Poll

What is your personal position with the recreational/hunting/concealed carry use of firearms?

Support and partake in one or all of the mentioned uses of firearms.
21 (41.2%)
Support the use of firearms, but do not partake in it.
19 (37.3%)
Neither support, nor use any form of firearm.
11 (21.6%)

Total Members Voted: 51

Author Topic: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage  (Read 15290 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Agamemnon

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4940
  • Darwins +15/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #145 on: October 06, 2010, 02:03:19 PM »
koberulz, FYI:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring_(idiom)

Quote
Red herring is an idiomatic expression referring to a rhetorical tactic of diverting attention away from an item of significance.
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.  --Bertrand Russell

Offline Seppuku

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3856
  • Darwins +125/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • I am gay for Fred Phelps
    • Seppuku Arts
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #146 on: October 06, 2010, 02:09:22 PM »
Quote from: koberulz
There are decent reasons to control guns, too. The question is whether or not they are more reasonable than the reasons not to, a point I wasn't covering.

So, it would appear there is a point at which you'd budge to give up your civil liberties, where would you draw the line and why? Your current reasoning defends the right to own missiles as well as guns - you don't appear to draw the line at people being killed. What would make it more reasonable to 'control' guns than not?

Also, where do you stand on the 'taking arms to the government' argument? You claimed earlier your freedom allows you to overthrow the government, today, with the government's firepower, you need more than just guns. You also claimed that it'd be too difficult to smuggle weapons (it was your response to me suggesting that if civil war ever happened, guns would be smuggled), so I don't think you can use that as an answer, unless you think you were wrong.

Should missiles be included in the right to bear arms?

When you talk about 'control' what would you consider to be control? I mean our ideas of 'control' are obviously two completely different things - 'control' to me is to allow allow the purchase of hunting rifles with a hunting permit and the possession of de-activated firearms and active firearms to be found in sporting locations supervised by licensed professionals with emergency procedures in place- therefore only in rare cases will any be used as a murder weapon and aren't likely to serve to increase the numbers of murders per year in a country. Your idea of control might be something different.
“It is difficult to understand the universe if you only study one planet” - Miyamoto Musashi
Warning: I occassionally forget to proofread my posts to spot typos or to spot poor editing.

Offline koberulz

  • Emergency Room
  • ****
  • Posts: 374
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Everything I say is false.
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #147 on: October 06, 2010, 02:12:02 PM »
You are trying to make an irrelevant point
Not really. You mentioned that the government clearly realises what a disaster banning guns would be. This argument involved a situation that had a lot in common with the current drug situation, which led to my point that if the government made drugs illegal (marijuana becoming illegal just two years after the end of prohibition, even), it's not inconceivable that they could similarly miss the point with regards to guns (and, as I went on to point out, there are actually reasonable...well, reasons, for banning guns, which there aren't with drugs).

That seems sufficiently relevant to me.

Quote
I will assume that you have tacitly agreed with all of my earlier points?
Other than government clearly understanding what a mess banning guns would be, I haven't seen anything I disagree with. Even that is probably true, but you do never know with politicians.

koberulz, FYI:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring_(idiom)

Quote
Red herring is an idiomatic expression referring to a rhetorical tactic of diverting attention away from an item of significance.
My confusion over the definition of the term was sarcasm.

Offline koberulz

  • Emergency Room
  • ****
  • Posts: 374
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Everything I say is false.
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #148 on: October 06, 2010, 02:14:09 PM »
So, it would appear there is a point at which you'd budge to give up your civil liberties
Is there?

Quote
When you talk about 'control' what would you consider to be control? I mean our ideas of 'control' are obviously two completely different things - 'control' to me is to allow allow the purchase of hunting rifles with a hunting permit and the possession of de-activated firearms and active firearms to be found in sporting locations supervised by licensed professionals with emergency procedures in place- therefore only in rare cases will any be used as a murder weapon and aren't likely to serve to increase the numbers of murders per year in a country. Your idea of control might be something different.
Any limit at all on the availability of guns. I didn't have anything in mind; just about any level of control could be seen as being reasonable, up to and including a total ban. I don't see it that way, but I can see why others might without being complete morons.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12580
  • Darwins +703/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #149 on: October 06, 2010, 02:49:03 PM »
None of any of this invalidates my prior point.




I think we've seen anger already. So, three to go.
 

Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Agamemnon

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4940
  • Darwins +15/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #150 on: October 06, 2010, 03:03:57 PM »
You are trying to make an irrelevant point
Not really.

Yes, really.

You mentioned that the government clearly realises what a disaster banning guns would be. This argument involved a situation that had a lot in common with the current drug situation, which led to my point that if the government made drugs illegal (marijuana becoming illegal just two years after the end of prohibition, even), it's not inconceivable that they could similarly miss the point with regards to guns (and, as I went on to point out, there are actually reasonable...well, reasons, for banning guns, which there aren't with drugs).

And we have pointed out that your comparison of some drugs which are illegal to the banning of all firearms is an invalid comparison.

And I pointed out that the gun lobby and their supporters would make it abundantly known to legislators that banning guns is a practical impossibility. You must think our politicians are all total idiots if you believe that they wouldn't be aware of the economic fallout from an all-inclusive gun ban. I can assure you, they are not that stupid. If they were that stupid, I'm pretty sure that a nation-wide, all-inclusive firearms ban would already be the law of the land. That seems like a reasonable assumption.

You have no point to make, here. There is no reason to discuss drug laws, because all you want to do is conflate the illegalization of a subset of X with a complete ban on Y.

You are just grasping at straws to keep your "boy who cried wolf" fantasy alive for some reason.

My confusion over the definition of the term was sarcasm.

I know.
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.  --Bertrand Russell

Offline Operator_011

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2646
  • Darwins +17/-1
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #151 on: October 06, 2010, 03:10:15 PM »
This is definitely more interesting than the other gun thread(s).


Popcorn.. popcorn.. come and get your tasty popcorn..
Former Moderator Account

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6888
  • Darwins +927/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #152 on: October 06, 2010, 03:13:57 PM »
I want to own a shoulder-mounted rocket launcher. I want to own a stash of illegal drugs. And I want to move next door to Koberulz. Let the gummint come! Bring it on, beeyatches! :D
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Dante

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2250
  • Darwins +76/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • Hedonist Extraordinaire
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #153 on: October 06, 2010, 03:25:21 PM »
I want to own a shoulder-mounted rocket launcher.

 :shrug I'd be ok with that.


I want to own a stash of illegal drugs.

I'm ok with that too.


And I want to move next door to Koberulz.

Are you sure?


Let the gummint come! Bring it on, beeyatches! :D

They're already here!
Actually it doesn't. One could conceivably be all-powerful but not exceptionally intelligent.

Offline Seppuku

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3856
  • Darwins +125/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • I am gay for Fred Phelps
    • Seppuku Arts
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #154 on: October 06, 2010, 04:38:18 PM »
Quote from: koberulz
Is there?

You said "there's decent reasons to control guns" and "the question is whether or not they are more reasonable than not to". I'm wondering what be a more 'reasonable'? That sounds to me like, if the reasons to control them outweighs the reason not to then, you'd budge. I'm wondering what you'd consider reasonable?


Also, I get the feeling you're dodging. When you brought up parallel situations that I deemed inaccurate of my argument, I gave you answers, we've gone by a few posts and it seems you're avoiding giving us any answers or pointing out the flaws, you've claimed that there's reasons to control 'missiles' but you've neither stated what they are nor whether or not they outweigh the reasons not to. Your vagueness would lead me to assume that my assessment of your argument has been accurate.


I mean I don't want to suggest that guns are always bad and I don't want to go on a long trail of ridiculous arguments and conjecture - its proving to be a waste of your time and everybody else's. As it stands - the evidence is in neither favour. Your statistics suggests that America needs to keep hold of its guns. Frank's statistics suggest that the rest of the world might not need guns. Neither sets suggest exactly what would happen as a result of gun legalisation in other cultures or the exact causes of increase or decrease in violent crime in other cultures, you'll remember my previous argument about 'statistics', that view still stands and if the day comes and somebody drops that study right in front of me that proves that the UK will be better off with guns, then I'll gladly accept it. Most of us here are scientifically minded, so evidence is what we live by. I argue that you can't know something until you can confirm it, neither of us can confirm exactly what would happen, it'd be a fool's decision to take the US's statistics and universalise them, a good sociologist, heck any good scientist will tell you that's stupid. You might hold this libertarian ideology, and you're perfectly welcome to it, but don't allow it to blind you from the lack of evidence. You may feel guns would be the solution, but I'm sure you're man enough to accept that whilst you feel this, it's still unconfirmed?
“It is difficult to understand the universe if you only study one planet” - Miyamoto Musashi
Warning: I occassionally forget to proofread my posts to spot typos or to spot poor editing.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6888
  • Darwins +927/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #155 on: October 06, 2010, 05:14:40 PM »
Culture has a lot to do with how dangerous a society is-- what is acceptable behavior is more important than just the presence or absence of guns.

Japan is a very crowded, highly industrialized gunless country with extremely low rates of crime. The culture there is polite and controlled.

I lived in a poor Latin American country where lots of men had guns, walked around with them sticking out of their belts like cowboys. It was definitely a sign of macho manhood. But hardly anyone ever got shot, because the idea of shooting someone was just not acceptable.

This was not a non-violent place like Japan-- there were a lot of fights, especially domestic violence and even some killings. But the people fought with fists and killed with knives or machetes. Not guns.

Culturally, if a person disrespected another in a bar and they wanted to fight, they would fist-fight, and if it got bad, someone might run home to get a machete or knife--even if they had a gun! If someone wanted to protect his family from a burglar, he would probably grab his machete before even thinking of grabbing his gun.

I knew of several people cut with machetes in bar fights and one killed in such a fight. I only know one person who was killed by a gun. It was a young police officer who committed suicide by shooting himself in the head with his own service pistol.

I am not saying it is better to get chopped up by a machete than shot. But at least with a machete you are not going to kill the wrong person by accident because they are too far away to see them clearly. It is pretty hard for a child to kill a friend by picking up a machete and examining it. And, if an assailant is close enough to get cut by a machete, they probably deserve it.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline bosey926

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1039
  • Darwins +8/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #156 on: October 06, 2010, 10:51:16 PM »
This is definitely more interesting than the other gun thread(s).


Popcorn.. popcorn.. come and get your tasty popcorn..

I know and whole primary intention was to see atheists and how we used firearms.  Although, the thread has gotten somewhat interesting, so it doesn't bother me that it was taken in so many directions.

Offline Str82Hell

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Darwins +3/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #157 on: October 07, 2010, 05:23:16 AM »
And we have pointed out that your comparison of some drugs which are illegal to the banning of all firearms is an invalid comparison.
I disagree. By legalising drugs an entirely new industry might (would) arise, providing labour for people and tax income for the government.
Quote from: George Bernard Shaw
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12466
  • Darwins +293/-32
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #158 on: October 07, 2010, 07:09:46 AM »
How does that disagree with what Agamemnon said?
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.

Offline Agamemnon

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4940
  • Darwins +15/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #159 on: October 07, 2010, 07:35:11 AM »
And we have pointed out that your comparison of some drugs which are illegal to the banning of all firearms is an invalid comparison.
I disagree. By legalising drugs an entirely new industry might (would) arise, providing labour for people and tax income for the government.

The point you're trying to make has absolutely nothing to do with my statement above. Regardless, I could make the same argument about guided surface to air missles, too.
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.  --Bertrand Russell

Offline Agamemnon

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4940
  • Darwins +15/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #160 on: October 07, 2010, 07:41:29 AM »
I'm going to email my congressman and see if I can find out if he is aware of the devastating impact an all-inclusive gun ban would have on the U.S. economy. I am an acquaintance of his, so I should stand a pretty good chance of getting a real response.
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.  --Bertrand Russell

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #161 on: October 07, 2010, 08:48:15 AM »
I have a question, actually one brought up last night while my husband and I were chatting.  Would it make a difference to gun owners who say that they own guns for target shooting, if gun ownership was very curtailed *but* you could go to licensed places and shoot *anything*, from a .38 to a M1A1 (yep, I mean the tank)?  Would that make a difference on how you viewed gun control? 
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12580
  • Darwins +703/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #162 on: October 07, 2010, 08:59:27 AM »
Should the right to bear arms extend to swords as well? 

I'd feel more comfortable if people carried swords with blades at least 18" long rather than handguns.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #163 on: October 07, 2010, 09:03:20 AM »
Because pulling a gun on someone tends to make the situation safer.
For the person holding the gun, yes.

I'm having trouble following who is claiming what here.  But as an answer for right now,  I am of the philosophy that if one pulls a gun, you are in effect committing to kill a person. If I draw, I am shooting. Waving one around as only a threat is ridiculous, in my opinion. 
There's a difference between waving it around idly, and pulling it out and having the situation immediately defuse, at which point firing it would be ridiculous.
I find this to be delusional and not backed up by any evidence. If you can provide some, please do.  AFAIK, just having a gun makes the situation more dangerous since it is a weapon intended to kill and you cannot guarantee the effect.  You assume that drawing a gun will *always* defuse a situation and provide no evidence it does. You claim that drawing a gun makes the holder safer and show no evidence it does.  

I am not convinced that most people have the presence of mind to know when and when not to pull a weapon. It becomes a crutch and can aggravate a situation not "immediately defuse" it as you assume.  The trouble is that you *can't* know.  You think you can become a hero with a gun and that's not guaranteed.  Now, if we could guarantee that people who get carry permits are trained, not like the idiots who come to PA to hunt deer and haven't fired a gun before or only once a year, then I might be less bothered by the idea.     
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline Seppuku

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3856
  • Darwins +125/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • I am gay for Fred Phelps
    • Seppuku Arts
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #164 on: October 07, 2010, 09:39:55 AM »
Should the right to bear arms extend to swords as well? 

I'd feel more comfortable if people carried swords with blades at least 18" long rather than handguns.

I'm quite quick handed with a sword, I already know how to stop somebody drawing their sword - I could gain an upper hand. Would you fuck with a guy carrying a claymore? Personally I'd prefer my Bo, it's a lot harder to get in close to somebody wielding one and you can do enough damage to get out of a situation - even one with multiple attackers. A bo is big enough for anybody to realise you're carrying one and that ought be enough to deter attackers and it's hard to rob a grocery store with one. Wooden bos, sadly aren't a match for swords, especially katanas, so they ought to supply metal ones - or better yet, halberds, which can be used in a similar way (I've tried), they can cause more damage if needed for more difficult situations.
“It is difficult to understand the universe if you only study one planet” - Miyamoto Musashi
Warning: I occassionally forget to proofread my posts to spot typos or to spot poor editing.

Offline Agamemnon

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4940
  • Darwins +15/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #165 on: October 07, 2010, 09:57:51 AM »
I am not convinced that most people have the presence of mind to know when and when not to pull a weapon. It becomes a crutch and can aggravate a situation not "immediately defuse" it as you assume.

That reminds me of a story: My daughter-in-law works for a small restaurant in BFE North Carolina. One day there were a few rednecks in there eating when a homeless guy walks in. He goes to the bar but the rednecks are leery of him, so one of them draws his previously-concealed handgun under the table and cocks it, thinking that there's going to be trouble from the homeless guy. All of a sudden my DiL hears a loud bang as the redneck accidentally shoots himself in the foot.

Of course, the cops and ambulance show up, and the guy is in a panic because (a) he didn't have any kind of handgun permit and (b) he was a convicted felon, so he wasn't even allowed to have a handgun in the first place.

So I would have to agree with velkyn on the presence of mind/aggravation thing.
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.  --Bertrand Russell

Offline koberulz

  • Emergency Room
  • ****
  • Posts: 374
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Everything I say is false.
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #166 on: October 07, 2010, 10:41:45 AM »
And we have pointed out that your comparison of some drugs which are illegal to the banning of all firearms is an invalid comparison.
So your claim is that there is not a black market for drugs, violent crime occurring to resolve disputes in that black market, or overflowing jails? Because that is news to me.

It's exactly the same situation you mentioned with regards to banning guns. A black market springs up for the illegal item, violence and jailings ensue. The government is also losing revenue they could gain from selling these items legally, and jobs selling and creating this item disappear. What exactly is the difference between the two situations, other than scale? Banning illegal drugs is effectively banning drugs from a consumer perspective anyway, because even the ones that are legal have to be acquired illegally for recreational use, barring a massive coincidence.

Quote
And I pointed out that the gun lobby and their supporters would make it abundantly known to legislators that banning guns is a practical impossibility.
And there are people making noise about drugs. Less effective post-ban than pre-ban, perhaps, but it's still happening. Mostly with respect to marijuana (which appears to be working in some states).

Quote
You must think our politicians are all total idiots
Not all of them, but some sure are. There's certainly no lack of government stupidity in the world.

Quote
You are just grasping at straws to keep your "boy who cried wolf" fantasy alive for some reason.
Could you tell me what this fantasy is? The scenario you mentioned post-ban with respect to guns sounded similar to the situation with the War on Drugs. I pointed this out. That's all. Unless, again, you're claiming that the idea of an underground drug market and overflowing US jails is a fantasy.

That sounds to me like, if the reasons to control them outweighs the reason not to then, you'd budge. I'm wondering what you'd consider reasonable?
Not really, because 'reasonable' would involve the banning of guns not being an infringement on our freedoms, which can never be the case.


Quote
you've claimed that there's reasons to control 'missiles' but you've neither stated what they are
Same as the reasons to control guns. They're dangerous weapons. Moreso than guns, because they have very limited applications for self-defense.

Quote
Your vagueness would lead me to assume that my assessment of your argument has been accurate.
I don't really have an argument with regards to missiles. In an ideal world, they'd be legal, but we're not in an ideal world. I don't really know, it's not ever going to happen so it's not been worth thinking about until now.


Quote
Most of us here are scientifically minded, so evidence is what we live by. I argue that you can't know something until you can confirm it, neither of us can confirm exactly what would happen, it'd be a fool's decision to take the US's statistics and universalise them, a good sociologist, heck any good scientist will tell you that's stupid. You might hold this libertarian ideology, and you're perfectly welcome to it, but don't allow it to blind you from the lack of evidence. You may feel guns would be the solution, but I'm sure you're man enough to accept that whilst you feel this, it's still unconfirmed?
You can go on about evidence and whatnot all you like, but it's irrelevant when it comes to the issue of freedom. If you're of the position that what people might do with an item should affect its legal status, then you can look at your stats and propose bans on all sorts of things up to and including tea cosies (which killed three people in 2002 or so). But I'm not, so all the gun violence statistics in the world have no impact on my position.

I find this to be delusional and not backed up by any evidence. If you can provide some, please do.  AFAIK, just having a gun makes the situation more dangerous since it is a weapon intended to kill and you cannot guarantee the effect.  You assume that drawing a gun will *always* defuse a situation and provide no evidence it does. You claim that drawing a gun makes the holder safer and show no evidence it does.
Always? Of course not. Some people are just that insane. However, I know that if I were in the process of committing a crime and the victim pulled out a gun, I'd stop what I was doing and get out of there.

I also heard a guy tell of a time he was held up with a knife, pulled out his gun and the would-be robber pocketed the weapon and walked off. He also saved a neighbour from a possible assault or murder in similar fashion. On neither occasion did he fire a shot.

Naturally, it's anecdotal evidence, but I'm not sure how you could empirically prove anything either way with regards to this issue.

Quote
Now, if we could guarantee that people who get carry permits are trained, not like the idiots who come to PA to hunt deer and haven't fired a gun before or only once a year, then I might be less bothered by the idea.     
Yeah. A mandatory level of training is something I'd be okay with, for the same reason we have driver's licenses. That said, there would need to be some measure to ensure maximum training requirements, because otherwise anti-gun states could impose ridiculous amounts of training to deter gun owners.

Offline Str82Hell

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Darwins +3/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #167 on: October 07, 2010, 10:55:38 AM »
And we have pointed out that your comparison of some drugs which are illegal to the banning of all firearms is an invalid comparison.
I disagree. By legalising drugs an entirely new industry might (would) arise, providing labour for people and tax income for the government.

The point you're trying to make has absolutely nothing to do with my statement above. Regardless, I could make the same argument about guided surface to air missles, too.
I'm not trying to make a point, koberulz does, and he's absolutely right and it absolutely is a valid comparison.
There's a huge amount of tax money lost by banning drugs, prisons are filled with people because of possession and smuggling and the United States has caused a big crisis in Mexico by insisting they keep their drug laws in place. As koberulz said, if that logic occurred to them, the war on drugs would never have happened, because it's an utter waste of money and resources.
Quote from: George Bernard Shaw
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12466
  • Darwins +293/-32
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #168 on: October 07, 2010, 10:57:20 AM »
Str82Hell, if you are going to quote Agamemnon's posts, then it would be proper etiquette to actually address their content, instead of deliberately ignoring it as you've been doing for the past several posts.
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.

Offline Str82Hell

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Darwins +3/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #169 on: October 07, 2010, 11:09:19 AM »
Str82Hell, if you are going to quote Agamemnon's posts, then it would be proper etiquette to actually address their content, instead of deliberately ignoring it as you've been doing for the past several posts.
No, because that's not my position. I've made that argument myself earlier on. I disagree with koberulz on this topic and I disagree that the US is heading towards banning all guns and besides that, I really don't care. koberulz made a valid comparison and after nagging about definitions and other petty things it was asserted that his analogy was wrong and it has never been explained why.
Quote from: George Bernard Shaw
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12466
  • Darwins +293/-32
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #170 on: October 07, 2010, 11:11:14 AM »
If koberulz made a valid comparison, and Agamemnon's argument for why it's not valid is flawed, then perhaps you should address Agamemnon's argument instead of deliberately ignoring it as you've been doing.
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.

Offline Str82Hell

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Darwins +3/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #171 on: October 07, 2010, 11:13:26 AM »
He has never presented an argument so it can't be demonstrated to be flawed.
Quote from: George Bernard Shaw
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one

Offline Seppuku

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3856
  • Darwins +125/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • I am gay for Fred Phelps
    • Seppuku Arts
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #172 on: October 07, 2010, 11:43:42 AM »
Quote from: koberulz
Not really, because 'reasonable' would involve the banning of guns not being an infringement on our freedoms, which can never be the case.

Quote from: koberulz
Same as the reasons to control guns. They're dangerous weapons. Moreso than guns, because they have very limited applications for self-defense.

Quote from: koberulz
You can go on about evidence and whatnot all you like, but it's irrelevant when it comes to the issue of freedom. If you're of the position that what people might do with an item should affect its legal status, then you can look at your stats and propose bans on all sorts of things up to and including tea cosies (which killed three people in 2002 or so). But I'm not, so all the gun violence statistics in the world have no impact on my position.

So why is it reasonable to infringe on the rights of owning missiles but not guns? This is not what you have covered. You say missiles are more dangerous and have fewer applications for self-defense - what if guns proved to be as dangerous or more dangerous in a society than missiles? You state all the gun violence statistics in the world would have no impact on your position, so it wouldn't matter to you? So why then are you drawing the line at missiles? In an ideal world you'd say missiles ought to be legal, so what is it that's making you draw the line in this 'less' ideal world?



If quality of life and safety in a society could be worsened by a massive degree by the legalisation of guns you wouldn't give a crap because you're free to keep your gun? Even if evidence and statistics show that other rights have been infringed as a result. I challenge you to live in a warring 3rd would country, you may take your guns and see how you feel about 'gun crime statistics' then, I'd argue that if developing countries weren't armed in the first place then the situation would be a lot better - it'd also make it easier for the likes of the UN to maintain peace. We wouldn't have needed to worry about WMD's and the middle east wouldn't be killing off our soldiers.

I'm beginning to think it's your kind of mentality that has led to the arming of developing countries, offering them more firepower to kill each other and pose threats to countries including our own. We should never have armed developing countries, which includes Iraq and Afghanistan who are now using arms the West supplied against us. Several accounts of attempted genocide have been aided by the supply of guns. These kind of ideals also armed people to stop communism spreading into their countries, but in turn aided further destruction. But none of that matters so long as they're all free to carry guns? I am sure many of these people, particularly victims, would much prefer to live in a much more controlled society where they're safe and I doubt they'll complain that they don't have that sweet smell of freedom when told they can't carry guns. Plenty of people flee to safer countries, including those with strict gun laws, like the UK.
“It is difficult to understand the universe if you only study one planet” - Miyamoto Musashi
Warning: I occassionally forget to proofread my posts to spot typos or to spot poor editing.

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12466
  • Darwins +293/-32
  • Gender: Male
Re: Atheists and Gun Ownership/Usage
« Reply #173 on: October 07, 2010, 11:48:45 AM »
He has never presented an argument so it can't be demonstrated to be flawed.

Perhaps a read through the thread is in order, then?
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.