/2014 2:51:14 PM, klkl47 wrote:
Just read on twitter that People w guns kill not the guns. Kinda hard to kill someone without a gun these days. From a distance. Just saying.

There are still:

1. Crossbows (can be purchased at many stores)
2. Bows (can also be purchased at many stores)

People kill, not guns. However, when people kill, guns are more efficient and deadlier.

So what? "When" is the key term here - owning a gun doesn't necessarily mean that you're going to kill someone - meaning that, if you ban or restrict guns in ANY sense, you're restricting people who would have done no harm with one from buying and owning guns. It's ridiculous to argue that consensual trading should be outlawed because of psychopaths.

Full disclosure - I would fight to the death for the right for someone to own a tank, helicopter, or nuclear weapon - as long as their owning that thing wouldn't infringe on the property rights of anyone else.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush