Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Baseball player killed because teenagers were "Bored" « previous next »
Page: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16

spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6893
Offline
#180 : August 23, 2013, 01:10:27 PM

To be honest, less guns does equal less gun death (at least eventually), what it does not prove nor address is the issue do less guns equal less death?

this is a good point^^^^

right, you mean take away the guns, people will still kill.  if that is what you mean, you are probably right, in part, and I think your strongest argument is that without guns certain people will kill by other means, but that is limiting the discussion to MURDER and I have been talking about violence.  As a simple matter of common sense, the very fact that guns are so accessible means that there is more gun violence then there would be with less guns because there are accidental shootings and suicides and crimes of passion that result in murder because guns are so deadly.

I think you can see supports for BOTH our positions just by looking at Australia.  Since harsh gun restrictions, gun violence is down, but knife violence is up. Also, suicides are down.  Notably, one non-suicide category impacted greatly by gun restrictions is domestic crime another is massacres (large number murder/violence by gun).  The reason?  Guns are very effective killers so they are good for mass murder and close range, personal murder like domestic violence

I was referring to all death and violence. For example I will support you again and say less access to guns also result in less SUCCESSFUL suicides. I doubt for one moment if it effects the number of suicide ATTEMPTS though.  The statistics don't address that do they? Neither do they address the quality of life of people who failed to commit suicide. I knew a guy who tried to kill himself by electrocution. Blew his thumbs and nose off. Don't ask, I don't know. He was a miserable bugger afterwards and spent most of his time in seclusion. What about the people who drink things like bleach and destroy their mouth, throat and intestines? I am not saying that they are better off dead, but highlighting that surviving a suicide isn't always quite as peachy as you would like to think.

Now, should we therefore ban an object because it makes topping yourself that much easier? I've heard that throwing yourself in front of a train is an extremely effective way of committing suicide as well. In fact it is much more effective than using a gun with an almost 100% success rate. I guess that is where we diverge. I say no, you obviously say yes. I think that is more due to your distaste of firearms than for any great desire to reduce the suicide rate, but that is just my opinion. It is at best nanny statish. Nobody can do something because somebody does a bad thing. Funny enough the best solution I have seen so far (IMO) is New York. Yes, they have the strictest gun laws, but the most effective policy has been to flood crime hot sports combined with stop and frisk. Combined with their current laws, they make it that it is not worthwhile to walk around with a firearm other than for legitimate and legal purposes. Gun violence has plummeted as a result. Compare that with Chicago.

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17699
Offline
#181 : August 23, 2013, 02:45:20 PM

To be honest, less guns does equal less gun death (at least eventually), what it does not prove nor address is the issue do less guns equal less death?

this is a good point^^^^

right, you mean take away the guns, people will still kill.  if that is what you mean, you are probably right, in part, and I think your strongest argument is that without guns certain people will kill by other means, but that is limiting the discussion to MURDER and I have been talking about violence.  As a simple matter of common sense, the very fact that guns are so accessible means that there is more gun violence then there would be with less guns because there are accidental shootings and suicides and crimes of passion that result in murder because guns are so deadly.

I think you can see supports for BOTH our positions just by looking at Australia.  Since harsh gun restrictions, gun violence is down, but knife violence is up. Also, suicides are down.  Notably, one non-suicide category impacted greatly by gun restrictions is domestic crime another is massacres (large number murder/violence by gun).  The reason?  Guns are very effective killers so they are good for mass murder and close range, personal murder like domestic violence

I was referring to all death and violence. For example I will support you again and say less access to guns also result in less SUCCESSFUL suicides. I doubt for one moment if it effects the number of suicide ATTEMPTS though.  The statistics don't address that do they? Neither do they address the quality of life of people who failed to commit suicide. I knew a guy who tried to kill himself by electrocution. Blew his thumbs and nose off. Don't ask, I don't know. He was a miserable bugger afterwards and spent most of his time in seclusion. What about the people who drink things like bleach and destroy their mouth, throat and intestines? I am not saying that they are better off dead, but highlighting that surviving a suicide isn't always quite as peachy as you would like to think.

Now, should we therefore ban an object because it makes topping yourself that much easier? I've heard that throwing yourself in front of a train is an extremely effective way of committing suicide as well. In fact it is much more effective than using a gun with an almost 100% success rate. I guess that is where we diverge. I say no, you obviously say yes. I think that is more due to your distaste of firearms than for any great desire to reduce the suicide rate, but that is just my opinion. It is at best nanny statish. Nobody can do something because somebody does a bad thing. Funny enough the best solution I have seen so far (IMO) is New York. Yes, they have the strictest gun laws, but the most effective policy has been to flood crime hot sports combined with stop and frisk. Combined with their current laws, they make it that it is not worthwhile to walk around with a firearm other than for legitimate and legal purposes. Gun violence has plummeted as a result. Compare that with Chicago.

The mayor of NY is one of the biggest advocates for gun restrictions. I agree stop & frisk plays a big part, but it may not survive a constitutional challenge.

In your home country people jump off buildings. Saw a jumper last time I was there. There are buildings in London that deny access to rooftops or that have added fences etc.  I am not sure that is "nanny state" as much as Public Health

I am sure you likely disagree with this, but the bottom line is guns have a very low social utility in America. Guns have some value for personal security (although if you look at the NYT article posted in this thread it says less than 1% defense rate with a gun) and some value as a sporting endeavor, but all of that is weighed against a lot of preventable death. The ONLY reason there are a lot of guns in the US is because there is a lot of money in guns.  the NRA intentionally puts a noble spin on things by calling out the 2nd Amendment and stoking anti-government fear, but the real interest is $$$$, and its big $$$.  Right now the majority in America tolerate guns, but that will change, especially with the NRA repeatedly taking outrageous stances.

Politicians in this country just do whatever they need to do to get and stay elected. Eventually the NRA will lose power/influence. Unfortunately, it may take a lot of unnecessary lost life to get there

Biggs3535

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 31381
Online
#182 : August 23, 2013, 05:10:29 PM

Now, if the good Counselor will strap on his straight-jacket, we can get back to the subject of the thread:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/08/23/al-sharpton-on-chris-lane-killing-nothing-to-protest-because-it-wasnt-racial-and-system-worked/

LOLZ @ that race-baiting hypocrite.


VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17699
Offline
#183 : August 23, 2013, 05:45:50 PM

Now, if the good Counselor will strap on his straight-jacket, we can get back to the subject of the thread:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/08/23/al-sharpton-on-chris-lane-killing-nothing-to-protest-because-it-wasnt-racial-and-system-worked/

LOLZ @ that race-baiting hypocrite.

ah yes, Buggsy wants to get back to an issue more his speed

spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6893
Offline
#184 : August 24, 2013, 12:08:14 AM

Now, if the good Counselor will strap on his straight-jacket, we can get back to the subject of the thread:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/08/23/al-sharpton-on-chris-lane-killing-nothing-to-protest-because-it-wasnt-racial-and-system-worked/

LOLZ @ that race-baiting hypocrite.

I did say Jones looks White but someone said he was biracial, I haven't seen anything to substantiate that yet so he (Sharpton) may have a point. At least an out. I have seen some of the tweets etc of the others and you could say there was a racial biais/hatred, but when one of your best buddies is a white guy, bit tough to proceed down that line I am thinking.

spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6893
Offline
#185 : August 24, 2013, 12:09:44 AM

I agree stop & frisk plays a big part, but it may not survive a constitutional challenge.

It has already been ruled constitutional by the SC.

spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6893
Offline
#186 : August 24, 2013, 12:27:54 AM


1. I am sure you likely disagree with this, but the bottom line is guns have a very low social utility in America. ...

2. The ONLY reason there are a lot of guns in the US is because there is a lot of money in guns. 

3. the NRA intentionally puts a noble spin on things by calling out the 2nd Amendment and stoking anti-government fear, but the real interest is $$$$, and its big $$$. 

4. Right now the majority in America tolerate guns, but that will change, especially with the NRA repeatedly taking outrageous stances.


1. No idea what you mean by this so cannot comment.

2. Beg to differ. I agree there is a lot of money to be made on firearms, but not for the reason you give. Supply and demand. If there was not a market for them, there would not be as much money.  What's more, the ironic thing is the more gun control comes into the conversation, the greater the demand.

3. Being a signed up member of the NRA, this is not the "propaganda" I get. They fight and seek support for what they perceive as challenges to the 2nd Amendment, but not in the manner you seem to imply. At least not in the stuff they send me.

4. We will see. I am thinking the NSA is giving the NRA a whole lot of latitude right now.
: August 24, 2013, 12:55:00 PM spartan

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17699
Offline
#187 : August 24, 2013, 07:22:34 PM

I agree stop & frisk plays a big part, but it may not survive a constitutional challenge.

It has already been ruled constitutional by the SC.

huh?

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17699
Offline
#188 : August 24, 2013, 07:24:19 PM

2. Beg to differ. I agree there is a lot of money to be made on firearms, but not for the reason you give. Supply and demand. If there was not a market for them, there would not be as much money.  What's more, the ironic thing is the more gun control comes into the conversation, the greater the demand.

3. Being a signed up member of the NRA, this is not the "propaganda" I get. They fight and seek support for what they perceive as challenges to the 2nd Amendment, but not in the manner you seem to imply. At least not in the stuff they send me.

4. We will see. I am thinking the NSA is giving the NRA a whole lot of latitude right now.

#2  and #3-  NRA-driven fiction

(cue dumb azz Buggsy claiming I am "derailing" the thread by responding to your comments)

CBWx2

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5920
Offline
#189 : August 26, 2013, 03:02:24 PM

Damn it.  I set this up to be a perfectly good race baiting thread and you guys have to ruin it with your stupid gun rights discussion.

Interesting isn't it? The immediate, knee-jerk response from the "anti-race-baiting" crowd was to make it about race, rather than to question how the hell high school and middle school aged kids got their hands on firearms so easily. Perhaps because Fox News seems to have missed this inconvenient truth about this case, and we all know that they set the tone for conservative America. Never mind the fact that only one of the shooters was black. One was mixed-race, and the other was white. Fox News says "three black kids", and without a moments contemplation, the "anti-race baiters" run with it. Hypocrisy is colorblind.

Funny, pics of these kids with firearms surfaced after the shooting. No pics of them drinking beer did, though.


VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17699
Offline
#190 : August 26, 2013, 03:09:29 PM

Damn it.  I set this up to be a perfectly good race baiting thread and you guys have to ruin it with your stupid gun rights discussion.

Interesting isn't it? The immediate, knee-jerk response from the "anti-race-baiting" crowd was to make it about race, rather than to question how the hell high school and middle school aged kids got their hands on firearms so easily. Perhaps because Fox News seems to have missed this inconvenient truth about this case, and we all know that they set the tone for conservative America. Never mind the fact that only one of the shooters was black. One was mixed-race, and the other was white. Fox News says "three black kids", and without a moments contemplation, the "anti-race baiters" run with it. Hypocrisy is colorblind.

I agree with you on the gun portion, but on the rest let me get this straight, your response is to accuse FoxNews of adopting the same approach that almost every other major news outlet took in the Trayvon Martin case, albeit in reverse? Don't the words in bold sound like the early reporting from MSNBC and others (much of which you adopted as truth, by the way)? Didnt most other news stations treat TM as if he was a child and not a a teenager? Didnt NBC actually edit out a portion of a 911 tape to make race appear to be an issue?

I am not pointing these out to raise a factual issue, I am pointing tehse out to illustrate that your hyper-political approach is NOT the answer.  You and others like you fuel that kind of insane partisanship because no one ever says "enough is enough." Instead, you all just say "oh yeah, well you did it too."

CBWx2

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5920
Offline
#191 : August 26, 2013, 03:17:33 PM

Damn it.  I set this up to be a perfectly good race baiting thread and you guys have to ruin it with your stupid gun rights discussion.

Interesting isn't it? The immediate, knee-jerk response from the "anti-race-baiting" crowd was to make it about race, rather than to question how the hell high school and middle school aged kids got their hands on firearms so easily. Perhaps because Fox News seems to have missed this inconvenient truth about this case, and we all know that they set the tone for conservative America. Never mind the fact that only one of the shooters was black. One was mixed-race, and the other was white. Fox News says "three black kids", and without a moments contemplation, the "anti-race baiters" run with it. Hypocrisy is colorblind.

I agree with you on the gun portion, but on the rest let me get this straight, your response is to accuse FoxNews of adopting the same approach that almost every other major news outlet took in the Trayvon Martin case, albeit in reverse?

I'm not accusing them of anything. It's what they did. My beef isn't with Fox News. I couldn't care less about what they report because I don't watch it. My response was to call out all of the "unbiased, anti-race baiters" who are only upset about it when the other side does it. You can characterize it however you like.


Bucfucious

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3679
Online
#192 : August 26, 2013, 03:25:11 PM

 "One was mixed-race, and the other was white."

Link?

Skull and Bones

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 22188
Online
#193 : August 26, 2013, 03:44:15 PM

Damn it.  I set this up to be a perfectly good race baiting thread and you guys have to ruin it with your stupid gun rights discussion.

Interesting isn't it? The immediate, knee-jerk response from the "anti-race-baiting" crowd was to make it about race, rather than to question how the hell high school and middle school aged kids got their hands on firearms so easily. Perhaps because Fox News seems to have missed this inconvenient truth about this case, and we all know that they set the tone for conservative America. Never mind the fact that only one of the shooters was black. One was mixed-race, and the other was white. Fox News says "three black kids", and without a moments contemplation, the "anti-race baiters" run with it. Hypocrisy is colorblind.

I agree with you on the gun portion, but on the rest let me get this straight, your response is to accuse FoxNews of adopting the same approach that almost every other major news outlet took in the Trayvon Martin case, albeit in reverse?

I'm not accusing them of anything. It's what they did. My beef isn't with Fox News. I couldn't care less about what they report because I don't watch it. My response was to call out all of the "unbiased, anti-race baiters" who are only upset about it when the other side does it. You can characterize it however you like.
actually I was calling out your race baiting hypocrisy


VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17699
Offline
#194 : August 26, 2013, 04:26:53 PM

Damn it.  I set this up to be a perfectly good race baiting thread and you guys have to ruin it with your stupid gun rights discussion.

Interesting isn't it? The immediate, knee-jerk response from the "anti-race-baiting" crowd was to make it about race, rather than to question how the hell high school and middle school aged kids got their hands on firearms so easily. Perhaps because Fox News seems to have missed this inconvenient truth about this case, and we all know that they set the tone for conservative America. Never mind the fact that only one of the shooters was black. One was mixed-race, and the other was white. Fox News says "three black kids", and without a moments contemplation, the "anti-race baiters" run with it. Hypocrisy is colorblind.

I agree with you on the gun portion, but on the rest let me get this straight, your response is to accuse FoxNews of adopting the same approach that almost every other major news outlet took in the Trayvon Martin case, albeit in reverse?

I'm not accusing them of anything. It's what they did. My beef isn't with Fox News. I couldn't care less about what they report because I don't watch it. My response was to call out all of the "unbiased, anti-race baiters" who are only upset about it when the other side does it. You can characterize it however you like.

I am just pointing out that your response is predictable and not helpful, to you everything is political.  All means are justified by ends
Page: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Baseball player killed because teenagers were "Bored" « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools