My Professor

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: PimpJuice

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: zoiks

Originally posted by: txrandom
Criminals and crazies will find a way to get a hold of a gun. Might as well let citizens have guns to protect themselves.

Yeah. And what do you do when a crazy ass citizen comes up and shoots somebody for no reason. Are you going to have your gun on you at all times?

So we should ban guns so that the "crazy asses" will be guaranteed unarmed people to shoot?

You sure make a lot of sense...

I just dont hear about guns being used to save many lives (by citizens)....instead I hear 10x as many stories about them being used by an angry husband/wife/son/student, etc...who happened to be 'normal' at the time of purchase.

just my biased 2cents from my experiences......

Guns are used correctly in a defensive situation between 100,000 and 2.5 million times a year. Yes, I know, ridiculous spread. Below is a site that discusses why. The FBI also has stats on the number of reported gun uses, how often people fired, etc. The bottom line is that there are at LEAST ten times the number of defensive gun uses as there are gun crimes every year.

Civilian gun use blog
Discussion of defensive gun use statistics

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: zoiks

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: zoiks

Originally posted by: txrandom
Criminals and crazies will find a way to get a hold of a gun. Might as well let citizens have guns to protect themselves.

Yeah. And what do you do when a crazy ass citizen comes up and shoots somebody for no reason. Are you going to have your gun on you at all times?

So we should ban guns so that the "crazy asses" will be guaranteed unarmed people to shoot?

You sure make a lot of sense...

Like I said, ban all guns. Illegal or otherwise.

Yeah, because banning all drugs has completely removed them from society. :roll:

Ding ding ding! you get the prize for being the 100th poster to make this statement in the last 24 hours! Please show him what he has won

It's an incredibly apt analogy, and really the only reason why I happen to side with the pro-gun rights crowd.

It goes like this: an extremely small minority of people who possess drugs happen to also commit crimes. Likewise, an even smaller minority of people who possess guns happen to also commit crimes. A crime is committed. Knee-jerkers rise up in emotional alarm and indignant moral authoritarianism. THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!

At the risk of slippery slope, the next step for the emotional reactionaries, after the passage of some bit of simple solution legislation, after said legislation predictably does not work, is to keep falling back on that legislation in further attempts of draconian single-mindedness, putting more and more and more people into prisons for longer and longer periods of time while doing absolutely nothing to solve the actual problem.

It. is. insanity.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic
The "100% armed society" is just a nonsense false dilemma argument by the anti-gun rights crowd. They have to create an illogical and extreme opposing argument in order to polarize their own illogical illogical and extreme argument.
It's comparable to the way the drugs warriors argue that if drugs were legalized then everyone would suddenly start doing drugs.

If we need to outlaw anything, I think it should be the extremists with their ever-ready "WHY THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!" simple solutions to complex social problems.

Has there historically been a society where the majority of the citizens are armed?

For full nations today it tops out between 30 and 40%. For towns yes, there are some that require you to own a firearm (Geuda Springs, Kansas for instance).

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: zoiks

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: zoiks

Originally posted by: txrandom
Criminals and crazies will find a way to get a hold of a gun. Might as well let citizens have guns to protect themselves.

Yeah. And what do you do when a crazy ass citizen comes up and shoots somebody for no reason. Are you going to have your gun on you at all times?

So we should ban guns so that the "crazy asses" will be guaranteed unarmed people to shoot?

You sure make a lot of sense...

Like I said, ban all guns. Illegal or otherwise.

Yeah, because banning all drugs has completely removed them from society. :roll:

Ding ding ding! you get the prize for being the 100th poster to make this statement in the last 24 hours! Please show him what he has won

I'll stop with the obvious answers when they stop with the obvious stupidity.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic
The "100% armed society" is just a nonsense false dilemma argument by the anti-gun rights crowd. They have to create an illogical and extreme opposing argument in order to polarize their own illogical illogical and extreme argument.
It's comparable to the way the drugs warriors argue that if drugs were legalized then everyone would suddenly start doing drugs.

If we need to outlaw anything, I think it should be the extremists with their ever-ready "WHY THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!" simple solutions to complex social problems.

Has there historically been a society where the majority of the citizens are armed?

Of course. But what relevance does that have to what I said?

I'm just curious if there's been documentation of the crime rates for a nearly fully armed society .

 

[Vic]

Well, to be fair, I think IMO that the simple solution-ers act from the best of motives. A horrible tragedy occurs (or they witness some form of injustice in the world, etc., you name it) and they desperately want to figure out some way to prevent such a thing in the future. They want to believe that, admidst the madness that is this cruel and unfair world around them, they can do something ANYTHING positive for change. Unfortunately, it don't tend to work that way, and their "solutions" tend to just add to the madness. Even worse is that this need to control becomes a problem in and of itself. This is why BTW you see people who disagree on complex issues begin to attack each other as "evil" and "selfish."
Craig123 used to run around on P&N (I don't see him much anymore) with a sig that was literally the height of this self-delusionment, i.e. that everyone who disagreed with him was just looking for excuses to justify selfishness. Sigh...

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic
The "100% armed society" is just a nonsense false dilemma argument by the anti-gun rights crowd. They have to create an illogical and extreme opposing argument in order to polarize their own illogical illogical and extreme argument.
It's comparable to the way the drugs warriors argue that if drugs were legalized then everyone would suddenly start doing drugs.

If we need to outlaw anything, I think it should be the extremists with their ever-ready "WHY THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!" simple solutions to complex social problems.

Has there historically been a society where the majority of the citizens are armed?

Of course. But what relevance does that have to what I said?

I'm just curious if there's been documentation of the crime rates for a nearly fully armed society .

Switzerland has an almost equal number of armed households as the US, except that the majority of their weapons are military grade. Crime is VERY low. That doesn't show that military weapons make crime stop, but it does show that just weapon ownership doesn't CAUSE crime.

In other words, the guns are totally meaningless, it's the underlying societal and cultural attributes which create both the problems and the solutions.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: Vic
Well, to be fair, I think IMO that the simple solution-ers act from the best of motives. A horrible tragedy occurs (or they witness some form of injustice in the world, etc., you name it) and they desperately want to figure out some way to prevent such a thing in the future. They want to believe that, admidst the madness that is this cruel and unfair world around them, they can do something ANYTHING positive for change. Unfortunately, it don't tend to work that way, and their "solutions" tend to just add to the madness. Even worse is that this need to control becomes a problem in and of itself. This is why BTW you see people who disagree on complex issues begin to attack each other as "evil" and "selfish."
Craig123 used to run around on P&N (I don't see him much anymore) with a sig that was literally the height of this self-delusionment, i.e. that everyone who disagreed with him was just looking for excuses to justify selfishness. Sigh...

You said madness so many times, someone needs to get in a 300 pun soon.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic
The "100% armed society" is just a nonsense false dilemma argument by the anti-gun rights crowd. They have to create an illogical and extreme opposing argument in order to polarize their own illogical illogical and extreme argument.
It's comparable to the way the drugs warriors argue that if drugs were legalized then everyone would suddenly start doing drugs.

If we need to outlaw anything, I think it should be the extremists with their ever-ready "WHY THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!" simple solutions to complex social problems.

Has there historically been a society where the majority of the citizens are armed?

Of course. But what relevance does that have to what I said?

I'm just curious if there's been documentation of the crime rates for a nearly fully armed society .

Switzerland has an almost equal number of armed households as the US, except that the majority of their weapons are military grade. Crime is VERY low. That doesn't show that military weapons make crime stop, but it does show that just weapon ownership doesn't CAUSE crime.

In other words, the guns are totally meaningless, it's the underlying societal and cultural attributes which create both the problems and the solutions.

The Swiss carry military grade arms in their homes. That's fearsome.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic
Well, to be fair, I think IMO that the simple solution-ers act from the best of motives. A horrible tragedy occurs (or they witness some form of injustice in the world, etc., you name it) and they desperately want to figure out some way to prevent such a thing in the future. They want to believe that, admidst the madness that is this cruel and unfair world around them, they can do something ANYTHING positive for change. Unfortunately, it don't tend to work that way, and their "solutions" tend to just add to the madness. Even worse is that this need to control becomes a problem in and of itself. This is why BTW you see people who disagree on complex issues begin to attack each other as "evil" and "selfish."
Craig123 used to run around on P&N (I don't see him much anymore) with a sig that was literally the height of this self-delusionment, i.e. that everyone who disagreed with him was just looking for excuses to justify selfishness. Sigh...

You said madness so many times, someone needs to get in a 300 pun soon.

Are you referring to the movie? Sorry, I haven't seen it.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic
The "100% armed society" is just a nonsense false dilemma argument by the anti-gun rights crowd. They have to create an illogical and extreme opposing argument in order to polarize their own illogical illogical and extreme argument.
It's comparable to the way the drugs warriors argue that if drugs were legalized then everyone would suddenly start doing drugs.

If we need to outlaw anything, I think it should be the extremists with their ever-ready "WHY THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!" simple solutions to complex social problems.

Has there historically been a society where the majority of the citizens are armed?

Of course. But what relevance does that have to what I said?

I'm just curious if there's been documentation of the crime rates for a nearly fully armed society .

Switzerland has an almost equal number of armed households as the US, except that the majority of their weapons are military grade. Crime is VERY low. That doesn't show that military weapons make crime stop, but it does show that just weapon ownership doesn't CAUSE crime.

In other words, the guns are totally meaningless, it's the underlying societal and cultural attributes which create both the problems and the solutions.

The Swiss carry military grade arms in their homes. That's fearsome.

Only fearsome if you're a criminal.

Seriously though, while I imagine there is some small causal relationship (maybe even very very small), most of it is other stuff. Deal with the actual causes of crime and the symptoms go away on their own.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: Vic
Are you referring to the movie? Sorry, I haven't seen it.

Yea, the movie.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic
The "100% armed society" is just a nonsense false dilemma argument by the anti-gun rights crowd. They have to create an illogical and extreme opposing argument in order to polarize their own illogical illogical and extreme argument.
It's comparable to the way the drugs warriors argue that if drugs were legalized then everyone would suddenly start doing drugs.

If we need to outlaw anything, I think it should be the extremists with their ever-ready "WHY THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!" simple solutions to complex social problems.

Has there historically been a society where the majority of the citizens are armed?

Of course. But what relevance does that have to what I said?

I'm just curious if there's been documentation of the crime rates for a nearly fully armed society .

Switzerland has an almost equal number of armed households as the US, except that the majority of their weapons are military grade. Crime is VERY low. That doesn't show that military weapons make crime stop, but it does show that just weapon ownership doesn't CAUSE crime.

In other words, the guns are totally meaningless, it's the underlying societal and cultural attributes which create both the problems and the solutions.

The Swiss carry military grade arms in their homes. That's fearsome.

How so? They also have the oldest surviving republic on earth, and haven't been defeated in war for hundreds of years.

But yes, military service is compulsory for all Swiss males. Upon honorable discharge, their weapon is given to them, with their name stamped into the butt of it, and they are entrusted to keep that weapon for the rest of their lives, and to use as lawfully necessary. And despite the fact that there is a gun in nearly every household, Switzerland also has one of the lowest crime in the world.

A friend of mine is WWII antique arms collector, and he has a couple of Swiss Army issue rifles. Among some other beauties, like a Browning .30 cal machine gun (now semi-auto, in order to be lawful). While we're knee-jerking that ALL guns should be outlawed, can we assume that we're talking about antique gun collection as well? You see how silly all this is?

 

[mooncancook]

From an Asian background, I know that most Asian countries (China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, to name a few) outlaw private ownership of guns. I think that gun control does not reduced crime rates, but then again I never heard of anything like that happened in those countries.

 

[Aquaman]

Instead of gun control........ how about harder sentencing when it comes to gun crimes? You do a crime with a gun and you go away for a long time.

Cheers,
Aquaman

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Aquaman
Instead of gun control........ how about harder sentencing when it comes to gun crimes? You do a crime with a gun and you go away for a long time.

Cheers,
Aquaman

Still won't stop people. Might reduce it slightly, but that's all. Have to deal with causes, not consequences. Well, let me rephrase that...if you truly want to reduce it you have to deal primarily with causes...nothing wrong with doing consequences too.

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic
The "100% armed society" is just a nonsense false dilemma argument by the anti-gun rights crowd. They have to create an illogical and extreme opposing argument in order to polarize their own illogical illogical and extreme argument.
It's comparable to the way the drugs warriors argue that if drugs were legalized then everyone would suddenly start doing drugs.

If we need to outlaw anything, I think it should be the extremists with their ever-ready "WHY THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!" simple solutions to complex social problems.

Has there historically been a society where the majority of the citizens are armed?

Of course. But what relevance does that have to what I said?

I'm just curious if there's been documentation of the crime rates for a nearly fully armed society .

Switzerland has an almost equal number of armed households as the US, except that the majority of their weapons are military grade. Crime is VERY low. That doesn't show that military weapons make crime stop, but it does show that just weapon ownership doesn't CAUSE crime.

In other words, the guns are totally meaningless, it's the underlying societal and cultural attributes which create both the problems and the solutions.

My father and most of his classmates used to carry their guns to school so they could hunt on the way home to help supplement the food on the dinner table. They would leave them standing in the corner of the classroom during the school day. They never had any school shootings.

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Originally posted by: mooncancook
From an Asian background, I know that most Asian countries (China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, to name a few) outlaw private ownership of guns. I think that gun control does not reduced crime rates, but then again I never heard of anything like that happened in those countries.

Wasn't there an incident in China in the last year or two where someone went into a dormitory and stabbed several male students?

 

[Cutterhead]

Originally posted by: mooncancook
From an Asian background, I know that most Asian countries (China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, to name a few) outlaw private ownership of guns. I think that gun control does not reduced crime rates, but then again I never heard of anything like that happened in those countries.

"South Korea was the scene of one of the world's deadliest shooting sprees, when police officer Woo Beom-gon went from house to house on an eight-hour overnight rampage in 1982 in the southeastern village of Euiryeong, killing 55 people and wounding 35 others."

Link (At the very end of the article)

 

[hanoverphist]

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteven

Originally posted by: mooncancook
From an Asian background, I know that most Asian countries (China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, to name a few) outlaw private ownership of guns. I think that gun control does not reduced crime rates, but then again I never heard of anything like that happened in those countries.

Wasn't there an incident in China in the last year or two where someone went into a dormitory and stabbed several male students?

outlaw knives!

we can cut steaks with spoons!

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Vic
The "100% armed society" is just a nonsense false dilemma argument by the anti-gun rights crowd. They have to create an illogical and extreme opposing argument in order to polarize their own illogical illogical and extreme argument.
It's comparable to the way the drugs warriors argue that if drugs were legalized then everyone would suddenly start doing drugs.

If we need to outlaw anything, I think it should be the extremists with their ever-ready "WHY THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!" simple solutions to complex social problems.

Has there historically been a society where the majority of the citizens are armed?

Of course. But what relevance does that have to what I said?

I'm just curious if there's been documentation of the crime rates for a nearly fully armed society .

Switzerland has an almost equal number of armed households as the US, except that the majority of their weapons are military grade. Crime is VERY low. That doesn't show that military weapons make crime stop, but it does show that just weapon ownership doesn't CAUSE crime.

In other words, the guns are totally meaningless, it's the underlying societal and cultural attributes which create both the problems and the solutions.

The Swiss carry military grade arms in their homes. That's fearsome.

How so? They also have the oldest surviving republic on earth, and haven't been defeated in war for hundreds of years.

But yes, military service is compulsory for all Swiss males. Upon honorable discharge, their weapon is given to them, with their name stamped into the butt of it, and they are entrusted to keep that weapon for the rest of their lives, and to use as lawfully necessary. And despite the fact that there is a gun in nearly every household, Switzerland also has one of the lowest crime in the world.

A friend of mine is WWII antique arms collector, and he has a couple of Swiss Army issue rifles. Among some other beauties, like a Browning .30 cal machine gun (now semi-auto, in order to be lawful). While we're knee-jerking that ALL guns should be outlawed, can we assume that we're talking about antique gun collection as well? You see how silly all this is?

Fearsome in the sense that there's a military grade weapon for all intruders to see.

 

[mrkun]

To everyone talking about Switzerland,

Yes, each male keeps his rifle after military service, as well as being given a 50-round box of ammunition. However, it's illegal to unseal the ammunition for any reason, except upon being called to duty.

 

[angminas]

Originally posted by: DigitalWanksta
I walk into my Economics class today, for the first time since the VT shootings. My professor starts class with a serious; "I don't know what to say about the situation at Virginia Tech that hasn't already been said by others. However, I'll say this; you need to grieve but you need to do something about gun control or your kids will be in the situation that you?re in today."

Let me set the scene for you here because this guy is the type that thinks he knows everything. He makes sure you're aware that he has earned his PhD, etc.. Does he not realize that no matter what you do with gun control, you won't be able to stop a killer from executing his plan? If the government decides tomorrow to increase severe gun control and keep weapons out of reach, this will not keep a situation from taking place such as Virginia Tech.

I just got out of this class, and I felt the need to post it. It really just rubbed me the wrong way because he almost seemed insensible to those victims and their families so he could place more focus on what he thinks the government should do.

/end rant

Sounds like a lot of people on ATOT. Half of that big VT thread was penis wars. I'm a jerk, but even I am unable to comprehend that level of shamelessness. The reaction from so many on ATOT was nearly as much a shock to me as the shooting. If I ever doubted the existence of Satan, Monday changed that forever.

Let's don't forget the other half, though. There are still a lot of people who give a damn if people get ruthlessly murdered, and I thank you for caring. I'm still recovering from Monday and it's good to see people think about others. I know this is poorly written, but I hope you can see what I'm trying to say :heart:

 

[mrkun]

Originally posted by: angminas

Originally posted by: DigitalWanksta
I walk into my Economics class today, for the first time since the VT shootings. My professor starts class with a serious; "I don't know what to say about the situation at Virginia Tech that hasn't already been said by others. However, I'll say this; you need to grieve but you need to do something about gun control or your kids will be in the situation that you?re in today."

Let me set the scene for you here because this guy is the type that thinks he knows everything. He makes sure you're aware that he has earned his PhD, etc.. Does he not realize that no matter what you do with gun control, you won't be able to stop a killer from executing his plan? If the government decides tomorrow to increase severe gun control and keep weapons out of reach, this will not keep a situation from taking place such as Virginia Tech.

I just got out of this class, and I felt the need to post it. It really just rubbed me the wrong way because he almost seemed insensible to those victims and their families so he could place more focus on what he thinks the government should do.

/end rant

Sounds like a lot of people on ATOT. Half of that big VT thread was penis wars. I'm a jerk, but even I am unable to comprehend that level of shamelessness. The reaction from so many on ATOT was nearly as much a shock to me as the shooting. If I ever doubted the existence of Satan, Monday changed that forever.

So ATOT caused you to believe in Satan?

 

[Mill]

I don't agree with what the professor said, but you people that are saying "report him" are nuts. Is this Nazi Germany where you get a pat on the back from a Party Member for reporting someone who disagrees with you politically? Grow up. I have Professors that say weird stuff all the time. So what? I have my own brain. It isn't like I can't ignore them, either.