Gun Control

[iambiguous]

Start by calling the Vatican.

You're the one with the immortal soul on the line: you call.

No, I'm the one asking those who claim to have a soul to explain to me how they have convinced themselves that they do. Given that there are many, many religions out there that insist that all souls are obligated to follow the One True Path to immortality and salvation. Their own path. I suggested the Vatican to you because your friend Mannie is likely able to advise you what to expect from them given the extent to which he believes that Catholicism itself reflects True Christianity.

On last night's episode of Fear Thy Neighbor, both men knew the other man was packin'. Each man had at least 10 firearms. And the venting went back and forth until one of them was shot three times and the shooter was sent to prison. Typical. Both sides convinced they were in the right. Both sides tweaking the emotions of the "bad guy". The bullets flying.

And hatred packin' bazookas vs. hatred packin' fists? All hell breaking loose with the same results?.

Like I said: when even self-(p)reservation is negated by hate, all hell is gonna break loose, firearms or not.

Note to others:

Mr. Snippet again. And you tell me what on earth his point here really has to do with mine. He simply ignores it. Or turns the consequences of feuding neighbors packin' bazookas into, what, a joke?

Bigger, is all. Like July 4th.

Yeah, I asked the same question: becuz these hillbillies, rednecks, crackers, niggas, defectives, and pinheads do wrong with their property, I should give up mine, why?

Again, what's that got to do with my point? Calling other people names and setting them apart from yourself, doesn't change the fact it's not only you who gets to say when others do wrong with their property.

And gun laws are passed in any particular community precisely because different people view private citizens ownings guns [especially military grade weapons] given different sets of assumptions: https://gun-control.procon.org/

All I say is: if you use your life, liberty, or property to unjustly deprive another of his life, liberty, or property, you stink. Shall we go over just & unjust again?

No, we get it, henry. Just and unjust here are what you say they are. Even though on another thread you admit that you have been wrong about things like this before. And may well be wrong again.

On the other hand, in the end, in regard to conflicting goods here...

I don't care.

There's simply what you believe "in your head":

"Take it or leave it, Biggie. Just don't expect me to sustain a substantive discussion about it. Hell, I don't even sustain a substantive discussion with myself. I just assert things to be true."

Note where I have ever argued that my opinions here are anything other than personal political prejudices derived existentially from the life that I have lived. Just like yours.

Nope. Not about that.

Of course, your reaction to me in this "exchange" is rather typical of those I have had with objectivists over the years. "Nope, not about that". Why? Because, in my view, that is precisely what you need to steer clear of. The recognition that your own points here are basically just "personal political prejudices derived existentially from the life that you have lived."

In fact you even turned to a God, the God, your God in order to anchor your precious Self in a Soul. Now "in your head" you are "somehow" at one with Creation itself!!!

Just not the right one according to Mannie. He wants to save your Soul from eternal damnation by convincing you to accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior. And while you both agree that packin' bazookas is synonymous with "God's will", he needs to tug you over to the real deal One True Path. Why? In order to align your Soul with immortality and salvation.

Keep us posted.

That's because when the focus here shifts to "A well regulated Militia" in the political wars your side really has no argument to rebut it. Instead those of your ilk prefer the, "I'll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead hands" mentality.

To witless:

"Fuck democracy and the rule of law! It's Ruby Ridge, baby!!"

We get that, henry. You're a Bonafide "rugged individual". And you'll be one all the way to the grave. Only as with Ayn Rand and her ilk, if others wish to be rugged individuals too they damn well better think exactly as she did -- as you do -- about, well, everything.

It's not what you defend fiercely -- that could be anything at all up and down the ideological spectrum -- but that you must defend it fiercely. Why? Because that's the anchor -- the psychological security blanket -- you need to embed I in.

Nope. The 2nd is meaningless. Words on paper. My right to property, your right to property, doesn't come from words on paper.

Of course: the Ruby Ridge mentality. In America there is the Constitution, there is democracy and the rule of law, there are elections to vote into office men and women to pass and enforce laws that folks all up and down the political spectrum favor.

But fuck that! Let's go back to the law of the jungle where either might makes right or right makes might prevails. There's what you know "in your head" that constitutes justice -- just us -- and you'll barricade yourself on your property and fight to the death to preserve your own political prejudices. Derived ultimately from God Himself.

Somehow.

[henry quirk]

I'm the one asking those who claim to have a soul to explain to me how they have convinced themselves that they do.

I've explained -- multiple times -- how I got there. When I do: you pooh-pooh.

Ain't layin' nuthin' out for you again.

*

Mr. Snippet again.

You been snippin' quite a bit yourself lately.

*

tell me what on earth his point here really has to do with mine

And what does yours have to do with mine?

Again: becuz others do wrong with their property, I, when I've done no wrong with it, should be deprived mine?

*

Just and unjust here are what you say they are.

Nope. Just and unjust are what naturally derive from a person's right to his life, liberty, and property.

*

And may well be wrong again.

It's possible, yeah. I may, in fact, be the kind of robot with no right to diddly that you believe you are. I'm open to your evidence: sock it to me.

*

But fuck that!

Yes.

[henry quirk]

Becuz this thread, for a while, has been sumthin' other than intended, and becuz I'm thinkin' the back & forth between me and biggy is comin' to an end (at least here) let me steer it gently back with what seems the root question...

Becuz some misuse their property, or misuse a machine, to hurt or kill themselves or unjustly hurt or kill others, everyone ought be penalized in their ownership and use of similar properties or machines?

[commonsense]

Becuz this thread, for a while, has been sumthin' other than intended, and becuz I'm thinkin' the back & forth between me and biggy is comin' to an end (at least here) let me steer it gently back with what seems the root question...

Becuz some misuse their property, or misuse a machine, to hurt or kill themselves or unjustly hurt or kill others, everyone ought be penalized in their ownership and use of similar properties or machines?

Everyone should be trained, like with driving cars.

[henry quirk]

Becuz this thread, for a while, has been sumthin' other than intended, and becuz I'm thinkin' the back & forth between me and biggy is comin' to an end (at least here) let me steer it gently back with what seems the root question...

Becuz some misuse their property, or misuse a machine, to hurt or kill themselves or unjustly hurt or kill others, everyone ought be penalized in their ownership and use of similar properties or machines?

Everyone should be trained, like with driving cars.

When I was a kid, my dad and mom taught me to drive. When I was old enough, I got a learner's permit, then, a little later, my driver's license.

Today: my 16 year old must attend an expensive driving class, must have a TIP (temporary instructional permit) to complete the course, and once he passes, then he can apply for his learner's permit.

Now: I've already taught hm how to drive, just like my parents did for me. There's no reason he shouldn't have his learner's permit or even a full license right now, and he would if it weren't for legislation sayin' otherwise.

My parents also taught me to shoot. And -- thank Crom -- there was and is no kind of mandatory training or licensing.

I'm teachin' mine to shoot and, as with drivin', that's enough in my book.

And: what does all of this have to do with...

Becuz some misuse their property, or misuse a machine, to hurt or kill themselves or unjustly hurt or kill others, everyone ought be penalized in their ownership and use of similar properties or machines?

...?

[Age]

Becuz this thread, for a while, has been sumthin' other than intended, and becuz I'm thinkin' the back & forth between me and biggy is comin' to an end (at least here) let me steer it gently back with what seems the root question...

Becuz some misuse their property, or misuse a machine, to hurt or kill themselves or unjustly hurt or kill others, everyone ought be penalized in their ownership and use of similar properties or machines?

Everyone should be trained, like with driving cars.

When I was a kid, my dad and mom taught me to drive. When I was old enough, I got a learner's permit, then, a little later, my driver's license.

Today: my 16 year old must attend an expensive driving class, must have a TIP (temporary instructional permit) to complete the course, and once he passes, then he can apply for his learner's permit.

Now: I've already taught hm how to drive, just like my parents did for me. There's no reason he shouldn't have his learner's permit or even a full license right now, and he would if it weren't for legislation sayin' otherwise.

So, when should a human being be able to obtain a full license or be allowed to drive by "them self", to you?

My parents also taught me to shoot. And -- thank Crom -- there was and is no kind of mandatory training or licensing.

I'm teachin' mine to shoot and, as with drivin', that's enough in my book.

And: what does all of this have to do with...

Becuz some misuse their property, or misuse a machine, to hurt or kill themselves or unjustly hurt or kill others, everyone ought be penalized in their ownership and use of similar properties or machines?

...?

[Walker]

My parents also taught me to shoot. And -- thank Crom -- there was and is no kind of mandatory training or licensing.

Yep. I remember too. Six years old. 22 revolver and sometimes the 38. Two guns of the hand. Out beside the house, shooting into a hay bale backed by a berm. 22 long-rifle with an uncle. No shotgun, too little. BB gun for me. I have a nice long-barrel pellet gun now for practice. Times change.

[Skepdick]

Becuz this thread, for a while, has been sumthin' other than intended, and becuz I'm thinkin' the back & forth between me and biggy is comin' to an end (at least here) let me steer it gently back with what seems the root question...

Becuz some misuse their property, or misuse a machine, to hurt or kill themselves or unjustly hurt or kill others, everyone ought be penalized in their ownership and use of similar properties or machines?

Well, what do you mean by "misuse"?!?

Is speeding and drunk driving a "misuse" of a vehicle?

Just because other speedsters and drunk drivers hurt and kill other people it doesn't mean that I will. Why do you penalise me for other people's sins?

Is shooting my gun up in the air "misuse"?

Just because other people have killed people doing that it doesn't mean I will. Don't punish me for other people's bad luck!!!

TL;DR Henrietta is a whiny bitch with a persecution complex.

[henry quirk]

Is speeding and drunk driving a "misuse" of a vehicle?

I said: Becuz some misuse their property, or misuse a machine, to hurt or kill themselves or unjustly hurt or kill others, everyone ought be penalized in their ownership and use of similar properties or machines?

*

Just because other speedsters and drunk drivers hurt and kill other people it doesn't mean that I will. Why do you penalise me for other people's sins?

I won't.

*

Is shooting my gun up in the air "misuse"?

Where does the bullet land?

*

Just because other people have killed people doing that it doesn't mean I will. Don't punish me for other people's bad luck!!!

I won't.

*

TL;DR

I don't think you know what that means, cuz, obviously, you read it.

[henry quirk]

My parents also taught me to shoot. And -- thank Crom -- there was and is no kind of mandatory training or licensing.

Yep. I remember too. Six years old. 22 revolver and sometimes the 38. Two guns of the hand. Out beside the house, shooting into a hay bale backed by a berm. 22 long-rifle with an uncle. No shotgun, too little. BB gun for me. I have a nice long-barrel pellet gun now for practice. Times change.

I was a little older, mebbe 10, when they took me out in the pasture behind the house, set up targets and we got started. Regular practice after that.

[henry quirk]

So, when should a human being be able to obtain a full license or be allowed to drive by "them self", to you?

I don't think anyone ought to have to get a license to operate their own property.

[commonsense]

So, when should a human being be able to obtain a full license or be allowed to drive by "them self", to you?

I don't think anyone ought to have to get a license to operate their own property.

…when should a human being be allowed to drive by themself?

[henry quirk]

So, when should a human being be able to obtain a full license or be allowed to drive by "them self", to you?

I don't think anyone ought to have to get a license to operate their own property.

…when should a human being be allowed to drive by themself?

Ideally, when whoever is teachin' (a parent, a sibling, a friend, etc.) gives the

But, if you got the cash to buy it, ultimately, you decide if you drive it.

[attofishpi]

I don't think anyone ought to have to get a license to operate their own property.

…when should a human being be allowed to drive by themself?

Ideally, when whoever is teachin' (a parent, a sibling, a friend, etc.) gives the

But, if you got the cash to buy it, ultimately, you decide if you drive it.

Correct me if I am wrong, as I have just skimmed the last page of this thread.

So.

We are comparing responsible use of an automobile (a machine that enables us to get from A to B quicker than running) with owning a gun (a machine that serves no purpose beyond hurting\killing others)?

Am I correct thus far?

[henry quirk]

…when should a human being be allowed to drive by themself?

Ideally, when whoever is teachin' (a parent, a sibling, a friend, etc.) gives the

But, if you got the cash to buy it, ultimately, you decide if you drive it.

Correct me if I am wrong, as I have just skimmed the last page of this thread.

So.

We are comparing responsible use of an automobile (a machine that enables us to get from A to B quicker than running) with owning a gun (a machine that serves no purpose beyond hurting\killing others)?

Am I correct thus far?

For me: the thread is about property. I ask: Becuz some misuse their property, or misuse a machine, to hurt or kill themselves or unjustly hurt or kill others, everyone ought be penalized in their ownership and use of similar properties or machines? Cuz Joe does wrong with his, Stan, who's done no wrong, gets punished? The good must suffer with the bad?

But, as with all threads, this one meanders with various examples, comparisons, and agendas gettin' tossed into the mix.

As for cars and guns: you can drive thru a crowd with one and feed your family with the other, so: I'm not seein' your point in your last line/question.