Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
I honestly don't see why this is any more absurd than saying that inner city violence can be reasonably blamed on gangsta rap, which I am guessing was Contre's point.
Out of control gun control
- Thread starter kochman
- Start date
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
Well, that's a shortcoming of your own that you have to deal with, if you don't see the difference...
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
As with your own inability to see that Wagner caused Nazism. If you get where I'm going with this.
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
I do, and it is a ridiculous argument.
You have one guy (Hitler), who happened to love Wagner's music... and as a result, his lackies all listened more than they would otherwise, etc.
Versus gangster rap, which is completely direct in it's lyrics, it's clothing styles are glorified, and they direct lyrics are directly acted upon every day...
I get what you are saying, there was already a criminal element in the areas where rap spawned... but "gangster rap" was like giving that element steroids.
nonconformist
Miserable
The stupid argument here is that every major shooting in the UK has been done with legally owned firearms.
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
OK, you're right, that is a stupid argument.
And, the bombings in the UK? Were those done through use of legal bomb parts?
nonconformist
Miserable
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
Not at all, bombs are illegal in Britain, unless you are the government.
nonconformist
Miserable
You asked whether the bombings were done via "legal gun parts".
Yes they were.
You're being intellectually dishonest, and changing the goalposts, because it suits your argument.
civver_764
Deity
You typically make a bomb with legally obtained items.
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
You're nitpicking the choice of words...
OK, were the bombings done in the UK used doing LEGAL BOMBS??? Sorry I added "parts" in there.
Legal bomb parts -> illegal bombs
is equivalent to
Legal guns -> illegal shootings
in this analogy.
Having bomb parts all around, readily for use in various legal endeavours, does not prevent the illegal use of assembly and bombing. Having legal guns all around does not prevent the illegal use of murders and shootings, and causes more problems than it might prevent.
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
Negative... in both cases the action is illegal, made possible from things that are legal.
Better put...
Legal bomb parts (noun) -> illegal bombings (verb)
Legal guns (noun) -> illegal shootings (verb)
You had it going Noun -> Noun is equal to Noun -> Verb... not a valid analogy.
Verbose
Deity
Verbose's Rough Guide to Spotting French Law Enforcement:
Black jumpsuits, the gendarmes.
Blue jumpsuits, the CRS.
Camo, the army.
Oh, and in particular try to stay clear of the CRS,...
Constructing a bomb is illegal.
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
OK, great... let me break this down further, since you want to nitpick as well...
1) Have bomb parts (noun) -> creating illegal bomb (verb that doesn't effect anyone directly)
2) Have bomb parts (noun) -> using illegal bomb (verb that does effect someone directly)
3) Having gun parts (nount) -> creating illegal gun (verb that doesn't effect anyone directly)
4) Having gun parts (nount) -> using any gun illegally (verb that does effect someone directly)
Do you see how 1 & 3 are more closely related to each other than 1 & 3 are with 2 or 4 and vice versa?
Technically, 1 & 3 don't hurt anyone, whereas 2 & 4 clearly do.
Bad analogy.
You were doing fine stating facts right up until that last (bolded) bit, which went from fact to opinion without warning.
I don't even know what we're talking about anymore.
Correct. I was afraid that the facts might look a certain way, so I inserted an opinion to influence readers.
(Too much honesty?)
Similar threads
