The Thread Where We Discuss Guns and Gun Control

[Lexicus]

Someone who is willing to concede that in the case of tanks or bomb vests public safety is more important than freedom, we can shift away from the argument about rights to an honest look at the evidence.

No, we won't be doing any of that. In fact I'm calling it now: inb4 Commodore says it doesn't matter because suicide vests and tanks are not rights guaranteed by the Constitution

 

[Farm Boy]

Someone who is willing to concede that in the case of tanks or bomb vests public safety is more important than freedom, we can shift away from the argument about rights to an honest look at the evidence for guns.

Nope. It shifts the nature of the right and the balance of power defended.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Right to die with dignity when old and useless

Like the Ättestupa?

suicide vests and tanks are not rights guaranteed by the Constitution

Well at least that's a somewhat good-faith argument that has some logical coherence that can be discussed on the merits... as opposed to...

 

[Farm Boy]

Just worth noting that the appropriateness of self-selected death as a remedy for suffering tends to be just about 100% linked with how useful we consider the person to be if they work on our behalf, instead. So yes.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Or is it just the case that in terms of gun deaths suicides > accidental deaths > homicides in terms of frequency?

Yes, this.

 

[ulyssesSgrant]

Nope. It shifts the nature of the right and the balance of power defended.

The nature remains the same, the balance of power is the question.

 

[Lexicus]

Yes, this.

I'm pretty sure it's suicides>homicides>accidental deaths, actually.

edit: yep, 2013 numbers

These deaths included 21,175 suicides,[7] 11,208 homicides,[8]505 deaths due to accidental or negligent discharge of a firearm, and 281 deaths due to firearms use with "undetermined intent".[7]

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I'm pretty sure it's suicides>homicides>accidental deaths, actually.

edit: yep, 2013 numbers

That number for homicides combines intended targets with the incidentally killed. My initial point was that more people who are killed by guns were not only not killed in self defense, they weren't killed intentionally at all. So the whole "well, the bomb vest isn't targeted like a gun is" argument against it being a 'righteous choice' for self defense is just plain wrong.

 

[Lexicus]

Oh I see what you're saying. Yeah, you're right.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I need a tee shirt that says "I'm packin' and I don't see too good; try to mug me and I'm liable to shoot up the whole block."

 

[Sommerswerd]

Just worth noting that the appropriateness of self-selected death as a remedy for suffering tends to be just about 100% linked with how useful we consider the person to be if they work on our behalf, instead. So yes.

Sure... even more generally, we're fine with people we don't give a squeeze about dying.

It's only when people we care about commit suicide that we say *gasp* But he had so much to live for! How weak! How selfish! How could he?!? We demand an investigation! People OD everyday, nobody gives a rats... but Michael Jackson ODs and his doctor gets thrown in jail.

 

[Farm Boy]

Useful people we don't otherwise care about get statistics and control if not investigations.

The nature remains the same, the balance of power is the question.

Allocated to everybody by merit of being to be deprived as determined as opposed to allowed by active consensus is deeper than simple balance of power.

 

[Lexicus]

This is pucking bizarre...is it me or is Farm Boy trying to argue that stopping people from killing themselves is bad because we just want to use them for work anyway?

WTH?

 

[Sommerswerd]

Useful people we don't otherwise care about get statistics and control if not investigations.

Like you said, we care about them because they're useful... that and that alone keeps a lot of grannies out of the nursing home.

This is pucking bizarre...is it me or is Farm Boy trying to argue that stopping people from killing themselves is bad because we just want to use them for work anyway?

WTH?

I think the argument/observation is that there is a direct relationship between how useful a person is perceived to be and how resistant people are to letting them off themselves. ​

 

[Farm Boy]

Yeah, but grannie is allowed in the house. Profitable usefulness gets lower than a dog.

 

[Lexicus]

I think the argument/observation is that there is a direct relationship between how useful a person is perceived to be and how resistant people are to letting them off themselves. ​

I guess I just have a nasty suspicious mind but it doesn't seem like a coincidence that he just happened to spit out this idea when I started talking about how gun control can reduce suicides.

Maybe he's trying to obliquely claim that we're lying about wanting reduce suicides, because we just have a perverse need to tread on snakes and violate rights?

 

[Sommerswerd]

Yeah, but grannie is allowed in the house. Profitable usefulness gets lower than a dog.

Not necessarily... anyway, that could just be legality, rather than affection.

 

[metalhead]

"Undetermined intent?"

 

[Farm Boy]

Not necessarily

There's an awful lot of not necessarily to go around.

 

[El_Machinae]

I think the argument/observation is that there is a direct relationship between how useful a person is perceived to be and how resistant people are to letting them off themselves. ​

It's the depression that comes from feeling that your best is not good enough. It requires a perceived loss. If you're talking about usefulness, usually one of the main recommendations is to figure out a way to get the person gainfully employed again.