Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Duck and cover
User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Mon May 04, 2015 11:09 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:
xouper wrote:You are correct in pointing out the inconsistency. The paper I cited claims such knife bans are not constitutional, but the US Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the matter.

so you would think it a great expression of personal freedom and a great way to ensure personal and general safety if people (laws permitting) would run around with assault rifles with bayonets attached, and a claymore on the back?

Are you predicting that is what would happen if laws did not prohibit people from running around armed as you describe?

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4143
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby ElectricMonk » Tue May 05, 2015 3:59 am

xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:so you would think it a great expression of personal freedom and a great way to ensure personal and general safety if people (laws permitting) would run around with assault rifles with bayonets attached, and a claymore on the back?

Are you predicting that is what would happen if laws did not prohibit people from running around armed as you describe?


I was asking a question...

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Tue May 05, 2015 4:20 am

ElectricMonk wrote:
xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:so you would think it a great expression of personal freedom and a great way to ensure personal and general safety if people (laws permitting) would run around with assault rifles with bayonets attached, and a claymore on the back?

Are you predicting that is what would happen if laws did not prohibit people from running around armed as you describe?

I was asking a question...

And part of my answer is my question to you. The other part of my answer depends on your answer.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 13133
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby JO 753 » Tue May 05, 2015 5:25 am

Window shot out. 280,000,000 rezults.

Therez your mysterious culprit, xoup. The glass industry iz the hidden hand behind the entire scandal. Anything to increase salez, no matter the side effects.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4143
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby ElectricMonk » Tue May 05, 2015 6:20 am

@xouper

I want to understand why you are in favor of guns without any reservations. As you said, you neither live in the US nor have a gun. Did you actually ever had any training with one?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Tue May 05, 2015 4:29 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:@xouper

I want to understand why you are in favor of guns without any reservations. As you said, you neither live in the US nor have a gun. Did you actually ever had any training with one?

I have some reservations. Just not as many as certain other people do. I am a US citizen by birth and I have had firearms training.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4143
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby ElectricMonk » Tue May 05, 2015 4:30 pm

xouper wrote:I have some reservations. Just not as many as certain other people do. I am a US citizen by birth and I have had firearms training.


but you would support laws allowing all citizens to own and carry (concealed or open) 'Militia' weapons, both firearm and melee ?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Tue May 05, 2015 4:31 pm

JO 753 wrote:Window shot out. 280,000,000 rezults.

Therez your mysterious culprit, xoup. The glass industry iz the hidden hand behind the entire scandal. Anything to increase salez, no matter the side effects.

Good one. :lol: I rather enjoy your sense of humor, JO.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Tue May 05, 2015 4:39 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:
xouper wrote:I have some reservations. Just not as many as certain other people do. I am a US citizen by birth and I have had firearms training.

but you would support laws allowing all citizens to own and carry (concealed or open) 'Militia' weapons, both firearm and melee ?

Almost all citizens, yes. I am in favor of minimizing the infringement of the Second Amendment, just as I am in favor of minimizing the infringement of the First Amendment or any other rights mentioned in the Constitution.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4143
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby ElectricMonk » Tue May 05, 2015 4:59 pm

and is the 2nd one as important as the 1st?
Because every single other country in the world usually has the 1st in one form or another, but almost none have anything remotely like the second. And many are better democracies than the US.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Tue May 05, 2015 7:08 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:and is the 2nd one as important as the 1st?

Yes.

ElectricMonk wrote:Because every single other country in the world usually has the 1st in one form or another,

That is factually incorrect. Most other countries have more censorship than the US and many have a great deal more censorship.

ElectricMonk wrote:... but almost none have anything remotely like the second. And many are better democracies than the US.

Why does it matter what other countries do? Are you arguing that the majority are always right?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Tue May 05, 2015 7:12 pm

xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:Plenty of types of knifes are simply banned - you can not make them, you can not sell them, you can not buy them - pretty strong restrictions. You are almost everywhere banned from carrying them in public, unlike many open-carry laws for rifles etc. If you consider that the 2nd Amendment certainly had weapons like sabers, bayonets, stilettos etc. in mind it's confusing why banning such weapons in constitutionally ok, but banning firearms is not.

You are correct in pointing out the inconsistency. The paper I cited claims such knife bans are not constitutional, but the US Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the matter.

Wisconsin, for example, is making progress in remedying that inconsistency.

http://gunwatch.blogspot.ca/2015/05/wi-reform-of-knife-law-possible-in.html

Stay tuned, this is an ongoing process against the unconstitutionality of knife laws.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21825
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Tue May 05, 2015 8:28 pm

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
TJrandom
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9552
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby TJrandom » Tue May 05, 2015 10:03 pm



Maybe he needed to be armed - it could`a been a shotgun wedding..... :roll:

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Tue May 05, 2015 10:20 pm


So, are you suggesting even law enforcement cannot be trusted with a gun?

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9552
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby TJrandom » Tue May 05, 2015 10:30 pm

xouper wrote:

So, are you suggesting even law enforcement cannot be trusted with a gun?


Nope - but he wasn`t law enforcement at the time - he was a guest at a wedding, or so I assume.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Wed May 06, 2015 12:18 am

TJrandom wrote:
xouper wrote:

So, are you suggesting even law enforcement cannot be trusted with a gun?

Nope -

What conclusion would you have us make from that example?

TJrandom wrote:but he wasn`t law enforcement at the time

Please explain your reasoning here, why does that matter?

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9552
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby TJrandom » Wed May 06, 2015 7:17 am

xouper wrote:
TJrandom wrote:
xouper wrote:

So, are you suggesting even law enforcement cannot be trusted with a gun?

Nope -

What conclusion would you have us make from that example?

TJrandom wrote:but he wasn`t law enforcement at the time

Please explain your reasoning here, why does that matter?


TPO always matters - didn`t you learn that somewhere along the line?

But maybe you are right - and he needed to be armed at that particular wedding, or maybe because where it was being held, or even maybe because he didn`t trust his mother - who knows?

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21825
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Wed May 06, 2015 9:54 am

TJrandom wrote:
xouper wrote:

So, are you suggesting even law enforcement cannot be trusted with a gun?


Nope - but he wasn`t law enforcement at the time - he was a guest at a wedding, or so I assume.

The Rule of So states that any sentence that begins with "So..." will be a serious distortion of what the person really said.
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
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4143
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby ElectricMonk » Wed May 06, 2015 12:21 pm

xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:and is the 2nd one as important as the 1st?

Yes.

I see.

xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:Because every single other country in the world usually has the 1st in one form or another,

That is factually incorrect. Most other countries have more censorship than the US and many have a great deal more censorship.

But there are much stronger whistle-blower protections, less commercial influence on reporting, more money for actual global news gathering etc. etc.
Bans on holocaust denial etc. are pretty unimportant in comparison. US news is an embarrassment compared to any tiny EU country.

xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:... but almost none have anything remotely like the second. And many are better democracies than the US.

Why does it matter what other countries do? Are you arguing that the majority are always right?


How does that necessarily follow? It's just that if you are the only one driving in the opposite direction on the highway, you better have a good explanation why...

You seem to believe in US exceptionalism, which boils down to 'it must be right, because we are doing it ....

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Wed May 06, 2015 5:29 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:
xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:Because every single other country in the world usually has the 1st in one form or another,

That is factually incorrect. Most other countries have more censorship than the US and many have a great deal more censorship.

But there are much stronger whistle-blower protections, less commercial influence on reporting, more money for actual global news gathering etc. etc. Bans on holocaust denial etc. are pretty unimportant in comparison. US news is an embarrassment compared to any tiny EU country.

That doesn't refute the fact that many countries have more censorship than the US. Contrary to your claim, the US clearly has less censorship of speech than most other countries. China is a huge example of a country that has far less freedom of speech and press than the US. And China is hardly alone in that. Your claim above is clearly wrong.

ElectricMonk wrote:
xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:... but almost none have anything remotely like the second. And many are better democracies than the US.

Why does it matter what other countries do? Are you arguing that the majority are always right?

How does that necessarily follow? It's just that if you are the only one driving in the opposite direction on the highway, you better have a good explanation why...

Bad analogy. The US in not driving on the same highway as other countries so there is no requirement that we follow their rules of the road. We have our own highway and thus can make our own rules without being in conflict with their rules. No explanation required.

Since we do not share the highway with anyone else, your highway analogy is fundamentally flawed from the very start.

ElectricMonk wrote:You seem to believe in US exceptionalism, which boils down to 'it must be right, because we are doing it ....

No, that is not my argument. I do not argue from "exceptionalism". I am claiming that the US has a Second Amendment for some very good reasons, none of which include "exceptionalism".

You seem to be claiming that the US should do it the way other countries do it and get rid of the Second Amendment. Is that correct?

Do I really need to point out that is the fallacy called appeal to popularity? Just because other countries do not have something like the Second Amendment does not mean the US is wrong.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Wed May 06, 2015 5:36 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
TJrandom wrote:
xouper wrote:

So, are you suggesting even law enforcement cannot be trusted with a gun?

Nope - but he wasn`t law enforcement at the time - he was a guest at a wedding, or so I assume.

The Rule of So states that any sentence that begins with "So..." will be a serious distortion of what the person really said.

Asking for clarification of your point is not -- and cannot be -- a distortion of what you said. It was a question, not a statement of fact.

Since you appear to be saying that my example of a possible interpretation is not correct, then please explain what the point of your example is. What conclusion would you have us make from your example? What is the takeaway message you want us to have from your example?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Wed May 06, 2015 5:43 pm

TJrandom wrote:
xouper wrote:
TJrandom wrote:
xouper wrote:

So, are you suggesting even law enforcement cannot be trusted with a gun?

Nope -

What conclusion would you have us make from that example?

TJrandom wrote:but he wasn`t law enforcement at the time

Please explain your reasoning here, why does that matter?

TPO always matters - didn`t you learn that somewhere along the line?

How does that answer either of my questions?

TJrandom wrote:But maybe you are right - and he needed to be armed at that particular wedding, or maybe because where it was being held, or even maybe because he didn`t trust his mother - who knows?

I wasn't suggesting any of those things. I wasn't making any claim at all. I was asking questions for the purpose of getting clarification of your comments.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 13133
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby JO 753 » Thu May 07, 2015 4:06 am

xouper wrote:Bad analogy. The US in not driving on the same highway as other countries...


I think its good.

The 'hiway' iz the same - a population uv squishy crunchy framed idiots that are not very good at manajing theze devisez that eazily damaj and kill them. The restrictiv lawz governing the spanz uv hiway controlled by the other countryz haz proven that limiting akses to theze devisez iz very effectiv at redusing the negativ effect they hav on the population.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Thu May 07, 2015 5:36 am

JO 753 wrote:
xouper wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:... It's just that if you are the only one driving in the opposite direction on the highway, you better have a good explanation why...

Bad analogy. The US in not driving on the same highway as other countries...

I think its good.

Contrary to Monk's bogus analogy, the US does not share the "highway" with other countries, and thus does not need to explain anything to them.

JO 753 wrote:... The restrictiv lawz governing the spanz uv hiway controlled by the other countryz haz proven that limiting akses to theze devisez iz very effectiv at redusing the negativ effect they hav on the population.

Sure, and banning cars will reduce the negative effect they have on the population.

We have had this conversation more than once. Why do you keep repeating it? You keep bringing up the same flawed argument, and I keep pointing out the flaw in it.

:slapfight:

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4143
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby ElectricMonk » Thu May 07, 2015 6:28 am

...you really don't get the highway analogy?

driving in the wrong direction means everyone has to get of your way or you will crash - I was talking about ghost-driving.

I can see absolutely no reason for the 2nd amendment in a country which has full coverage of law enforcement and is not under any threat of invasion.
The best comparison for US gun laws would be Switzerland, which has a very high ratio of gun owners: but they have background-checks, gun registrations and mandatory training. This is due to the fact that Switzerland is tiny compared to its neighbors and could never field an army to challenge any invader. Instead, they've mined all tunnels in and out of the country, and have planned guerrilla-strategies to make invaders pay dearly: that is what Switzerland's gun laws are for: a concrete military purpose.

Gun laws in the US, otoh, are used as a substitute for law enforcement - as we've mentioned in the case of Detroit, because the police is often underfunded, people sometimes have to start protection themselves. But that is a very poor alternative, and very costly in terms of lives, both innocent and not so innocent.

http://libcloud.s3.amazonaws.com/9/8d/3 ... _women.pdf

Lax gun laws are either a cause or a symptom of weak state control: they are a clear sign that state institutions are no longer willing or able to protect their citizens.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Thu May 07, 2015 8:07 am

ElectricMonk wrote:...you really don't get the highway analogy? driving in the wrong direction means everyone has to get of your way or you will crash - I was talking about ghost-driving.

Except that on the US "highway", everyone is driving the same direction. That is the flaw in your analogy. Other countries may be driving in the other direction, but they are not doing so on the same "highway" as the US. That is the flaw in your analogy. Your analogy only works if all countries are driving on the same highway, but they are not.

The second flaw in your argument is the fallacy of appeal to popularity, in that you are arguing that US is the minority opinion and is therefore wrong. I'm surprised you think you can pull such a fallacy on this kind of forum.

ElectricMonk wrote:I can see absolutely no reason for the 2nd amendment in a country which has full coverage of law enforcement and is not under any threat of invasion.

Tell that to all the people who have successfully used a gun for self defense. I think they will be amused that you think they should not be allowed to defend themselves with a gun. Also, tell it to the store owners in Baltimore who did not have police protection during the recent "demonstrations". I'm sure they too will be amused that you think they had adequate police protection.


That's an interesting bit of propaganda with made up statistics. Michael Bloomberg has a proven reputation of lying with statistics. Nice try, but I am not fooled by that. This is a skeptic forum after all, so where is your skepticism of those numbers?

ElectricMonk wrote:Lax gun laws are either a cause or a symptom of weak state control: they are a clear sign that state institutions are no longer willing or able to protect their citizens.

Like in Britain where the violent crime rate is higher than the US despite having an almost total ban on handguns?

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4143
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby ElectricMonk » Thu May 07, 2015 9:10 am

@xoup

again, you think you identified a source and, if it's biased according to you, you simply ignore it instead of actually reading it. The link I gave is based on research from the Harvard School of Public Health, and they sure have better data than you.

We've been through the Britain example, and it simply does not fit: US gun deaths are so high, and 'violent crime' is so vague that we can say little more than that your are far less likely to be killed in Britain than in the US, though you might get mugged at some point - I don't see how the former is better than the latter.

And you still don't get the highway bit ... seriously, it's not that complicated.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 13133
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby JO 753 » Thu May 07, 2015 9:49 am

xouper wrote:Contrary to Monk's bogus analogy,


Your failure to undrstand it duznt make it bogus.

Sure, and banning cars will reduce the negative effect they have on the population. We have had this conversation more than once. Why do you keep repeating it?


You are the wun repeating a comparison that haz been repeatedly dismissed.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Thu May 07, 2015 4:23 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:again, you think you identified a source and, if it's biased according to you, you simply ignore it instead of actually reading it.

I read the entire poster. There were no sources cited anywhere on it. I've seen these numbers before and they are bogus. So your accusation is false that I merely dismissed them without consideration.

ElectricMonk wrote: The link I gave is based on research from the Harvard School of Public Health, and they sure have better data than you.

The link you gave did not reference any sources. Please give proper sources instead of just a single page pdf bumper sticker.

ElectricMonk wrote:We've been through the Britain example, and it simply does not fit: US gun deaths are so high, and 'violent crime' is so vague that we can say little more than that your are far less likely to be killed in Britain than in the US, though you might get mugged at some point - I don't see how the former is better than the latter.

Yes, I agree, it is not valid to compare countries, so why do you keep comparing the US with other countries? I keep doing it as a reminder to you that doing it is not valid.

ElectricMonk wrote:And you still don't get the highway bit ... seriously, it's not that complicated.

No, you don't get it. You claim the US is going "against the traffic". Except it is doing no such thing. Your analogy assumes the US is driving on the same "highway" as other countries. But that is false, and that's why your analogy is false.

The US is not driving on the same "highway" as other countries. The US has its own "highway" that other countries are not driving on.

Secondly, just because other countries are going the wrong way does not mean the US must change
directions. That is the second flaw in your argument.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Thu May 07, 2015 4:23 pm

JO 753 wrote:
xouper wrote:Contrary to Monk's bogus analogy,

Your failure to undrstand it duznt make it bogus.

Your failure to understand it does not make it correct.

JO 753 wrote:
xouper wrote:Sure, and banning cars will reduce the negative effect they have on the population. We have had this conversation more than once. Why do you keep repeating it?

You are the wun repeating a comparison that haz been repeatedly dismissed.

No it hasn't. YOUR argument is clearly hypocritical. You want to ban guns in order to reduce deaths from guns, but you refuse to ban cars to reduce deaths from cars. That's the very definition of hypocritical. You argue that cars have other legitimate uses besides criminal misuse, but you refuse to accept that guns also have other legitimate uses besides criminal misuse. That too is hypocritical. Sorry, JO but your argument is logically and morally dead.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 13133
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby JO 753 » Thu May 07, 2015 5:25 pm

You seem angry. Angry arguerz tend to repeat stuff without thinking it thru.

We've been over the flaw in the car comparison several timez, but you never get the lojik.

I'm not being hypocritical at all. I know banning gunz cant happen here, so insted came up with a better idea. Get the beneficiariez (az they consider themselvez) to pay for their hobby.

Automobilez, trucks, roadz - the transportation system, even tho it coud be argued to be fundamentally ill consieved, rezulting in massive fatalityz, duz benefit everybody including non-driverz. However, I think there iz a great deal uv unfairness involved, mainly animalz getting hit, that shoud be adressed. The solution I favor iz to suspend the lisense uv anybody who killz anything bigger than a bug. Perhaps sum stiff finez also.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Thu May 07, 2015 6:36 pm

JO 753 wrote:We've been over the flaw in the car comparison several timez, but you never get the lojik.

:roll: JO, you wouldn't recognize valid logic if it bit you in the ass. Same for ElectricMonk.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 13133
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby JO 753 » Thu May 07, 2015 8:06 pm

Now youre getting insulting. Usually you limit yourself to inuendo. Iz this a new debate tactic youre trying out?

Dont giv up yet! There are several reazonable anglez that you and the real gun proponents hav yet to bring to the debate.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Thu May 07, 2015 9:04 pm

JO 753 wrote:
xouper wrote:
JO 753 wrote:We've been over the flaw in the car comparison several timez, but you never get the lojik.

:roll: JO, you wouldn't recognize valid logic if it bit you in the ass. Same for ElectricMonk.

Now youre getting insulting.

Too bad. Some days I have little patience for people who are wrong and keep insisting they are right. I have been more than patient with your failures of logic, but sometimes you push me too far.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9552
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby TJrandom » Thu May 07, 2015 10:13 pm

Another presumed Good Guy with a gun – so obviously turned bad….

$10K reward in shooting of West Philadelphia girl

http://news.yahoo.com/video/10k-reward- ... 59599.html

A $10,000 reward is being offered for information about the shooting of an 8-year-old girl, who may have been the victim of road rage.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 13133
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby JO 753 » Fri May 08, 2015 7:26 am

xouper wrote:Too bad. Some days I have little patience for people who are wrong and keep insisting they are right.


I'm not insisting, I am proving.

You put up a mighty fight, but you are like an enrajed bull in the stadium. Therez no way you can win agenst the lojik and stats. Both independently prezent inpassable obstaclez agenst your sofistry.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby xouper » Fri May 08, 2015 8:34 am

JO 753 wrote:
xouper wrote:Too bad. Some days I have little patience for people who are wrong and keep insisting they are right.

I'm not insisting, I am proving.

That is factually incorrect. Your so-called "proofs" are full of logical fallacies. Many of the "arguments" you have posted here would never get passing marks in a college course on critical thinking. And I would put money on that. There's even a name for what you are doing here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias wherein unskilled individuals [that would be you, JO] suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability to be much higher than is accurate. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their ineptitude.


I suspect you might be tempted to say I am guilty of the same thing. The problem is, I am not basing my claim on some misguided self-assessment. I have been objectively tested and passed with very high marks. I am not always right. But I am certainly not as inept at logic as you keep insisting.

Seriously, JO. I am not trying to be mean here (despite that it might seem that way). I am certainly often inept when it comes to interpersonal communication skills. I suck at that. I wish I knew how to convey just how faulty your arguments are in a way that you would recognize the errors. Merely pointing out the fallacies in your arguments is not working, apparently. But it would be a mistake on your part to infer from that that your arguments have no errors.

Don't take my word for it. And don't take your word for it either. As Richard Feynman once said, "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool."

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4143
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby ElectricMonk » Fri May 08, 2015 9:06 am

xouper wrote:Don't take my word for it. And don't take your word for it either. As Richard Feynman once said, "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool."


that should go both ways....

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 13133
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Examplz uv Unfortunate Events Involving Gunz

Postby JO 753 » Fri May 08, 2015 10:38 am

Your main lojik fail iz that you dont connect the dots wen they clearly draw a picture that refutes wut you want to believ. Youv often tried to karakterize any recognition uv patternz az unwarranted extrapolation, az if any use uv imajination iz unsientific.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.


Return to “Guns”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest