Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
The reason is: I like guns.
The Thread Where We Discuss Guns and Gun Control
- Thread starter Lemon Merchant
- Start date
-
- Tags
- all guns suck
bernie14
Filter Manipulator
Did either of you bother to look at the supplementary info in the article @EgonSpengler posted? Where the increase in gun deaths are occurring?
Lexicus
Deity
The potentially negative downstream consequences of flooding Ukraine with arms is another thing to blame Putin for tbh
Cloud_Strife
Deity
Well do tell us
I don't believe I have responded to Egon so no, I've not seen his post. I'll give a read if you link please.
I don't think it's necessary (or productive) for me to do the thing where I edit your post with strikethroughs and bolds to illustrate how the exact argument you are making directly contradicts your position on the issue of transwomen participation in womens sports. The reason I brought that otherwise unrelated issue up, was to confront you with the fact that your rationale for your position is inconsistent with your own prior expressed positions. In other words, why are you concerned with the athlete losing their sports opportunity to a transwomen athlete despite the low odds of it affecting your kids, but less concerned about the girl losing their life to school shootings, because of the low odds it would affect your kids? Why the inconsistency?
My hot-take/theory is that its because of the political implications of the positions. Your expressed rationale is inconsistent, however, what is consistent are the politics of your positions. You take the bog-standard Conservative/Republican position when it comes to transwomen participating in womens sports, ie skepticism/aversion etc., and similarly the bog-standard Conservative/Republican position when it comes to calls for gun control in the wake of school shootings, ie skepticism/aversion etc. It makes perfect sense, but its just straightforward partisanship, not principle or logic. I get the impression that you have convinced yourself, or at least hold the belief that your position is logical and/or principled. What I'm demonstrating to you, is that its not. Your position isn't principled, its just Republican/Conservative. Your position isn't principled/logical... as it contradicts your expressed/implied reasoning/principles in taking other positions.
My point then is to suggest to you, that your position on this issue, (ie calls for gun control in the wake of school shootings) is not so much principled as it is partisan. That is to say, my impression is that your position is simply the standard party/ideological line and there isn't much more to it than that... which to be fair, is perfectly normal, perfectly commonplace. I'm just trying to get you to consider that your claimed rationale for your position does not stand up to scrutiny, in terms of logic, or more particularly, consistency with your position on another controversial issue, except when viewed through the lense of straightforward, partisanship. In other words, you are skeptical, against, unmotivated, etc., when it comes to gun control in this context, because that is the Republican position... and that's all there is to it.
So I'm not suggesting that your position is "absurd". I'm not asking you to give up your guns, or your sacrosanct liberties, or however you want to redefine euphemize "guns". Your position makes sense to me, without regard to whether I agree with it. All I'm doing is pointing out to you that your position upon examination, appears to be mostly partisan in nature, and your attempts at rationalization, are demonstrably internally inconsistent... further highlighting that the rationalizations aren't legitimate, but more likely a post facto, possibly subconscious (also very common) attempt to convince yourself (and maybe others) that your position is something more nuanced/reasoned than straightforward partisan ideology.
Again, my point isn't necessarily to condemn straightforward partisan ideology as a justification for a position. It makes perfect sense to me. My point is to try to confront you with the apparent fact that your current argument about "odds" and "receipts" does not add up, and encourage you to take a thoughtful look at the effect simple partisanship plays in your positions.
EDIT: The other, possible straightforward explanation that I can see, is captured in @Ziggy Stardust 's post above. If you're a gun/gun-rights enthusiast you are going to tend to be more resistant to calls for gun control. But again, that's the rationale, not arguments about "odds" and so forth... Its just that you like guns, so you don't want them to be restricted. Makes sense... but its not about logic or principle, its about personal preference/amusement/fetish.
Last edited:
I wonder what gun people would do if the 2nd amendment was repealed?
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2012
- Messages
- 952
I agree it would be better to focus on the easier solutions first than the harder ones. Such door-stoppers might be one solution.
But that is going to be up to each facility and/or business to decide what measures they can put in place to dissuade intruders. And that (fortunately or not) does not speak to US national policy on guns.
It won't be. As an aside, I think that is the proverbial 800-pound gorilla. Democrats won't/can't address the 2nd amendment, because it is a tough issue politically. That is part of why I think the gun-control issue is a hopeless losing issue for Democrats.
EDIT: As a thought exercise, I considered for a moment how gun enthusiasts would react to a repeal of the 2nd amendment (which I regard as highly unlikely in the first instance).
My hot take is they would complain a lot and not do much else. As long as the government was not physically going around trying to confiscate guns, very little would happen, other than a huge spike in gun sales in the run-up to the repeal.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2012
- Messages
- 952
I looked. I'll tell: gun deaths caused by black American men nearly exceeds that of other races combined; in fact it seems to have jumped a good measure between 2019 and 2020; if I'm reading this data right. See below.*
(forgot to add: suicide looks like it takes up nearly a third of gun deaths)
So...
If our interest would be to limit the number of gun deaths in the US (not just the number of mass shooters but all gun deaths) only by severely curtailing individual possession of firearms, our straightforward logical response would be targeted disproportionately towards blacks.
Now if that is something we're willing to tolerate, then okay, but if not, then "banning guns" is going to be an unserious solution.
*posted again
Cloud_Strife
Deity
Oh cool, we're going down the racist route
Lexicus
Deity
Holy crap dude i was expecting the usual "democrat cities with gun control laws" thing but damn you really took it to another level, kudos for being so openly racist lol
Cloud_Strife
Deity
Love how the "serious solution" is to further oppress poc's lmao, just absolute clownshoes logic
bernie14
Filter Manipulator
I assumed you knew how to read. Do you know what a "graph" is?
Sure thing...oh, see above, obvious racism
New England journal of medicine showing racist stats
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2011
- Messages
- 4,905
As I recall in that thread I posted a pretty damning set of stats that neither you or anyone else really challenged, where I posted the best times for biological male amateur athletes vs. biological females and pointed out how very many pages of the former you had to sift through before you got to the best time of the latter, so I don't really agree with you that I'm being inconsistent at all. There are substantially better odds of my daughter losing a competitive race if she has to compete against a biological male than her being shot while she attends school. It's not even close, honestly. It's a silly comparison. I'm comparing the chance of one of the nearly 50 million school children in the USA being killed in a mass shooting. You're bringing up what I think of the odds of 9 female runners beating one male in a race.
And I'm also not a particularly partisan Republican on a whole host of issues (gay rights and abortion being prominent examples) but I will completely admit that I think when it comes to gun control Democrats and liberals have lost their minds, rave about "threats" that are better classified as anomalies, miss the target wildly when they try to figure out what's causing all of this, and are just fantastically wrong. If I had to pick one Republican position that I'd die on a hill over, it'd be this one. You can sway me on others (someone once did on abortion, after all). You're not changing my mind on this one.
Lexicus
Deity
Do you know how to make an argument?
Once again asking you to make an argument.
Sure thing...oh, see above, obvious racism
New England journal of medicine showing racist stats
Again for the third time, make a damn argument please
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2011
- Messages
- 4,905
Have you come across any studies on what people happened to be doing when they were shot? As in, how many were just trying to go to school, how many were actively involved in a crime when they were shot, how many were part of a criminal organization shot by a member of a different criminal organization, how many were bystanders while others were engaged in a crime, etc. I've found stats on the number of folks who were intentionally shot by someone else, but I can't find one that breaks down what the intent actually was.
Similar threads
