WE NEED MORE GUNS..

[Harbal]

Yes, and that's why we also educated ourselves here in the civilised world that gun ownership is not a necessary requirement to live a normal civil, mature, mentally balanced intelligent and socially functional gun free society.

There's all sorts of unnecessary things that you don't have laws against.

Why do you have laws against gun ownership?

Because the risks far outway the benefits.

[Skepdick]

Speaking of defense, war—now that’s a place where everyone has a gun .

Yep. And the place where only one side has a gun is called genocide.

[Age]

'you', "skepdick", seem to think or BELIEVE that guns have some sort of magical power to protect life.

I do?

Are you TELLING us 'you' DO here?

Because if you are, then I will inform you that there is a question mark at the end of that STATEMENT.

At no point have I anthropomorphised guns.

So, you have NOT attributed human behavior nor characteristics to a gun, okay.

Which, by the way, are themselves NOT 'magical powers' EITHER, so WHY the link between 'anthropomorphizing' and 'magical power/s' here I am NOT EXACTLY sure of WHY.

I just EXPRESSED what seem to be doing here, to me.

To which you then replied and wrote; 'I do', (admittingly though with two question marks at the end), which to me implies that you do, ACTUALLY, think or BELIEVE that guns have some sort of 'magical power' to PROTECT LIFE, or you were asking me some sort of question. And, this is ALL we can REALLY go ON, and OFF of, here.

[Skepdick]

Because the risks far outway the benefits.

No the don't.

We ran that experiment for centuries.

trends.png

[FlashDangerpants]

I think somebody who rants on the internet about Jews and homosexuals on the daily, and has now brought in black and brown people via a spurious linkage of murder to race (murder rates are higher where there is poverty not where there are brown people) and promotes gun owenership among "Anglicans" to prepare for the race war at the end of the social order isn't terribly reasonable myself.

I think it's important for him in particular not to own a gun, because he's in training to shoot up a synagogue or shopping mall.

Could you describe what you think the law should look like such that it declares this particular person unfit to posess a firearm while it also passes constitutional muster?

He rants on the interenet about Jews and he hears the voice of god. There should be no problem finding a justification for him not to own firearms. Much the same goes for you, you are a total psycho and the most powerful weaponry in your armoury should like this.

[Skepdick]

I think somebody who rants on the internet about Jews and homosexuals on the daily, and has now brought in black and brown people via a spurious linkage of murder to race (murder rates are higher where there is poverty not where there are brown people) and promotes gun owenership among "Anglicans" to prepare for the race war at the end of the social order isn't terribly reasonable myself.

I think it's important for him in particular not to own a gun, because he's in training to shoot up a synagogue or shopping mall.

Could you describe what you think the law should look like such that it declares this particular person unfit to posess a firearm while it also passes constitutional muster?

He rants on the interenet about Jews and he hears the voice of god. There should be no problem finding a justification for him not to own firearms. Much the same goes for you, you are a total psycho and the most powerful weaponry in your armoury should like this.

Thank fuck we live in a society with constitutional rights, laws and reasonable degrees of freedom and accountability. Otherwise self-righteous idiots like FlashDangerdork would have unconstrained decision-making power.

Keep ranting on a Philosophy forum, so you don't accidentally end up in a position where you are given any responsibility or auathority.

[Wizard22]

The guy obsessed about over-medicating wants to dictate who should or should not have guns.

Ironic?

[FlashDangerpants]

The guy obsessed about over-medicating ...

Would appear to be this guy....

..... Furthermore, US major Pharmaceuticals are pumping kids full of who knows what anti-psychotic medications. On top of this, you have Mexican drug cartels pushing meth, heroine, and fentanyl freely across the wide-open Southern border.....

But yes, you are showing signs of being off your meds and it would be a wise choice to go back on them before you go 100% Kanye.

[Harbal]

Which is all the more reason for not wanting to risk finding myself on the wrong side of what can very often be a fine line between them. I would hate to murder someone when I was only trying to kill him.

So would it be fair to say that it's your ignorance of the law which makes you dislike firearms?

No it wouldn't be fair, and that's probably what encouraged you to imply it. It would be fair to say that it's my dislike of firearms that makes me approve of law that severely restricts ownership of them.

The least you can do is quit pretending you give a shit about my dignity.

It was the dignity of the comment I was pretending to care about, not yours; although you have undermined your own dignity to such an extent that I haven't the heart to kick it when it is so far down.

You can't even tell me why I am not allowed to defend my constitutional right to life and dignity with a gun.

I think that guns are too dangerous for the public in general to be allowed to possess them; therefore, I think your "constitutional right" to own a gun is misguided.

[Skepdick]

No it wouldn't be fair, and that's probably what encouraged you to imply it. It would be fair to say that it's my dislike of firearms that makes me approve of law that severely restricts ownership of them.

So it would also be fair to say that your dislike of firearms outweighs your like for my right to life and dignity.

I think that guns are too dangerous for the public in general to be allowed to possess them; therefore, I think your "constitutional right" to own a gun is misguided.

Yes I know you think that. But is your thinking grounded in any facts or is the law being subjugated to your feelings here?

[Age]

Indoctrinated how?

If 'this' was directed to me, then I suggest you quote me so that I will be notified of your response.

but if 'it' is not, then not to worry. My suggestion here still stands though.

Does wanting to defend yourself from criminals, require indoctrination? Isn't it universal, common sense?

Are you asking these two questions here to anyone in particular?

Or, are these just MORE examples of QUESTIONS that you are NOT REALLY WAITING for CLARITY of?

[commonsense]

There is NO need to so-call 'outgrow' cars and airplanes as these 'things' are used for transport. Whereas, there is NO real USE for guns or weapons OTHER THAN to just KILL or MAIM "one another".

Good thing I don't use my gun for killing then. I use it to stop attacks other people.

The side-effect of that may be death, but hey - that's not my problem.

Hypocrite! Earlier you stated that it is your intention to kill anyone who harms your loved ones. Do you own a firearm to kill people or not?

[Skepdick]

There is NO need to so-call 'outgrow' cars and airplanes as these 'things' are used for transport. Whereas, there is NO real USE for guns or weapons OTHER THAN to just KILL or MAIM "one another".

Good thing I don't use my gun for killing then. I use it to stop attacks other people.

The side-effect of that may be death, but hey - that's not my problem.

Hypocrite! Earlier you stated that it is your intention to kill anyone who harms your loved ones. Do you own a firearm to kill people or not?

Do I own a firearm to kill people? Maybe.
Do I own a firearm to murder people? No.

[commonsense]

I'm not a virtue signaler nor a pacifist. I'm just someone who realises there is a difference between the exciting, shoot-anything-that-moves world of TV cops and robbers, and the real world of what a bullet entering a human body looks like.

I don't buy your gung-ho attitude towards the issue, anyway. It wouldn't surprise me if you'd never touched a real gun.

I don't buy the attitude you are conveying either, and I do wonder why you are conveying it.

Nothing about killing another person excites me. The thought of having to do it again and go through the self-doubt, legal process, a small fortune in legal fees and the stress of having over-stepped some legal technicality and potentially going to prison gives me gut-wrenching nausea.

But I will do it if it's necessary.

Amen, man. Amen.

[Harbal]

No it wouldn't be fair, and that's probably what encouraged you to imply it. It would be fair to say that it's my dislike of firearms that makes me approve of law that severely restricts ownership of them.

So it would also be fair to say that your dislike of firearms outweighs your like for my right to life and dignity.

No, that would not be a fair representation of my view. It would be fair to say that my dislike of firearms is such that I don't think private citizens should be allowed to possess them.

We aren't discussing my right to own a gun.

We are discussing my right to life and the right to defend that life.

The thread is about guns and the possession of guns, and any implications about your right to life are incidental to that subject. Of course we are discussing your right to own a gun.