Las Vegas

Duck and cover
User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Sat Oct 07, 2017 9:26 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote:Contrary to your assertion, guns do indeed "provide a vital/necessary/desired function", just like every other man made tool.

That is the flaw in your argument.

No.......the flaw in your obstinance and refusal to accept facts you don't like. REf: the linked to survey.


It doesn't matter whether there are 90 percent or only 50 percent who see the value of the tool, it still has value.

That is the flaw in your argument.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Las Vegas

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Oct 07, 2017 9:31 am

Of course it has value. It also has unavoidable harm. If you aren't stuck on stupid......you can recognize the same math the majority of people do as shown in EVERY survey taken.

You can have your own opinion/values==>but not as you push it to your own facts.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:02 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Of course it has value. It also has unavoidable harm. If you aren't stuck on stupid......you can recognize the same math the majority of people do as shown in EVERY survey taken.

You can have your own opinion/values==>but not as you push it to your own facts.


Cars also have unavoidable harm.

That is the flaw in your argument.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Las Vegas

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:23 am

X that was covered.

Do better.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Sat Oct 07, 2017 11:10 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:X that was covered.


It was not refuted.

Your argument still has the same flaw.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Las Vegas

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Oct 07, 2017 11:52 am

The fact that cars do harm is IN THE COST/BENEFIT EQUATION that most people determine make cars worth the harm but guns not worth the harm.

Stop being so pig headed and refusing to deal with the facts put before you. THAT is your flaw. I'm starting to think its not done on purpose..... just your own limitation.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Sat Oct 07, 2017 12:04 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:The fact that cars do harm is IN THE COST/BENEFIT EQUATION that most people determine make cars worth the harm but guns not worth the harm.


Some do and some don't. It doesn't matter what the proportion is.

In a free society, each individual makes that cost/benefit evaluation for themselves.

You do not get to make it for them.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Las Vegas

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Oct 07, 2017 12:08 pm

X==you simply can't follow an argument. By design or by limitation.

OK..........I've had enough. Until you engage the argument presented rather than just repeat your own personal desires, you have made your position clear and there is no reason to discuss these issues further.

Now.......I very much do not like ignoring people.......so.......don't respond to me anymore. I'm just not up to what you mean to say.

Mmmmmmmm Kay?

.................................and to be fair, I'll try not to engage you.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Sat Oct 07, 2017 12:14 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:X==you simply can't follow an argument. By design or by limitation.

OK..........I've had enough. Until you engage the argument presented rather than just repeat your own personal desires, . . .


Hey look the pot is calling the kettle black. Again.


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:. . . you have made your position clear and there is no reason to discuss these issues further.


I have expressed my opinions and you have expressed your opinions. That's good enough for me.


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:.................................and to be fair, I'll try not to engage you.


I'm not trying to shut you up on the issues. Just stop making personal insults. Is that too much to ask?

I don't mind that you sometimes have opposing opinions.

I don't mind when you challenge my arguments.

But please leave the insults out of it, mmkay??

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Las Vegas

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Oct 07, 2017 6:43 pm

On the cannon thing.
That experiment will be imprecise due to several sources of error. The biggest will be human inability to start and stop a stopwatch quickly enough. I do hope you are not referring to speed of light as a potential source of error, though. The experimenters will get an estimate of speed of sound, for that precise wavelength, which will not be accurate, but will not be too drastically far off.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Sat Oct 07, 2017 7:26 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:On the cannon thing.
That experiment will be imprecise due to several sources of error. The biggest will be human inability to start and stop a stopwatch quickly enough. I do hope you are not referring to speed of light as a potential source of error, though. The experimenters will get an estimate of speed of sound, for that precise wavelength, which will not be accurate, but will not be too drastically far off.


I agree with your comment about precision and stopwatches, etc.

Even assuming perfect precision, there is still a flaw in the procedure.

And no, the speed of light is not part of the flaw. Although I should have anticipated that question, given the context of another recent conversation.

Maybe the flaw is not as obvious as I thought. Bobbo should get it immediately since he is a pilot.

Here's a hint, in the form of a brain teaser (assume perfect precision in all measurements):

Suppose you have an airplane that goes 100 kilometers per hour. Suppose you fly from point A to point B, which is 100 kilometers apart. No wind. Travel time is exactly one hour. Now turn around and measure the time to fly B to A. Also exactly one hour. Total travel time is exactly two hours. Now suppose there is a wind of 10 kilometers per hour going from A to B. What is your total travel time A to B and then B to A?

Spoiler:
It's not two hours.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Las Vegas

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Oct 07, 2017 7:31 pm

Tales overheard at the Beer Bar at 8AM after 24 hour work day: If you want maximum range: in a head wind increase your speed, if you are in a tail wind, slow down. but I might have been drunk at the time.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Las Vegas

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Oct 07, 2017 8:45 pm

Wind speed did occur to me, but I immediately relegated that effect to 'just one of the very minor causes of imprecision. '

If you had your cannon 10 kilometers apart, it will take sound roughly 30 seconds to cross that distance. If you had a breeze of 10 kilometers per hour (you would be unlikely to bother doing the experiment in a strong wind, since it would whisk the smoke away), it will take an hour for the wind to cross between cannon. A minor error, but not worth considering too much.

That error for a single measurement, would be 1 part in 120 roughly, whereas human reflex time would introduce up to 0.2 seconds error, which would be roughly 1 part in 18 error, making the wind speed irrelevant.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:19 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Wind speed did occur to me, but I immediately relegated that effect to 'just one of the very minor causes of imprecision. '

If you had your cannon 10 kilometers apart, it will take sound roughly 30 seconds to cross that distance. If you had a breeze of 10 kilometers per hour (you would be unlikely to bother doing the experiment in a strong wind, since it would whisk the smoke away), it will take an hour for the wind to cross between cannon. A minor error, but not worth considering too much.

That error for a single measurement, would be 1 part in 120 roughly, whereas human reflex time would introduce up to 0.2 seconds error, which would be roughly 1 part in 18 error, making the wind speed irrelevant.


You raise a good point. The imprecision you describe obscures the structural flaw in the computation of the speed of sound in that experiment. Thus it seems reasonable not to look there for the error.

So, I'll just say it. The flaw in that experiment is in how the speed of sound is computed from the elapsed times.

It is not valid to average the elapsed times going both ways and then divide that result into the distance. Each of the elapsed times must first be divided into the distance and only then take the average.

This is because the elapsed time is in the denominator.

Let's look at some actual numbers.

With no wind, the elapsed time for sound to travel between A and B is:

10000 meters / 343 meters per second = 29.15 seconds

Pretty much what you said.

To better illustrate my point, let's suppose a higher wind speed of 36 kilometers per hour (10 meters per second), then we get two elapsed times, one each way:

10000 meters / 353 meters per second = 28.33 seconds
10000 meters / 333 meters per second = 30.03 seconds

(Compared to the no wind speed, that's a difference of .82 and .88 seconds respectively.)

Now suppose those elapsed times are the ones we measured, and now we want to compute the speed of sound.

If we average the elapsed times first and then divide that into the distance, we get:

10000 / (28.33 + 30.03) / 2 = 342.7 seconds

Not quite right (we should have got 343), but pretty close to the potential imprecision of the timekeeper.

If we do the computation correctly:

( (10000 / 28.33) + (10000 / 30.03) ) / 2 = 343 seconds, as required

The structural flaw in the original experiment was in averaging the denominator first.

But as you observed, in this experiment, the error introduced by that mistake is obscured by the potential imprecision of the timekeeper.

Oh well.

My point was that there was a structural flaw in the experiment. Under other circumstances (like in the airplane brain teaser) such a flaw could be significant.

Perhaps I was wrong that it was an easy flaw to notice.

Well, that was a big waste of time. Sorry. But thanks for hanging with me thru it anyway.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Las Vegas

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:44 pm

Not a waste. It is always good to exercise the little grey cells.

However, my mind works a little differently to that of the great Asimov. He is pure scientist and gets involved in esoterica. I spent most of my adult life as an industrial chemist, and we in that profession are practical and down to Earth. When looking at a scientific test, we immediately decide on the greatest source of error and pay little attention to other errors that will not make much difference to the result. As I said at first, the greatest source of error would be the lack of precision in using the sighting of smoke as the starting point. So, as a practical chemist, I would not worry too much about lesser errors.

The cannon test, though, is the sort of thing that would have been used a few centuries back, and they would have found the speed of sound so determined useful, since they had little to go on previously. I could redesign that test with a few modern tools to make it very precise, and then the wind speed would become critical.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Sat Oct 07, 2017 11:40 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:The cannon test, though, is the sort of thing that would have been used a few centuries back, and they would have found the speed of sound so determined useful, since they had little to go on previously.


That's what Asimov was describing in his book.


Lance Kennedy wrote:I could redesign that test with a few modern tools to make it very precise, and then the wind speed would become critical.


Today, you could do it indoors. No wind?

Image

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Las Vegas

Postby Gord » Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:45 am

"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4125
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Las Vegas

Postby gorgeous » Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:18 pm

Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:33 pm



I got three minutes into it before I got sick and tired of all the fallacies and stupid arguments he was spouting.

I've heard them all before and he's got nothing new. Same old stoopid {!#%@}, repackaged in a snarky video. BFD.

Since I quit watching at the three minute mark, it's possible I may have missed something truly new in his argument. If so, please tell me the time mark and I'll go watch it. Otherwise, it's a total waste of time.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Las Vegas

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:53 pm

gorgeous wrote:he's alive
You really are an idiot. If Stephen Paddock is alive then where is he?

Are your "remote viewers" still trying to hide his location, even though they know where he is?
:lol:
Lock em up.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Las Vegas

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:04 am

xouper wrote:


I got three minutes into it before I got sick and tired of all the fallacies and stupid arguments he was spouting.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!

3 min in is right after the video DESTROYS X's argument that Guns are OK because we drive Cars. (Starts at 2:32)

So transparent. No harm though. X will use Cars are dangerous too argument while avoiding how regulated they are until the ..............cows come home............the next magazine is empty?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Mon Oct 09, 2017 7:28 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:3 min in is right after the video DESTROYS X's argument that Guns are OK because we drive Cars. (Starts at 2:32)


He does no such thing.

His argument is flawed. He trots out the same old tropes and they are all wrong.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby TJrandom » Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:15 am

xouper wrote:
Lance Kennedy wrote:The one thing you can be sure of is that this atrocity will NOT lead to sensible government action.


We've had this conversation before.

There are no "sensible" gun laws that could have prevented this shooting.

Every manner of legislation that has been proposed would either not have prevented this shooting, or would be a gross infringement of the civil liberties and rights of millions of law abiding citizens.


Right! The shooter, being a law abiding citizen, would have been infringed of his civil liberty to take the lives, liberty, and pursuit of happiness from his victims. Nope, we wouldn`t want to do that. Nothing to be done... move along. :roll:

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Las Vegas

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:06 am

Everyone is saying it: "There are no "sensible" gun laws that could have prevented this shooting." And that is true, but only in the short term. Actually enforce a no guns law and in a few decades or so...there would be precious few. In the main.......you get rid of the guns and the "gun culture" dies out so the pressure to access illegal guns also slowly goes away.

Its never stated, because its hardly ever discussed beyond meaningless statements of condolence and "nothing we can do about it".......but it follows that making guns illegal would include making their manufacture and sale illegal as well. THAT would dry up the market fairly well................................. except................... even now I see promos for all plastic guns and even $2000 metal milling machines to make one's own firing mechanism without serial numbers.

Yes........its guns and our gun culture........both need a stake thru the heart......... and garlic in the mouth so they don't rise again.

"Sensible"---is just what the current crop of SC rulings lack. Sensible is.........even the military should not have them.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby TJrandom » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:14 am

No legislation?

It seems to me that a typical American solution could help here – the use of private industry. Just require that gun owners be bonded/insured for accidental or illegal use – of course proportional to actual damage caused by that use. Maybe deaths at $50m per body, injury at $25m, and property damage at $1m for each piece of property damaged, etc. Then let the insurance companies determine who they insure and at what rate. Get your insurance, get your gun.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3069
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Las Vegas

Postby ElectricMonk » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:16 am

Gun owners have no clue about supply and demand, or balance of power.

It should be the strongly vested interest of anyone with a gun to make it harder for anyone else to have one.
I mean, obviously.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:19 am

TJrandom wrote:
xouper wrote:
Lance Kennedy wrote:The one thing you can be sure of is that this atrocity will NOT lead to sensible government action.


We've had this conversation before.

There are no "sensible" gun laws that could have prevented this shooting.

Every manner of legislation that has been proposed would either not have prevented this shooting, or would be a gross infringement of the civil liberties and rights of millions of law abiding citizens.


Right! The shooter, being a law abiding citizen, would have been infringed of his civil liberty to take the lives, liberty, and pursuit of happiness from his victims. Nope, we wouldn`t want to do that. Nothing to be done... move along. :roll:


I did not say anyone has the right to take lives, etc.

You invented that straw man all on your own.

What he did was illegal. Murdering people is against the law.

What I said was that taking guns away from law abiding people is not an acceptable solution.

The problem is that there are people who will violate the law and there is no law you can make to prevent that.

I understand your frustration. This is a serious problem. But sarcasm and straw men are not helpful.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby TJrandom » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:34 am

He was law abiding until the moment he wasn`t, and 58 people died, with many more seriously injured. Being law abiding does not prevent gun owners from becoming murderers. Since it cannot be prevented, require insurance to mop up the mess when it occurs.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:35 am

ElectricMonk wrote:It should be the strongly vested interest of anyone with a gun to make it harder for anyone else to have one.


I do not agree.

I am more than happy that many other sane people have guns for self defense, not only for defense of themselves, but for defense of those around them.

See for example:

The Chicago Tribune wrote:
Uber driver, licensed to carry gun, shoots gunman in Logan Square

Geoff Ziezulewicz, April 20, 2015

Uber driver with licensed gun takes down man firing at crowd, prosecutors say.

Authorities say no charges will be filed against an Uber driver who shot and wounded a gunman who opened fire on a crowd of people in Logan Square over the weekend.

The driver had a concealed-carry permit and acted in the defense of himself and others, Assistant State's Attorney Barry Quinn said in court Sunday. . . .


If his right to carry a gun had been violated, as many people seem more than willing to do, then how many lives would have been lost that day before the police showed up?

As bobbo says so often, there are pros and cons to all we do.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:42 am

TJrandom wrote:He was law abiding until the moment he wasn`t,


That's true of every criminal, not just gun owners.


TJrandom wrote:and 58 people died, with many more seriously injured. Being law abiding does not prevent gun owners from becoming murderers. Since it cannot be prevented, require insurance to mop up the mess when it occurs.


Then require liability insurance from everyone, not just gun owners, since anyone at any time can become a criminal.

Insurance companies will have a field day profiling who is most at risk for becoming a criminal, and charge accordingly. Are you at risk of being a member of an inner city gang? Higher premiums.

I can hear the liberals screaming now how racist that will be.

In Chicago, some 50 people are killed with guns every month.

Every month.

Year after year.

That's a much worse problem than the Las Vegas shooting.

In any case, how do you get people to buy insurance for guns they have illegally?

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3069
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Las Vegas

Postby ElectricMonk » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:16 am

Mental illness is the usual go-to reason used to avoid gun control attempts.
Looks like Vegas won't be any different.

But the obvious conclusion is to have regular mental health checks of gun owners, spotting suicidal and/or homicidal tendencies.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:54 am

ElectricMonk wrote:Mental illness is the usual go-to reason used to avoid gun control attempts.
Looks like Vegas won't be any different.

But the obvious conclusion is to have regular mental health checks of gun owners, spotting suicidal and/or homicidal tendencies.


That would be a violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7367
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby TJrandom » Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:20 am

xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:Mental illness is the usual go-to reason used to avoid gun control attempts.
Looks like Vegas won't be any different.

But the obvious conclusion is to have regular mental health checks of gun owners, spotting suicidal and/or homicidal tendencies.


That would be a violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.


Nope - voluntary if it was a requirement of private insurance.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19455
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Las Vegas

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:29 am

TJrandom wrote:He was law abiding until the moment he wasn`t, and 58 people died, with many more seriously injured. Being law abiding does not prevent gun owners from becoming murderers. Since it cannot be prevented, require insurance to mop up the mess when it occurs.

And all guns are stored safely until some five yo shoots his kid sister.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:50 am

TJrandom wrote:
xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:But the obvious conclusion is to have regular mental health checks of gun owners, spotting suicidal and/or homicidal tendencies.


That would be a violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.


Nope - voluntary if it was a requirement of private insurance.


Not if the insurance is required by law. Rights cannot be denied without due process of the law.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3069
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Las Vegas

Postby ElectricMonk » Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:57 am

So car and health insurance violates two amendments?
Who knew.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19455
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Las Vegas

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:00 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:So car and health insurance violates two amendments?
Who knew.

The gun lobby has long since run out of rational arguments for over-the-top gun obsessions, so they just say whatever the {!#%@} pops into their minds now.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:34 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:So car and health insurance violates two amendments?
Who knew.


Neither of those require everyone to undergo routine mental health evaluations, like you proposed for gun insurance.

That is the flaw in your argument.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Las Vegas

Postby xouper » Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:39 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:So car and health insurance violates two amendments?
Who knew.

The gun lobby has long since run out of rational arguments for over-the-top gun obsessions, so they just say whatever the {!#%@} pops into their minds now.


You mean like you're doing here?

That's got to be one of the most uninformed things I've seen you post lately.

In any case, since I am not "the gun lobby", your criticism does not apply to me personally.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3069
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Las Vegas

Postby ElectricMonk » Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:25 pm

xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:So car and health insurance violates two amendments?
Who knew.


Neither of those require everyone to undergo routine mental health evaluations, like you proposed for gun insurance.

That is the flaw in your argument.


Try getting car or health insurance when you have a record of mental health issues.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams


Return to “Guns”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest