The Thread Where We Discuss Guns and Gun Control

[Farm Boy]

Wasn't as good as the book, but was fun. What am I forgetting from the land of orange paintball special effects?

 

[Sommerswerd]

We did. We're helping prevent Iran from getting nukes. Americans have the right to own nukes, see, and Iranians don't.

"God-given" right... don't forget "God-given" right.

 

[Farm Boy]

Who is he forgetting is saying that, me? Everything is God given if you operate under the principle, including evil. So why bother including it, other than foe-naming/other-shaming?

 

[El_Machinae]

It was highlighting the hypocrisy. Some people believe that all animals are equal under God, just that some are more equal than others

"God-given" right... don't forget "God-given" right.

That was part of where I think Berserkers post was being misinterpreted. If you stroll through his writings, he means nature given.

I'm more used to people saying it, so his comments are easier to understand.

That said, there is a very strong portion of the Second Amendment fan base that believes god-given is referring to the Protestant God

 

[Broken_Erika]

That said, there is a very strong portion of the Second Amendment fan base that believes god-given is referring to the Protestant God

So only protestants should be allowed to have guns?

 

[El_Machinae]

Before I was born, I prayed that God would put me into a socio-economic position where I could afford a gun

So, obviously.

 

[Farm Boy]

Ty. Pass.

 

[ulyssesSgrant]

we don't punish animals for defending themselves

Yeah we do

Heck, we also slap animals

Uh, "we"? I don't...

Lets clarify who here punishes animals for defending themselves and who here slaps animals. I want names.

 

[Lexicus]

Lets clarify who here punishes animals for defending themselves and who here slaps animals. I want names.

I don't slap animals, but I participate in a society ("we") that euthanizes animals who defend themselves against humans with sufficient vigor.

 

[El_Machinae]

It is interesting how you understood "we" in the first instance, and not in the second.

It was so frustrating, I didn't even reply. I guess I got burned out by having someone assume that I didn't know we euthanize animals due to behavior

I'm currently straddling the fence as to whether I'm being read in order to communicate with, or with the subconscious goal of finding something to disagree with

 

[Lexicus]

It is interesting how you understood "we" in the first instance, and not in the second.

One is a socially-sanctioned behavior, carried out by the government, the other is not. Indeed, if "you" were to slap an animal in front of "me", "you" might find "me" slapping "you" as a result - there's no "we" there to speak of.

I guess I got burned out by having someone assume that I didn't know we euthanize animals due to behavior

Do you really not see that this was an obvious interpretation of what you said though? I didn't "assume" that, I concluded it from you saying something I interpreted to mean that.

 

[Farm Boy]

Lets clarify who here punishes animals for defending themselves and who here slaps animals. I want names.

I had squirrels in my walls last year. They're an invasive species and not legal to relocate. I euthanized a whole bunch of them for living in the wrong spot.

 

[El_Machinae]

No, it's not obvious. I will grant that there are many ways to interpret my initial statement, and then my resulting clarification.

But replying, twice, with the conclusion that I don't know about euthanasia is... frustrating. Rather than rethinking your quote-unquote obvious conclusion, you went with your conclusion.

Your first reply was even your famous bad faith "nuh-uh". I even treated it as if you were thinking of an exemption.

And, I hate to tell you, but slapping animals is still part of our society. In fact, in slapping me ( to show me that slapping is wrong, potentially?), you would be committing a criminal offense.

 

[Lexicus]

No, it's not obvious. I will grant that there are many ways to interpret my initial statement, and then my resulting clarification.

It was an obvious interpretation. Anyway the point was more to clarify what I was talking about, specifically, rather than an assumption you didn't know about what I was talking about. What I wasn't sure of was whether you knew it was what I was talking about.

But replying, twice, with the conclusion that I don't know about euthanasia is... frustrating. Rather than rethinking your quote-unquote obvious conclusion, you went with your conclusion.

I don't know what on Earth you're talking about here. I'm sorry that you felt condescended to or whatever, fwiw I often feel condescended to by you, I mostly don't make a big deal out of it.

And, I hate to tell you, but slapping animals is still part of our society. In fact, in slapping me ( to show me that slapping is wrong, potentially?), you would be committing a criminal offense.

Part of our society =/= socially-sanctioned as expressed by the state doing that thing with wide public support/acceptance.

 

[El_Machinae]

It wasn't condescension, it was my frustration that I misinterpreted your initial reply. I concluded that you were thinking of people that punished animals from a sense of Revenge, and not that you could read the sentences interpreting that someone didn't know about euthanasia.

It's valuable feedback regardless.

I don't find much value during a rabbit trail around definitions.

I clarify them, and then move on. If you want to use the word Revenge, fine, I can use the word Revenge. It captures the intent nicely. We can reserve punishment as the legal consequences.

Berserker wants to use the term God given, I can work with that.

If "we" is something that we get the government to do, sure. Legally, we tolerate animal slapping, but (socially) have much lower tolerance if the expressed attempt was Revenge.

Even people who feel the urge to Revenge, in a way that I don't understand very well, don't really tolerate that feeling when it comes to animals. They hold people to a different moral standard. A person who would never slap a dog is quite willing to slap a person.

Our abuse of animals is determined along dimensions that factor in our convenience in a way that is very different from our abuse towards people

 

[Farm Boy]

Even have to be careful with the term abuse. Correcting my son's over rambunctious play is not the same thing as correcting my puppy's over rambunctious play. I don't consider a light "get your attention, hey your jaws hurt me when you do that" cuff that is deliberately far below the pain threshold to be a "slap," but some cray cray people might. And some people think beating a dog past the point of pain is going to reliably do something other than make it mean, so they're a bit cray cray too.

 

[Lexicus]

Even people who feel the urge to Revenge, in a way that I don't understand very well, don't really tolerate that feeling when it comes to animals. They hold people to a different moral standard. A person who would never slap a dog is quite willing to slap a person.

I mean I'm not going to disagree with this but I'm not really sure it's true. I don't think there is much difference between hitting a child who doesn't know better and hitting an animal who doesn't know better, and I think most people who feel the urge to Revenge are probably perfectly okay with hitting children.

edit: also took me a while to find this for whatever reason

 

[ulyssesSgrant]

Even people who feel the urge to Revenge, in a way that I don't understand very well, don't really tolerate that feeling when it comes to animals. They hold people to a different moral standard. A person who would never slap a dog is quite willing to slap a person.

I don't really buy into this "I don't feel the urge to Revenge" stuff. I mean, I get what you are saying I think. It is probably turned way turned down in a lot of people, like perhaps yourself, especially for those who don't live in an honor culture. But if you're sitting their minding your own business and I come up and slap you, or maybe worse yet a significant other/close friend, or a child, across the face for no apparent reason, I'll be damned if there is more than a small handful of people in the entire world who wouldn't feel at least some urge to retaliate. Like, honestly, what kind of a person wouldn't feel that urge? Some kind of robot person who is basically dead inside.

 

[Lexicus]

I don't really buy into this "I don't feel the urge to Revenge" stuff. I mean, I get what you are saying I think. It is probably turned way turned down in a lot of people, like perhaps yourself, especially for those who don't live in an honor culture. But if you're sitting their minding your own business and I come up and slap you, or maybe worse yet a significant other/close friend, or a child, across the face for no apparent reason, I'll be damned if there is more than a small handful of people in the entire world who wouldn't feel at least some urge to retaliate. Like, honestly, what kind of a person wouldn't feel that urge? Some kind of robot person who is basically dead inside.

I don't tend to act on my revenge urges and when I do I tend to regret it afterwards.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I don't really buy into this "I don't feel the urge to Revenge" stuff. I mean, I get what you are saying I think. It is probably turned way turned down in a lot of people, like perhaps yourself, especially for those who don't live in an honor culture. But if you're sitting their minding your own business and I come up and slap you, or maybe worse yet a significant other/close friend, or a child, across the face for no apparent reason, I'll be damned if there is more than a small handful of people in the entire world who wouldn't feel at least some urge to retaliate. Like, honestly, what kind of a person wouldn't feel that urge? Some kind of robot person who is basically dead inside.

Based just on this comment I don't think you are operating from a standard definition of "revenge." Someone walks up to me while I'm minding my own business and slaps me I'm likely to break several of their bones, but that isn't motivated in the least bit by revenge. They are a hazard to be neutralized, period. And, yes, there may well be more "socially prescribed" means of neutralizing such a hazard, but that's a different issue.

Now, if some designated "law enforcement representative" happens to be there and wants to follow an agreed upon systematic method for neutralizing the hazard but I demand the "satisfaction" of breaking bones, that would be an example of revenge as motivation.