WritersBeat.com
 

Go Back   WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table

The Intellectual Table Discussions on political topics, social issues, current affairs, etc.


Myers' Random Thoughts and General B.S. Thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #61  
Old 11-06-2017, 09:20 AM
fleamailman's Avatar
fleamailman (Offline)
Samuel Johnson, obviously!
Official Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,306
Thanks: 2,357
Thanks 3,778
Default


("...well folks, the difference between someone's blog and their random thread here, is that blogs don't get bumped like these random threads do..." mentioned the goblin, adding "...surely one can't actually be living a life where nothing is worth posting, so pick you pen now and plough through you thoughts, just sow your posts and reap your readership...")


Last edited by fleamailman; 11-06-2017 at 10:21 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 11-06-2017, 01:51 PM
Grace Gabriel's Avatar
Grace Gabriel (Offline)
Always Online
Official Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,385
Thanks: 1,945
Thanks 1,045
Default

26 people gunned down in a church......

why?
__________________
GRACE GABRIEL
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 11-06-2017, 05:18 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,847
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

Originally Posted by Grace Gabriel View Post
26 people gunned down in a church......

why?
he had an assortment of problems http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...worshiped.html
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 11-06-2017, 09:48 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,842
Thanks: 361
Thanks 846
Default

Originally Posted by Grace Gabriel View Post
26 people gunned down in a church......

why?


He was an asshole with mental health problems who was allowed to buy military style weapons. When you couple mental health problems with our current interpretation of our 2nd amendment, you get these shootings.

Either we live with that, or we do something about it. Most Americans can live with it until someone they love gets killed by a psycho like this. And... since itís still a relatively rare event, most people will never feel the urge to do something about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 11-07-2017, 07:22 PM
bluewpc's Avatar
bluewpc (Online)
Profusive Denizen
Official Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 280
Thanks: 3
Thanks 34
Default

It seems to me that there is an implicit dismissal of the western value of the sanctity of life in this continuing spate of massacres and I think its demonstrable by analyzing the last two massacres, Las Vegas and Sutherland. In each case there has been an obviously simple solution to placate proponents of gun control and to give even the illusion of trying to prevent these massacres.

In the case of Las Vegas a bump-stock was employed that de fact converted a semi-automatic weapon into a fully automatic weapon. Now as much of a gun lover as I am even I confess there is no need to have a fully automatic weapon for civilian use. Its cool at the range yes, but totally outside the scope of anything you would use in life. Automatic weapons for any of you all who dont know are used for suppression. No idiot would ever use the three round burst on an M16, and with those variants of the M4 capable of automatic fire those are used for room clearing. Ammunition conservation is part of what keeps you alive. Even with machine guns say the M249 or the M240 there are equations for how you manage your downrange output and you use those. Theres a method called talking where to maximize suppression two M240s will let off bursts one after the other so as to maintain a constant rate of fire without depleting supplies.

Now all of that can be accomplished with semi-automatic weapons. The idea of fully automatic weapons is not to suppress multiple armed targets, though thats part of it, but to achieve fire superiority. Something that a civilian would neither know nor need to do. Even cops are amateurs when it comes to this so the idea that a civilian without a background in infantry would know anything is beyond belief.

The easy thing to do in a situation like this would be to make the argument above and ban bump-stocks. But while this was given lip service it was ultimately and unsurprisingly dropped. They are at this moment still available. https://www.npr.org/2017/11/07/56250...o-resume-sales

Turning to the Sutherland massacre its stated that mental health is the problem not guns but the department of MHAA is about to suffer a severe budget cut:

https://ctmirror.org/2017/08/01/huma...hout-a-budget/

Now when you couple the refusal to legislate guns or to enforce existing gun laws and you refuse to fund the departments that could help prevent these massacres (which is the common blame) then when spoken to of the sanctity of life my response has much in common to Raskolnikov's outburst towards his sister's suitor. Nonsense! More than the logical conclusion it is in fact the only possible outcome. And since we all accept the outcome what is the implication? What is the implicit admission? Why that we do not value life. All proclamations contrariwise are irrelevant. We believe that the second amendment should be so liberally interpreted, so unfettered that any and all aught be allowed to amass whatever arsenal they so desire to whatever means they desire.

Of course none dare say this. But who truly laments a child drowining in her own blood? Who could even dare claim that it is a tragedy? Their sorrow and loss are meaningless because their lives are meaningless. Less than meaningless even. Contemptuous. From here the slip into solipsism is apparent. Why shouldnt I kill those who impede me? Why shouldnt I kill for the simple joy of the slaughter?

It is no secret that life is sacrificable at the altar of various values but these values must not be contrary to life. The desire for good must not unleash demons yet more horrible in man than those forces which man seeks to secure himself from. The pathway to communism through the perversion of empathy is a perfect example but so to this desire of the individual to protect himself against threats.
Dostoevsky wrote in the Brothers Karamazov that we are all guilty before another and I believe one meaning of this has to do with collective acquiescence. Gun reform could happen overnight if only there were the will to do it. But even those who wish reform, who would sign a petition, march, are as guilty because they do not rail against it with every fiber of their being. But of course how could they? How unrealistic is it to combat each cause with the totality of the self only to move from one to the next. But nevertheless it could be done in a night. In the same way that death is only a heartbeat away.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 11-08-2017, 12:35 AM
anna (Offline)
Copyist
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 48
Thanks: 19
Thanks 30
Default

Of course none dare say this. But who truly laments a child drowning in her own blood? A mother. Who could even dare claim that it is a tragedy? A woman. Their sorrow and loss are meaningless because their lives are meaningless. Less than meaningless even. Contemptuous.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 11-08-2017, 09:14 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by anna View Post
Of course none dare say this. But who truly laments a child drowning in her own blood? A mother. Who could even dare claim that it is a tragedy? A woman. Their sorrow and loss are meaningless because their lives are meaningless. Less than meaningless even. Contemptuous.
Que? Only women care about kids?
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 11-08-2017, 09:23 AM
anna (Offline)
Copyist
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 48
Thanks: 19
Thanks 30
Default

righty, let’s sort out this gun reform then, eh?

btw congrats to you and your girl, very best wishes.
write that love poem, dare you
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 11-08-2017, 09:28 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

The following is big picture stuff, I'm not saying stricter laws can't mitigate the issue...

ď...we don't need new governments
new revolutions
we don't need new men
new women
we don't need new ways
we just need to care.Ē

Bukowski

Personally I think we're conditioned super early to consider every solution through the prism of government and legislation.

The one thing I can say about gun crime is that it's more cultural and socio-economic than anything else. Severity of laws or lack thereof doesn't seem to have much bearing on your murder rate.

In short -- if we want to kill each other, we will. We kinda have to stop wanting to do it if we want things to change.

So the question is, why do people kill? And for me the answer starts by examining childhood. Rare that you won't find a high degree of dysfunction within someone's upbringing who goes onto embark on some killing spree.

So y'know, blame the parents
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 11-08-2017, 09:52 AM
anna (Offline)
Copyist
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 48
Thanks: 19
Thanks 30
Default

lol, Iíll leave you to think over the bigger picture stuff, would you like a cup of tea while youíre at it. To be human is to be pretty dysfunctional. Not sure females want to go about killing folk in quite the same way though, itís a bloke thing, so is lack of gun controls.

Last edited by anna; 11-08-2017 at 09:57 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 11-08-2017, 10:38 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Pretty much a bloke thing yeah. But who raises the blokes? Fathers are at work, or at war, or drunk in the gutter somewhere. It's women in the nurseries, women in the primary schools. The balance of influence on children doesn't even out until possibly secondary (high) school. I only say this because I believe childhood to be the main cause, and therefore the whole 'it's a bloke thing' is a bit dismissive of women's role in raising stable individuals.

Evolutionarily men are just more aggressive, because we had to go and hunt, compete and protect the tribe. In a more animalistic or 'natural' sense you just don't survive especially well by being meek and passive.

So men have all these aggressive genes which were useful but are bound to backfire. Women are of course not adverse to killing and will under certain conditions encourage it, again in order to compete or protect (as they see it).

It's not like say Cleopatra, Margaret Thatcher, Queen Victoria, Madame Nu, Madame Mao, Griselda Blanco (to name a few) were anything to mess with. This is just for those who think a matriarchy means peace.

My thing is simply this: when these new laws come in, and someone obtains an automatic weapon illegally and starts shooting everyone, what conversations will we be having?

We might as well start having that convo now because otherwise you'll forever be railing against symptoms without dealing with causes.

Think of it this way, Chicago is a bloodbath, way moreso I imagine than 50 years ago. Is it because gun laws have relaxed? No, the kids are just way more crazy. Therein lies your cause, best to deal with it if you're serious.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.

Last edited by JohnConstantine; 11-08-2017 at 10:41 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 11-08-2017, 11:24 AM
anna (Offline)
Copyist
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 48
Thanks: 19
Thanks 30
Default

righty, so in your opinion, fuck the symptoms apart from highlighting the fact that women arenít raising stable individuals, have you asked them whether gun laws could be a tad helpful in addressing the cause. And how do you propose dealing with these Ďcrazy kidsí? What is your guidance to us women folk? Another cuppa? Casserole in the oven.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 11-08-2017, 11:37 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by anna View Post
righty, so in your opinion, fuck the symptoms apart from highlighting the fact that women aren’t raising stable individuals, have you asked them whether gun laws could be a tad helpful in addressing the cause. And how do you propose dealing with these ‘crazy kids’? What is your guidance to us women folk? Another cuppa? Casserole in the oven.
Lol

Well I'm saying that society is producing unstable people, and women are a huge part of society, so they don't get to heap all of the blame onto men. I hope that makes sense, though feel free to challenge anything here which doesn't ring true.

Help a tad, sure. Fix it, not even close. The reality is that the insanely high murder rate in Chicago, or any other place with an insanely high murder rate, is not created by people who care about laws.

So sure, ultimately we've got to slowly create a culture within which people find violence truly abhorrent. The places where violence is rife have failed in this area.

I'm not saying I know HOW you do that, I am staying that this is your only REAL solution. That's the cultural side anyway, and I think fixing the cultural side will fix the socio economic side -- and it isn't really possible to fix it the other way 'round.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 11-08-2017, 04:28 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,847
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post


My thing is simply this: when these new laws come in, and someone obtains an automatic weapon illegally and starts shooting everyone, what conversations will we be having?

We might as well start having that convo now because otherwise you'll forever be railing against symptoms without dealing with causes.

Think of it this way, Chicago is a bloodbath, way moreso I imagine than 50 years ago. Is it because gun laws have relaxed? No, the kids are just way more crazy. Therein lies your cause, best to deal with it if you're serious.
Good points.

What happens in a scenario like that when our government has given out guns to shit bags just across our border and overseas?

There is also a matter of trust.

Has trust in our government gone up or down?

There has always been a strong contingent of gun owners in the US, but ask when gun sales really exploded? Starting in the late Bush I era with Ruby Ridge, and then Clinton and the Waco Fiasco - People who ordinarily wouldn't have bothered with guns have started to buy guns.

In the same time period several other things happened - the crack and cocaine wars dampened down a good bit, and Concealed Carry Permits have become readily available. More people are going armed, small scale armed assaults are dropping as a result of it, so what gets headlines is the mass shootings.

Another thing of interest - the looney left has become a much bigger footprint firearms ownership, really starting November 9, 2016.

With all the factors, even draconian gun confiscations will fail. Or people will go with other means.

Look at Europe - not having access to legal fire arms isn't stopping violence there, now is it?
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 11-08-2017, 08:57 PM
anna (Offline)
Copyist
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 48
Thanks: 19
Thanks 30
Default

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...e_iOSApp_Other
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 11-08-2017, 10:50 PM
anna (Offline)
Copyist
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 48
Thanks: 19
Thanks 30
Default

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...=share_btn_lin
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 11-10-2017, 01:49 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

On America's distinction from 'developed' nations...

'The absolute rejection of a centralised state is part of its notion of freedom.'

Yeah... I never really understand this kind of mentality. An absolute rejection? The state becomes larger and larger, decade on decade, tax revenues all time high, regulations proliferate at unimaginable rates*, virtually no section of society left untouched by government. And yet we're convinced that it literally doesn't exist (thus crying out for more of it). Amazing stuff really; good ol' Guardian.

* According to the Office of the Federal Register, in 1998, the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), the official listing of all regulations in effect, contained a total of 134,723 pages in 201 volumes that claimed 19 feet of shelf space. In 1970, the CFR totaled only 54,834 pages.

It's a funny thing, I mean the total impossibility for society to be mindful of these regulations it would take a lifetime to read it let alone understand/live by it (just one more and everything will be fine!). I feel like Albert Camus 'At any street corner the feeling of absurdity can strike any man in the face.'
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 11-10-2017, 02:09 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by Mohican View Post
Look at Europe - not having access to legal fire arms isn't stopping violence there, now is it?
It probably does mitigate it to varying degrees. But sure, someone can make a bomb at home and set it off during a pop concert. They don't need an assault rifle.

I would go out on a limb and say Europe on balance is culturally less homicidal than America. The most obvious comparison is Switzerland, which allows for gun ownership and has a high ratio of owned guns per person, yet a very low murder rate.

For everyone who thinks it's just a legislative problem has to understand that. The Swiss are getting on just fine. The two main differences between the US and Switzerland on this issue must be cultural and socio-economic. The US obviously has a much higher population, and I imagine some states within the US report similar murder rates to Switzerland, which would be useful to analyse and try to unpack what distinguishes these states from Chicago.

And logically the Swiss attitude is what you want to be aiming for. You don't want the only reason that your son doesn't take out tens of strangers at his local mall to be lack of access to weaponry. You want it to be things like, he has a lot to live for, enjoys his life, is mentally sound etc. If our sons are/have none of these things, whose fault is it?
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.

Last edited by JohnConstantine; 11-10-2017 at 02:19 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 11-10-2017, 08:15 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,741
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

This is pure conjecture -- but in this country, of course there is something so specific about the gun mentality and what guns mean. And there's the power and efficiency and the detachment they provide.

So this guy who just killed all the people in the church -- I seriously doubt he would have used a bomb or driven up on a sidewalk etc.

I think this is especially true when there's no ideology behind it -- it's just about going out in a big way, guns blazing, and taking as many people with you as possible.

That's the fantasy -- including getting your hands on the guns and ammo etc. and going through it in your mind. Could be wrong, but think it's unlikely that this kind of person would live it out with a car or truck or a bomb made out of a pressure a cooking pot...

Last edited by Myers; 11-10-2017 at 08:19 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 11-10-2017, 09:10 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
That's the fantasy -- including getting your hands on the guns and ammo etc. and going through it in your mind. Could be wrong, but think it's unlikely that this kind of person would live it out with a car or truck or a bomb made out of a pressure a cooking pot...
I think this is reasonable. And to be honest I have no real objection to tightening up gun control especially when it comes to weapons which really belong on the battle field.

The point still remains though that some places are incredibly violent despite guns being illegal -- and others perfectly safe despite no ban being in place.

It's kind of like drugs to me. In the Philippines there is this crazy war on drugs leading to mass incarcerations, death sentences, private death squads taking out drug dealers with almost no regulation. It's as extreme a ban as you could conceive, usage remains more or less the same (in fact street prices are falling), and was pretty low to begin with anyway.

Ultimately you have to deal with why people want to do drugs, the method of beating them over the head is just a bandage, not anything like a cure.

The mental health issue argument is an interesting one... more funding etc. Seems like another bandage to me, most if not all of these shooters seem to be already medicated to the hilt.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JohnConstantine For This Useful Post:
Myers (11-10-2017)
  #81  
Old 11-10-2017, 11:12 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,741
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

I see the argument all the time that compares illegal drugs to firearms -- that people will somehow get their hands on them regardless of how draconian the laws are. (This isn't aimed at you.) I only partially buy it.

With drugs:

The source -- the raw material for drugs can be grown and the first stages of manufacturing can happen in the boondocks in third world countries. Almost impossible to stop.

Transport/Smuggling -- drugs are lightweight and malleable and can be smuggled inside just about anything -- including the human body.

Domestic manufacturing/growing -- for methamphetamine and counterfeit opioids and even MDA (although the raw materials are rare and hard to get) it doesn't take a lot to set up shop. Weed -- anyone with the equipment, space and know-how can grow it.

Demand -- from experience, I can tell you there is no one more tenacious, desperate and willing to take risks and spend a whole lot of money than a drug addict.

I'm not going to go through the specific differences of what it take to manufacture, smuggle and distribute guns etc. -- or how in comparison there would be far less demand and widespread willingness to break the law -- but you probably get the idea.

This is more conjecture -- I know a lot about drugs and where they come from, and not much about guns -- but I'm guessing just about everything to do with making illegal guns available is a heck of a lot harder -- and that it would be easier for law enforcement to find the sources and identify the different points along the supply chain. I mean -- a high school kid can hide/store and distribute drugs out of his parent's house or his school locker. Guns -- that's another story.

But of course, we all know how resourceful criminals can be...

Last edited by Myers; 11-10-2017 at 11:35 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 11-10-2017, 09:48 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,842
Thanks: 361
Thanks 846
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
I see the argument all the time that compares illegal drugs to firearms -- that people will somehow get their hands on them regardless of how draconian the laws are. (This isn't aimed at you.) I only partially buy it.

With drugs:

The source -- the raw material for drugs can be grown and the first stages of manufacturing can happen in the boondocks in third world countries. Almost impossible to stop.

Transport/Smuggling -- drugs are lightweight and malleable and can be smuggled inside just about anything -- including the human body.

Domestic manufacturing/growing -- for methamphetamine and counterfeit opioids and even MDA (although the raw materials are rare and hard to get) it doesn't take a lot to set up shop. Weed -- anyone with the equipment, space and know-how can grow it.

Demand -- from experience, I can tell you there is no one more tenacious, desperate and willing to take risks and spend a whole lot of money than a drug addict.

I'm not going to go through the specific differences of what it take to manufacture, smuggle and distribute guns etc. -- or how in comparison there would be far less demand and widespread willingness to break the law -- but you probably get the idea.

This is more conjecture -- I know a lot about drugs and where they come from, and not much about guns -- but I'm guessing just about everything to do with making illegal guns available is a heck of a lot harder -- and that it would be easier for law enforcement to find the sources and identify the different points along the supply chain. I mean -- a high school kid can hide/store and distribute drugs out of his parent's house or his school locker. Guns -- that's another story.

But of course, we all know how resourceful criminals can be...


Weíre doing research on the best consumer 3D printers on the market (within a price range). As soon as we get one we are going to print our own guns. Hey, I️ wonder if we can print drugs?😀


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 11-11-2017, 01:39 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

I think the argument against that is that very, very few crimes are committed with legally obtained guns now.

I think you might see a reduction of the lone wolf with mental health issues who most likely has no criminal ties, or much ties of any sort. This type of person would findnit hard to buy drugs even, unless they had the guts to just go around asking randomly. But for the criminally connected I don't see it being hard to get guns.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 11-11-2017, 04:25 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,741
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Well, all guns were legal at one point. They aren't manufactured in someone's basement -- brianpatrick's 3D printer aside.

I think what you're really saying -- at least as it applies to the U.S. -- is that we're already so awash in illegal guns, there's no point in making them a lot harder to get or trying to improve the systems to track them etc. -- which is just a variation of the old bumper sticker slogan "if you make guns a crime, only criminals will have guns."

I think we could do a better job -- but it's not something gun advocates or conservative politicians want to do. They see any measure to more stringently control guns as the path down the slippery slope, and at the bottom, the federales are going to storm their homes and take all their guns away.

It wouldn't be easy and the it would be slow going. And there isn't going to be any magic legislative bullet, because of course, what separates us from other countries is the deeply seated culture of guns and the other social and economic problems that drive gun related crime. Plus, there's the second amendment, that guarantees your right to own guns.

So again, essentially the argument is -- we've allowed this to fester for decades and get out of hand to the point where the only answer is -- do nothing.

BTW -- it's pretty much common knowledge were you can go in my city to get drugs. It's something I tried to avoid --
but I did it. It doesn't take a lot of asking around. And once you start using and hanging around with people who do drugs -- it's not very hard to get connected.

Last edited by Myers; 11-11-2017 at 04:35 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 11-12-2017, 04:44 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,847
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

in Texas a private citizen having access to a rifle is what stopped it.

It happens a lot more than what is in the headlines.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 11-12-2017, 05:12 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,847
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

It's always good when the media can weigh in on the subject, and do so accurately

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ab1u_9i6GWE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KydTB_EAdrM
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 11-13-2017, 01:55 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
BTW -- it's pretty much common knowledge were you can go in my city to get drugs. It's something I tried to avoid --
but I did it. It doesn't take a lot of asking around. And once you start using and hanging around with people who do drugs -- it's not very hard to get connected.
I'm not saying do nothing. Like I said I don't have any objection to tighter laws. We don't have them here and I see no need to introduce them.

I'll admit that I do think of government in terms of 'what happens when state power gets into the wrong hands' and so I get the whole idea that an armed population are harder to push around. It is fantastic I don't think anyone would deny that, but at the same time these things are always worth considering.

Sure it's not hard to get connected but it's definitely true that there is a type of person who only bought something because they could walk into a shop and do so -- and for whatever reason will avoid the black market.

Aside from that again if you have no issue with obtaining things illegally you'll be able to get whatever you want before long, drugs, prostitutes, guns... it's all there for paying customers. Nowadays you can even get it all on the internet.

The bumper sticker by definition does hold true. In every country where guns are illegal only the criminals have guns. I don't really buy the self defence argument if I'm honest -- I think the likelihood of being armed and ready to shoot at the moment of some surprised assault is probably so low as to pale into insignificance. I mean, you'd have to walk around constantly strapped -- or have a loaded gun under the pillow etc. Who wants to live like that?

To sum up, I don't have any issue even with a wholesale ban... I don't really see a very strong argument against it. However I don't believe that this solves your problem, in fact I wouldn't be surprised to see violent crime remain the same or even increase in the tumult of implementing the ban. So... my hypothetical is... what do you do then? When guns are banned and everyone is still shooting, then people will have to start looking at their communities. I guess what I'm trying to say is that the debate has always been too government-centric for me.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 11-13-2017, 06:30 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,741
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Well, we certainly could reduce gun violence if we legalized or decriminalized drugs.

But that's a scary proposition for most people. And illegality does serve as a deterrent to some degree -- especially if you're trying to get off drugs. That extra risk factor can make you think twice. I think alcoholics have a much harder time avoiding relapse -- because it's always available and in your face.

It's kind of funny that the latest crop of conservatives are advocating that we double down on the useless war on drugs -- too much money involved, I guess. And guns for self defense -- it's just a security blanket.

You're probably right about the effectiveness of bans -- or making them very hard to get. Canada has comparatively little gun violence, but they didn't have as much to begin with -- plus, they don't see the controls as a form of government oppression. The laws are tough -- my uncle volunteers for a reentry program at a Canadian prison. This average Joe who bought a gun in the states and smuggled it back in his R.V. got 6 months for a first offense -- and his neighbor turned him in, which is kind of weird.

Again, it's a whole different mentality here in the States. (And they don't have the same socioeconomic issues.) They pretty much think we're completely nuts when it comes to guns.

Post ban in the states -- I suppose it's possible this could be solved at the community level if people are still shooting each other -- or -- if violence increases substantially, that more law abiding citizen will throw in the towel and get their own guns. Then it's the Wild West. (Or the mythical Wild West, because they actually had pretty strict gun laws.) I guess I don't have much faith that people could solve the problem -- or the government.

Last edited by Myers; 11-13-2017 at 06:34 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 11-13-2017, 07:27 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
I guess I don't have much faith that people could solve the problem -- or the government.
I watched Louise Theroux doing his usual tour of crazy American subculture recently. One scene finds him in a jail questioning one of the inmates as to why he was there, how long he had... standard questions.

This guy was literally jumping up and down gleefully chanting that he'd taken out 8 or 9 dudes with a 'chopper', stating that 'that's what we do out here' or something to that effect. And everyone on the block seemed to be similarly excited about it.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x65sedh

One thing's for sure... the government can't fix that. What can the government do? -- lock you up with a bunch of other crazy people. It's a mentality. I have no idea how you change that kind of mentality, but it is up to people and communities almost solely.

What can people do?

Well if kids are growing up with no positive role models, mum's an alcoholic, dad's in jail, sister's a prostitute...

For those guys in jail the above was a pretty common back story. It's probably cliched to even mention this stuff but to me it's like what do you expect? It's so predictable that someone coming out of that kind of childhood experience is more likely to gravitate towards violence and crime.

I'd agree there's not much that instils faith in some major change. But I think this at least illustrates who really holds the cards.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 11-13-2017, 03:33 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,842
Thanks: 361
Thanks 846
Default

Originally Posted by Mohican View Post
in Texas a private citizen having access to a rifle is what stopped it.

It happens a lot more than what is in the headlines.


Yes, and I can take Advil for the headache I got from drinking too much vodka, but is That really a good solution?

I donít expect you to understand the deeper implications, but really?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
Reply

  WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Morals of a murderer wazzaroon Fiction 14 09-09-2011 02:38 AM
The Victor Gaines Fiction 22 04-23-2010 11:03 AM
The Five Brothers Part 1/Chapter 4 PopRocks Fiction 2 06-24-2009 09:13 PM
The General Geoffrey Robson Fiction 4 08-22-2007 11:27 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:41 AM.

vBulletin, Copyright © 2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.