|
Christian Graus wrote: I thought you were trying to be pointed about something *I* believe.
I don't know the specifics of what you believe. I chose the gay marriage thing as an example because I know you reject that specific idea and I thought it would be less confrontational allowing you to better see my point.
My point is more general though, if you accept an idea solely because it is written in a venerated document then you must suspend reason and logic in the face of evidence to the contrary.
|
|
|
|
|
_Josh_ wrote: I chose the gay marriage thing as an example because I know you reject that specific idea and I thought it would be less confrontational allowing you to better see my point.
I think gay marriage in general is a dumb idea only because I think it's part of an overall campaign to get a minority group special treatment. As a christian, I don't care that people are gay, nor do I want to single them out in any negative way.
_Josh_ wrote: My point is more general though, if you accept an idea solely because it is written in a venerated document then you must suspend reason and logic in the face of evidence to the contrary.
Sure. Like people who start museums to prove the world is 6000 years old, because they incorrectly believe the Bible says that ? I talked about that in church on sunday, actually.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Graus wrote: Like people who start museums to prove the world is 6000 years old, because they incorrectly believe the Bible says that ?
But it's not because they incorrectly believe, it's because they have 'faith'. Reason is suspended.
|
|
|
|
|
Faith is the origin of their incorrect belief, but the fact is, the Bible still does not say that.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Graus wrote: Faith is the origin of their incorrect belief, but the fact is, the Bible still does not say that.
Is there an example of something the bible does say that is now known to be incorrect?
|
|
|
|
|
I would agree that any reasonable reading of Gen 1 has God creating the world in 6 literal days, and that the only reason people look for ways for it to not say that, is that it is plainly not true.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a Bitter Clinger and also a White Male.
|
|
|
|
|
I joined the army and I hurt people. I was an infantry sniper. Do you have anymore comments about killing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You don't, but that's not the point and I think these kind of debates are usually besides the point since they are nearly always centered around some guy who does something extremely insane like murdering children or shooting in a mall.
Manslaughter is not the exclusive domain of deranged people, usually it are relatively sane people like you and me who make a mistake and it's a lot more likely to accidentally shoot somebody and kill him, than to accidentally attack somebody with a knife and kill him.
Guns are dangerous and off course cars are dangerous too; but you can't use a gun to drive you to work unless you carjack somebody with it. There's no good reason for having them.
And no, owning a gun also doesn't make you bulletproof, so you can't use it "for protection".
It's the same with nuclear weapons... Most countries have relatively stable governments right? Suppose everybody country in the world has nuclear weapons, nobody will dare to use them and nobody would dare to go to war.
That's the same pattern to how most pro-gun people seem to think. They underestimate the probability of human error and only focus on the 'most people are sensible, so having more sensible people carrying guns is good'. It's absolute bs.
Seriously, if you just came out cleanly and say you just like the sensation of power of shooting guns; I would respect that. I also like to shoot guns and I would probably buy one if I could do so legally, but I don't think I should have that right.
.
|
|
|
|
|
0bx wrote: It's the same with nuclear weapons... Most countries have relatively stable governments right? Suppose everybody country in the world has nuclear weapons, nobody will dare to use them and nobody would dare to go to war.
That's the same pattern to how most pro-gun people seem to think. They underestimate the probability of human error and only focus on the 'most people are sensible, so having more sensible people carrying guns is good'. It's absolute bs.
Most pro-gun people I know, and I know many (even ones that *gasp* voted for Obama), don't think that criminals or mental ill people should have a right to own guns. Constitutional guarantee's don't apply to criminals (look into convicted felon's voting rights).
Will you admit that if nobody can legally carry guns, only criminals would carry them? The sad thing is that pro-gun people are just willing to be realistic, and not idealistic. Can a rogue country get nukes? Yes, probably. Then should reasonable countries have nukes for defense via mutually assured destruction? Yes. Would the world be better without nukes? Maybe, but we don't live in that world. Nor do we live in a world without guns. They exist, bad guys and insane people can and will get their hands on them. Should we restrict law abiding citizens because of this? What purpose does that serve? So people will have a false sense of security and sleep better at night knowing that their law abiding, yet idiotically stupid, neighbor Joe won't accidentally discharge a gun into their condo? Wouldn't they sleep better knowing that criminals may be less likely to burglarize, rape, and murder their family because criminals aren't the only people armed?
I'll leave you with this:
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gun-control-myths-realities[^]
|
|
|
|
|
You talk about accepting reality, but as I said before: carrying a gun doesn't make you bulletproof.
It creates the illusion of security, but real security comes form having good locks, quality doors and windows, receiving basic martial arts training, encrypt your laptop, etc...
And I do see the ownership of guns separate from the presence of crime. This is the one thing I actually agree on with the pro-gun camp and it's also mentioned in the article.
It's only sad that despite their wisdom about crime not having anything to do with guns, they can't seem to be able to shut up about burglars wanting to rape children, etc...
Burglars don't typically break in when someone is home. Criminals are humans just like us; they think like us and have the same emotions like us. They would want to avoid confrontation as much as possible.
Having guns doesn't increase crime, but it doesn't decrease it either. The only thing it does is making crime more dangerous than it has to be.
So, let's focus on the "unintentional deaths" for a while. The article claims that they are very low in the US.
Sure who am I to judge how many death children you find acceptable, but may I remind you to the fact that they are 270 times more likely to happen compared to most countries[^]?
.
|
|
|
|
|
At least without guns, it is harder to kill.
|
|
|
|
|
That's pretty much the stupidest thing I've seen posted on CodeProject.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stay classy America 
|
|
|
|
|
There really was no call for that.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
Is it me or does your timing really stink!
I'm assuming you posted before the KILLING, not injuring, of a bunch of 5-10 year olds in the US. I support gun laws (I'm from Oz after all) but some of you people are like Fundies where guns are concerned.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Dude your no-guns rampage guy that you're talking about INJURED 22 people with a knife. INJURED. There's just a little difference you know. Getting a phone call saying your kid is INJURED, even slashed up with a knife, versus getting a phone call that your kid is freaking DEAD.
Nigel
|
|
|
|
|
In South Africa we have very strict gun control, and yet 'normal', i.e. one on one shootings are extremely commonplace. Nearly always the guns used in these are not legally owned by the shooter, but stolen or bought on the black market. Yet, we have extremely few mass shootings such as occur on an alarmingly regular basis in the US, and sometimes elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
You can't stop the intent.
What you could do is make it more difficult for someone who has the intent to access the weapons that allow him to carry out the intent so easily.
The problem is, of course, that the right to carry arms is embedded in the USA constitution. There's an argument that the right to carry arms is 150 years out of date and needs changing, but amending the constitution a *big* deal.
I don't have the figures to hand so am going on gut feel: let's suppose there are 50 indiscriminate murders in schools & colleges each year in the states. I'm guessing there are about a million students in any year, 1 in 300 of the population. So a 1/20,000 chance of your child being murdered by a rogue gunman in school/college.
Let's also assume that 10% of Americans take up their constitutional right to bear arms. That's 30 million people in round numbers. If an attempt to introduce gun legislation is made, 30 million people lose their rights when there's only a 1 in 20,000 chance that their children won't die because of it.
It's just not going to happen and the killings will continue.
|
|
|
|
|
There are over 85 million legal gun owners, and the number is increasing every day. That's more than 1/3 of the population, and over 50% of the portion of the population that can legally own a gun.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
You don't stop the intent. You prevent the damage being so serious by taking away the tools that can be used to do a lot of damage quickly.
You have linked to a story which is an absolutely perfect illustration of why gun control is a good thing. If guns were readily available in China, there's be 22 dead children, not 22 injured ones.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
