Guns and false dichotomies

Duck and cover
User avatar
Pyrrho
Administrator
Posts: 9823
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 12:31 am

Guns and false dichotomies

Post by Pyrrho » Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:05 pm

I think this article is worth the time to read.

http://brenebrown.com/blog/2017/11/08/g ... ng-change/

The author supports responsible gun ownership and "common sense gun laws."

YMMV
For any forum questions or concerns please e-mail skepticforum@gmail.com or send a PM.

The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Nov 08, 2017 10:48 pm

No good analysis has ever started with "responsible" gun ownership. That is an oxymoron. But, lets see?

1. Lots of irrelevant fluff to start the piece off with, but I read down to this: "The only true option is to refuse to accept the terms of the argument by challenging the framing of the debate." which is what I did with my opening line. Substitute any inherently dangerous activity: "responsible open vats of hydrochloric acid..." and so forth. The issue is framed by giving away the argument to begin with.

2. Whaaaa? Its all fluff. Not a single recommendation is made.

"What Happened?"

.........I suppose the "import" of the article is "Gun reform will not happen unless the silent majority of gun owners who passionately disagree with the NRA’s divisive rhetoric and complete lack of respect for responsible gun culture speak out and take political and economic action." //// This assumes facts not only not in evidence but evidenced against. Even "low to no" passionate NRA members don't even take the minimum action of not sending in their dues. Fluff: wishing the disagreement to simply go away.

Image
A steady increase......doubtful its gone down with the recent mass shootings? http://www.motherjones.com/crime-justic ... p-numbers/ I just took the first source I found. Maybe NRA numbers are more valid and more current?

We are in a SWAMP of gun culture. Posting "responsible gun ownership" is a symptom of this. It has merit only by comparison to what we have now while ignoring the basic unavoidable issue: guns are dangerous and should not be allowed.......even by police......and eventually.....even by armies. UNREALISTIC you say? Depends on where and when you draw the lines. There are fewer Nukes in the World now by this very recognition. Fewer guns in Europe, Australia by this very reasoning. You get rid of malaria by getting rid of mosquitoes....not by responsible mosquito management. (ok.....sic........it is a different issue...biology and all).

This gun culture has extended and contaminated the Supreme Court. I've posted before how the Supremes could and should sing a different tune. How many larger and larger mass shootings before the worm turns? I assume it will come........sometime. Doing whats "right" after trying all alternatives...........
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:25 pm

Edit to prior post: Was there any false dichotomy identified? I don't think so, and I do love false dichotomies, always fun to identify one you have fallen for. (Noam Chomsky caught me in quite a few when I caught a few of his first public tutorials. Hmmm....not so much false dichotomies but rather making unstated assumptions?==>that weren't true!!!!).........going to the point that if you are a member of the NRA you might be for restricting bump stocks but you aren't going to be passionate about outlawing them. so......... appears to me the article is basically WRONG: the solution when it comes will be the general population OUTSIDE of the NRA who stand up and become as passionate as the NRA in opposing their positions: ie: single issue voters like the NRA are...regardless of their so called passions or lack thereof.

Change "sometime" to "eventually." Change always comes.....eventually. Especially when the stimulus for the change comes faster and larger as is the gun violence. Life in the Swamp, 2017.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:58 pm

Rereading.....proofing.....

I think the linked article says the same thing I concluded with: the non-NRA members have to get passionate about their anti-gun positions. In context...this can only mean voting pro-gun legislators out of office. Its always been an unequal contest of single issue voters vs those with wider interests. Interesting that. Single Issue block voters exist for gun rights, right to life issues..... what else? but people who are ant-gun or are pro-choice generally rank such interests down on their list of concerns. So...as happens so often, its not the majority will that controls but rather the will of a well organized single issue constituency that Congresscreeps pay attention to.............just as they should.

Things that "approach" but don't quite express themselves as single issue blocks of votes: legalize drugs, anti-immigration, gold/digital currency, open internet, .....hmmm....maybe fair to say all the other issues? Each with a certain base of committed voters... just not enough of them?

What of corruption? Lots of corrupt money behind the gun rights advocates. Right to Life....not corrupt in that way, by money, but by religious conviction..... a different kind of corruption against the majority view? Oh.........$$ corruption. Lots of $$ corruption behind fossil fuels..... that "becoming" a single issue voter block??? perhaps lessened by a general concern for all things scientific? Lots of corrupt money behind drug policies......keeping MJ illegal and so forth. the data really is in. MJ is safe and cheap. Drug dealers don't like that. No reason at all the Purdue Family should not all be tossed into jail............for Murder.

My Dear Old Dad said about 3 things that have stuck with me. On point modified to fit: "Yes.....its a swamp. Learn to swim fast." By and large, I learned to swim fast, but decided to live on higher ground.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:13 am

Where is everybody? Ha, ha.........posting under moderation.......its fun...........try it.

thinking some more.............................................

gun rights, right to life. What else do they have in common?............................. They have a formal organized group lobbying Congress in their interests. The $$ corrupt positions do as well.

no such group for anti-gun position. How can there be change with no (formal/funded/organized) opposition? FORGET passion. How about some organization? .............and learning from Occupy Wallstreets failure: an organization with stated legislative goals????? This is whats wrong with offering only prayers. Praying does not work. Just look.

History: a prior single issue voter block, ORGANIZED and funded with specific proposals?======I remember MADD had these attributes and was successful. Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Out of fashion now.........because they won. Same with Civil Rights. Same with Stop the War. Passion is involved, but its the start, not the end. Its the motivation, but not the mechanics.

I know its a shitty deal: if you want to change politics, you have to get involved in politics. A real pigs bath: raising and spending money. Odious. Ha, ha..........it really is a contest of evils all for the better result.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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: 10898
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: has left the building

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by xouper » Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:17 am

Pyrrho wrote:I think this article is worth the time to read.

http://brenebrown.com/blog/2017/11/08/g ... ng-change/
That was well written and worth reading. Thanks.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has No Life
Posts: 11374
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by TJrandom » Thu Nov 09, 2017 6:28 pm

Yes, well worth the time to read it... Thanks.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:25 am

"Things don't change unless enough people care enough to make it an issue......"

/////////// This is a newsflash?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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
Phoenix76
Poster
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2017 7:16 am
Custom Title: Phoenix76
Location: Qld, Australia

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by Phoenix76 » Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:19 am

Gee Bobbo, you seem to be hot on this topic.

Listen, the answer is real easy.

A gun, on its own, cannot kill someone. Somebody has to "pull the trigger". It is as simple as that.

Given the "gun" massacres in the USA at the moment, it would appear that your greatest problem is the intellect, or lack thereof, of you populace. I'm not trying to put anyone down, but the number of incidents that have recently occurred strongly suggests that you have a real people problem.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:47 am

Guns are required to kill people with guns.

..........but that is not even the issue of this thread.

Kinda like Hide and seek?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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: 10898
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: has left the building

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by xouper » Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:02 am

bobbo_the_Tautologist wrote:Guns are required to kill people with guns.
Alert the media!!  Bobbo has just discovered a tautological truth.

"Object X" is required to kill people with "Object X".

Duh.

What will we get next from the highly astute bobbo, that prolonged contact with the solid form of dihydrogen monoxide can cause permanent skin damage?

:shock:

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:30 pm

X==we did go thru all that before. As we have with guns = cars. As we have with having guns makes you safer. As we have with establishing correlations when an issue is multifactorial and you have to analyse/filter the data.

Which is better or worse? The tautology of you need a gun to kill with a gun (which really is just the start of the discussion we have had regarding the lethality of a gun vs other weapons)

....................or ........................

The bone headed stupidity of: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

..................Put me down for the tautology. I expect your sound logic to eventually reject the tautology...... but its holding for now.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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: 10898
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: has left the building

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by xouper » Sat Nov 11, 2017 1:17 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:..................Put me down for the tautology. I expect your sound logic to eventually reject the tautology...... but its holding for now.
Tautologies are by definition always true.

And that's what makes them essentially useless* for making policy decisions.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:The bone headed stupidity of: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."
Not stupid at all. It demonstrates where the blame belongs, on the person, not the gun.

If you wish to maintain that guns kill people, then please explain how a gun pulls its own trigger.

Image




_________________________________________
* Footnote: Except perhaps in mathematics, in which proofs are established by reducing a theorem to a tautology.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Nov 11, 2017 1:21 am

The goal is not to blame people..........BUT RATHER..........to prevent death from guns. Given the tautology.....we either outlaw people or guns?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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
Ranb
New Member
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:18 am
Location: WA, USA

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by Ranb » Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:42 am

Some comments on the article in the OP;
I don’t believe that it should be legal to sell automatic weapons, large magazines, or armor–piercing bullets.
Why the stance on automatic weapons? It's not like the ones legally possessed ate a problem at all in the USA. Ditto for armor piercing bullets. Does Brene Brown even know what AP is and the legal definition of AP ammo?

Ranb

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Dec 02, 2017 5:44 am

Ranb wrote:Some comments on the article in the OP;
I don’t believe that it should be legal to sell automatic weapons, large magazines, or armor–piercing bullets.
Why the stance on automatic weapons? It's not like the ones legally possessed ate a problem at all in the USA. Ditto for armor piercing bullets. Does Brene Brown even know what AP is and the legal definition of AP ammo?

Ranb
1. Automatic weapons are maximally designed to kill people thereby having less support to keep them legal.

2. Legally possessed ones are used to kill people by their owners, owners family members, or by theives who steal them.

3. Armor Piercing...see No 1 and why have them around at all except for their designed purpose???

4. "legal"--how turd lickers call {!#%@} ice cream.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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
Ranb
New Member
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:18 am
Location: WA, USA

Re: Guns anof a certain type, and d false dichotomies

Post by Ranb » Sat Dec 02, 2017 3:32 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: 1. Automatic weapons are maximally designed to kill people thereby having less support to keep them legal.
But what evidence is there that legally possessed machine guns are a problem in the USA? Have any at all?
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:2. Legally possessed ones are used to kill people by their owners, owners family members, or by theives who steal them.
Can you name one? I'm talking about automatic, not semi-automatic.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:3. Armor Piercing...see No 1 and why have them around at all except for their designed purpose???
Do you know what armor piercing ammunition is? There is a legal definition which applies to certain handgun ammo only. Then there is the kind that is designed to penetrate armor (hard, like vehicles) that is used in rifles and is designated as such by the military.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4715
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by ElectricMonk » Sat Dec 02, 2017 4:32 pm

What's your opinion on bump-stocks, Ranb?
Last edited by ElectricMonk on Sat Dec 02, 2017 6:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Dec 02, 2017 5:25 pm

Rand: really enjoying that flavor of "legality" you got going there. As I understand it, automatic weapons are already illegal, so who is owning and using them? And it rather proves your counterpoint doesn't it? They are illegal....and they aren't a problem.

The same could happen with all lethal weapons absent the turd licker set.

A QUICK GOOGLE: ahhh..... the turd lickers have been hard at it. Lots of "legalities" regarding regulation vs enforcement with 50 different State Laws. Situation FUBAR'd by differences between automatic, semi-automatic, fully automatic, machine, and assault. I would lump them all together: an anachronism in modern times. Like having a wood burning fireplace. Society moves on and is harmed by the sticking points.

It all goes to building and maintaining a "gun culture" or not. Know what you are doing.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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: 10898
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: has left the building

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by xouper » Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:14 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Rand: really enjoying that flavor of "legality" you got going there. As I understand it, automatic weapons are already illegal, so who is owning and using them? And it rather proves your counterpoint doesn't it? They are illegal....and they aren't a problem.

The same could happen with all lethal weapons absent the turd licker set.

A QUICK GOOGLE: ahhh..... the turd lickers have been hard at it. Lots of "legalities" regarding regulation vs enforcement with 50 different State Laws. Situation FUBAR'd by differences between automatic, semi-automatic, fully automatic, machine, and assault. I would lump them all together: an anachronism in modern times. Like having a wood burning fireplace. Society moves on and is harmed by the sticking points.

It all goes to building and maintaining a "gun culture" or not. Know what you are doing.
Well, that was clear as mud. ;)

User avatar
Ranb
New Member
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:18 am
Location: WA, USA

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by Ranb » Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:47 am

ElectricMonk wrote:What's your opinion on bump-stocks, Ranb?
I think they suck. Ever use one? I own several ar-15's. I've used one with a slide fire stock and one converted to full auto. While a machine gun like an M-16 can be held in any position firmly for example on a bipod while the shooter dumps a full or partial mag, the slide fire or bump fired semi-auto fire cannot.

Bump fire is accomplished by holding the rifle loosely against the shoulder with the trigger finger locked firmly in front of the trigger. The weak hand pushes the rifle forward so that the trigger is pressed. Recoil allows the trigger/sear to reset and constant tension by the weak arm pulls the trigger again. The result is a very sloppy hold with lots of muzzle movement which makes the rifle very inaccurate. I've seen it done with semi-auto pistols also.

The Vegas shooter chose to engage his target from 1200 feet away. But since his target was a large group of people that occupied a site of about 8 acres, he was most likely able to put most of his rounds into the crowd. This is one of the few circumstances when bump fire might be beneficial. I've read claims that his rifles may be malfunctioned due to the high heat load put on them by the rapid fire. It is possible he could have done more damage with better aimed fire using slower trigger pulls and not bump firing.

A slide fire stock allows a firmer hold against the shoulder, but still requires constant forward tension by the weak arm instead of a firm supporting hold.

Suggesting that a ban on slide fire stocks would save lives is naive to say the least. They are good for little more than making more noise and expending more ammo. Anyone who says they are going to make us safer by banning them is lying to you.

User avatar
Ranb
New Member
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:18 am
Location: WA, USA

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by Ranb » Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:55 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Rand: really enjoying that flavor of "legality" you got going there.
Not really. But I happen to know that the federal government doesn't actually ban any types of firearms in the USA. Machine guns have to be registered prior to May 19, 1986 to be owned by an unlicensed person though.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:As I understand it, automatic weapons are already illegal, so who is owning and using them?
You understand wrong then. Surely you understand that in the USA (and most other countries) anything not prohibited by law is legal? Since you have never read any federal law banning use or possession of machine guns, you should have no reason at all to believe that they are illegal. Perhaps you can explain why you think machine guns are illegal?
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:And it rather proves your counterpoint doesn't it? They are illegal....and they aren't a problem.
No, it only proves you have no clue about gun control in the USA. Please educate yourself. You can start here; https://www.atf.gov/file/11241/download
Read this and you will see that machine guns are legal in all 50 states; some require a license to possess them though. An FFL/SOT is issued upon request to anyone will fills out the applications properly.
Last edited by Ranb on Sun Dec 03, 2017 1:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ranb
New Member
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:18 am
Location: WA, USA

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by Ranb » Sun Dec 03, 2017 1:03 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:A QUICK GOOGLE: ahhh..... the turd lickers have been hard at it.
Who are the turd lickers?
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: Lots of "legalities" regarding regulation vs enforcement with 50 different State Laws.
Yes it is a problem.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: Situation FUBAR'd by differences between automatic, semi-automatic, fully automatic, machine, and assault.
Automatic and full automatic are really saying the same thing.
Machine gun is a legal term used in the US Code. Perhaps you could become more familiar with it?
Assault (as in assault weapon) is a term coined to characterize certain weapons by their operation and features in order to control them. It ceased to have any meaning in federal law after the AWB sunset in 2004.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: I would lump them all together: an anachronism in modern times.
You shouldn't do that, it makes you look uneducated.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:It all goes to building and maintaining a "gun culture" or not. Know what you are doing.
You especially need to educate yourself if you want to oppose the "gun culture" whatever that is.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12532
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sun Dec 03, 2017 3:24 am

I have expressed my view on this before. The kind of firearm that should be banned is hand guns. The reason I choose hand guns is because they kill more people than all other firearms put together. About 8,000 people each year. The reason for this is the portability and concealability of hand guns. About 4,000 times a year, a person is killed when an argument gets heated and one arguer pulls out a hand gun and shoots the other. No other gun can be used in this way, because other guns are too big and clunky to be easily carried. Hand guns are also the biggest killer during suicides, and during domestic disputes.

For those who use the tired old argument that guns do not kill because people are needed to pull the trigger, compare lethality of knives and guns. On average, only 1 in 400 stab wounds actually kills. But 1 in 8 bullet wounds kill. The gun is 50 times more lethal. If a possible killer only has a knife instead of a gun, his ability to kill is reduced 50 fold.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10898
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: has left the building

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by xouper » Sun Dec 03, 2017 3:36 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:For those who use the tired old argument that guns do not kill because people are needed to pull the trigger, compare lethality of knives and guns. On average, only 1 in 400 stab wounds actually kills. But 1 in 8 bullet wounds kill. The gun is 50 times more lethal. If a possible killer only has a knife instead of a gun, his ability to kill is reduced 50 fold.
That is a gross misuse of statistics.

Contrary to your assertion, it does not take (on average) 400 stabs to kill a person with a knife.

The evidence is quite clear that a person intent on killing can do it with far less than 400 stabs.

User avatar
Ranb
New Member
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:18 am
Location: WA, USA

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by Ranb » Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:14 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:I have expressed my view on this before. The kind of firearm that should be banned is hand guns.
Do you feel handguns designed and intended for hunters should also be banned? They are much less concealable.
Image
Good for small game out to bout 75 meters.

Image
Good for medium sized game out to 200 meters.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:33 am

Ranb wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:It all goes to building and maintaining a "gun culture" or not. Know what you are doing.
You especially need to educate yourself if you want to oppose the "gun culture" whatever that is.
You don't know what gun culture is and I'm the one that needs an education?

X, your soul mate has arrived. Yes, I just smeared both of you.

Have fun Lance................................400 stabs of stupidity.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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
Ranb
New Member
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:18 am
Location: WA, USA

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by Ranb » Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:47 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:You don't know what gun culture is and I'm the one that needs an education?
I suppose you don't irony when you read it then? Your above post was for the most part 100% fail. This means you probably don't have the first clue at about "gun culture", whatever that is. :)

I can't help but notice that you act like the people here are stupid enough to believe your claims. Going to admit you have no idea what you're talking about or will you double down on your ignorance in general?
automatic weapons are already illegal,
Why do you believe this?
so who is owning and using them?
Any law abiding American who applies for a tax stamp and gets one. Look here for one to buy; http://www.subguns.com/classifieds/?db= ... ssion_key=
And it rather proves your counterpoint doesn't it?
Nope, proves you don't have a clue and would be more at home at the September Clues Forum or the Loose Change Forum.
They are illegal....
Nope, still not illegal.
Know what you are doing.
This is good advice; try taking it sometime.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12532
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:51 am

xouper wrote:
That is a gross misuse of statistics.

Contrary to your assertion, it does not take (on average) 400 stabs to kill a person with a knife.

The evidence is quite clear that a person intent on killing can do it with far less than 400 stabs.
Another straw man.
I did not say it took 400 stabs to kill a person with a knife. I said only 1 in 400 stab wounds is lethal, which is a very different matter.

The reason for this is that the human body is better protected than most people realise. Our delicate brain is protected by a heavy skull. The heart and lungs, and other internal organs are protected by the rib cage. Even cutting a persons throat is not as easy as Hollywood pretends it is. The vulnerable arteries are buried under cartilage and muscle. It is much tougher than most people realise to drive a knife through to a vulnerable place.

A bullet, though, is not even slowed down much by the skull, the rib cage, or that cartilage and muscle. It just goes right through and the blast destroys those vulnerable tissues and organs.

Certainly it MAY take fewer than 400 stabs to kill someone. It can even be done with one stab, but that takes skill and the right knife. A bayonet can do it, wielded by a trained soldier. But in the real world, on average, there is only 1 death for 400 stab wounds.

On average, a gun is 50 times as lethal as a knife.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10898
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: has left the building

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by xouper » Sun Dec 03, 2017 5:50 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
xouper wrote:That is a gross misuse of statistics.

Contrary to your assertion, it does not take (on average) 400 stabs to kill a person with a knife.

The evidence is quite clear that a person intent on killing can do it with far less than 400 stabs.
Another straw man.
I did not say it took 400 stabs to kill a person with a knife. I said only 1 in 400 stab wounds is lethal, which is a very different matter.
Right, they are very different. That's why your argument fails.

The mere fact that 1 in 400 stab wounds is lethal (compared to 1 in eight for a gun) does not mean that a knife is 50 times less effective when someone is trying to kill you with a knife.

The flaw is that you are assuming that every single stab wound was an attempt to kill. That's patently ridiculous.

You are using the statistic incorrectly to infer a policy position that is not warranted from the numbers.

The second flaw in your argument, and we've had this conversation numerous times, is that the lethality of a gun is what makes it more effective for self defense than a knife. It makes it easier for a 90 pound granny to fend off a 200 pound young male attacker. And that's not just a hypothetical, that actually happens.

I know you disagree on the use of guns for self defense, but so what, the evidence is clear they are in fact useful for self defense.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10898
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: has left the building

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by xouper » Sun Dec 03, 2017 5:57 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:X, your soul mate has arrived. Yes, I just smeared both of you.
Why do you do that?

If you think {!#%@} like that is a useful contribution to this forum, then you are severely delusional.

I have asked you numerous times to stop, and you don't.

Obvious question: Why do you continually choose to behave like an {!#%@}?

Seriously, why?

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4715
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by ElectricMonk » Sun Dec 03, 2017 5:58 am

so X - you claim that a gun is simultaneously both less and more lethal than a knife?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10898
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: has left the building

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by xouper » Sun Dec 03, 2017 6:12 am

ElectricMonk wrote:so X - you claim that a gun is simultaneously both less and more lethal than a knife?
I have not ever said that a gun is less lethal than a knife.

What I am saying is that when someone is intent on killing, I am challenging Lance's claim that a knife is 50 times less effective than a gun.

Most fatal stabbings are done with far fewer than 50 stabs. That is the relevant statistic, not the one Lance keeps using.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12532
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:16 am

It is correct that most fatal stabbings are done with less than 50 stabs, but it is also true that most attempts to kill someone with a knife do not succeed, making the average of 400 stab wounds for 1 death. Of course, this is to a large extent because of modern medicine, which prevents a wounded person bleeding to death. But that is also true of gunshot wounds. And yet single gunshots kill 50 times more often than single stab wounds.

It is simply a fact that a gun is a much more lethal weapon than a knife, which means that more guns in the possession of non police mean more successful murders.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:27 am

xouper wrote: Obvious question: Why do you continually choose to behave like an {!#%@}?

Seriously, why?
I can't quit you bro.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:28 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:It is correct that most fatal stabbings are done with less than 50 stabs, but it is also true that most attempts to kill someone with a knife do not succeed, making the average of 400 stab wounds for 1 death. Of course, this is to a large extent because of modern medicine, which prevents a wounded person bleeding to death. But that is also true of gunshot wounds. And yet single gunshots kill 50 times more often than single stab wounds.

It is simply a fact that a gun is a much more lethal weapon than a knife, which means that more guns in the possession of non police mean more successful murders.
You've said this fairly recently.............I assumed it was with X? With X though, its impossible to tell.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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: 10898
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: has left the building

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by xouper » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:49 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:It is simply a fact that a gun is a much more lethal weapon than a knife, . . .
How about if we just agree on that point.

And let it go that we disagree on your claim that guns are 50 times more lethal than knives.

I already explained why I reject your misuse of statistics, and nothing you've said since has added anything new to your argument.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17780
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Dec 03, 2017 8:03 am

xouper wrote: Most fatal stabbings are done with far fewer than 50 stabs.
You don't have any stats at all do you X. Link??? The key being "fatal." but you compare on a common sense basis gun events with fatal stabbing events rather than make the correct analogy. I'll bet you can't see that far..................
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian 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: 10898
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: has left the building

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by xouper » Sun Dec 03, 2017 8:33 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote: Most fatal stabbings are done with far fewer than 50 stabs.
You don't have any stats at all do you X.
Nope.

If you want stats, you're smart enough to find them on your own.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I'll bet you can't see that far..................
Why do you have to add that kind of BS?

Why can't you leave the personal commentary out of it?

It's usually wrong and it contributes nothing of value to the discussion.

In any case, you'd lose that bet.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10898
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: has left the building

Re: Guns and false dichotomies

Post by xouper » Sun Dec 03, 2017 8:38 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote: Obvious question: Why do you continually choose to behave like an {!#%@}?

Seriously, why?
I can't quit you bro.
Well, in that case, the next time I'm in Sacramento visiting my sister, I'll buy you a beer and we can talk airplanes.

"There I was . . ."

Image