WE NEED MORE GUNS..

[Age]

As long as people like you who have no problem killing other people even when it makes you feel sick to the stomach, then killing will never stop.

Try another moral high horse.

Every single one of your armed police officers likely feel the exact same way after taking a life. That's what the therapy is for...

It's no good just getting rid of every last weapon, you have to get rid of the problem of having no problem killing a sentient living organism of any description.

So you would much prefer it if your armed police couldn't pull the trigger to end a terrorist attack?

Have 'you' EVER the SAYING, 'Prevention is BETTER than the cure', "skepdick"?

[Age]

Sorry. I should have been more clear. All I’m saying is that whoever said citizens and the police have equivalent mandates was only trivially correct.

Well, they are legally correct. Not sure if that's trivial or not.

Of course you could argue that citizens have a stricter mandate - there's negative consequences to you if somebody doesn't protect your life when it needs protecting.

But what THE POINT BEING MADE here IS; that in some countries/societies the VERY REASON WHY people NEED PROTECTING is BECAUSE SO MANY "OTHER" people HAVE guns, in that country/society.

Which THEN MEANS ELIMINATE the guns, then the NEED FOR PROTECTION, ELIMINATES, FURTHER.

Who should do it?

REMOVE 'the cause', then absolutely NO one IS now 'needed' to do 'it', let alone 'should' do 'it' now, OBVIOUSLY.

[Age]

As long as people like you who have no problem killing other people even when it makes you feel sick to the stomach, then killing will never stop.

Try another moral high horse.

Every single one of your armed police officers likely feel the exact same way after taking a life. That's what the therapy is for...

It's no good just getting rid of every last weapon, you have to get rid of the problem of having no problem killing a sentient living organism of any description.

So you would much prefer it if your armed police couldn't pull the trigger to end a terrorist attack?

Why are you still going on about this. What is the point, what are you trying to achieve?

I'm saying, as long as you or anyone else has no problem killing someone else, then the killing will never stop. The banning of all the weapons in the world won't make the slightest bit of difference to the ending of murder and killing people and animals.

OBVIOUSLY if 'we' took this to the full length, then 'this' here is NOT True AT ALL.

So there is no point in talking about this subject anymore, since what is talking about it going to do to change what will obviously never be changed?

LOL But 'it' ALL can be CHANGED, and DID, SO EASILY, SO SIMPLY, and SO QUICKLY.

One just has to LEARN, OBTAIN, and HAVE the KNOW-HOW, FIRST.

Do you personally, have a problem killing someone?

If the answer is no, then you and you alone is the one who is creating the problem that will never stop, until you do.

Which IS a GREAT POINT here.

[Age]

Why are you still going on about this. What is the point, what are you trying to achieve?

Expose your bullshit.

Okay. So, let us take 'this' as being Factual.

If the REASON 'you', "skepdick", are STILL going on about 'this' is TO so-call 'expose the bullshit' of "dontaskme", then just WRITE what the ALLEGED and SUPPOSED 'bullshit' IS, EXACTLY, and then just WRITE the REASON/S WHY.

MOST of the LIES, DISTORTIONS, Falsehoods, and UNTRUTHS, from what I have OBSERVED and WITNESSED here, which ARE BEING EXPOSED here, are 'your' OWN "skepdick".

I'm saying, as long as you or anyone else has no problem killing someone else, then the killing will never stop. The banning of all the weapons in the world won't make the slightest bit of difference to the ending of murder and killing people and animals. So there is no point in talking about this subject anymore, since what is talking about it going to do to change what will obviously never be changed?

Do you personally, have a problem killing someone?

So you are actually equating the mass-murder perpetrated by a terrorist with the killing of a terrorist done by an armed policeman.

What a retard.
[/quote]

AND, ONCE AGAIN, we can CLEARLY SEE Dishonesty AND BEING CLOSED in its Truest FORM here.

That is; the ACTUAL QUESTION being ASKED, for CLARITY SAKE, is COMPLETELY and UTTERLY IGNORED.

These people, BACK THEN, would, literally, COME and CLAIM 'things', BUT WHEN CHALLENGED and/or QUESTIONED OVER and ABOUT what 'they' CLAIM 'they' would VERY QUICKLY, 'TRY TO', 'RUN AWAY' and 'HIDE'

[Age]

You say you are a police officer,

He's no more a police officer than you are; he's a bloody fantasist. You should dimiss him with immediate effect.

Please stop lying about me.

Which 'part/s' is, supposedly and allegedly, the 'lie' here "skepdick"?

[Age]

I have no idea what the question means.

How would I do about determining whether I do or don’t have a problem with it?

Are you telling me that you have no idea what I am asking when I say do you have a problem killing someone else?

WOW!

That's the difference between you and me, I know what it means to have a problem killing someone else, and I would answer the question without any difficulty. I would know immediately that I have a problem killing someone else using a gun and so I wouldn't do it.

Using a gun is the key to the answer here. Would you kill someone using a gun and have no problem doing that?

Yes, I have no idea what you are asking.

Because after everything I have said about the topic so far too are still asking me this question

This one WILL NOT ANSWER 'that QUESTION' because, as some say in some particular countries would say, ' doing so would incriminate "them" 'self' '.

[Age]

Please stop lying about me.

But he might not be lying.

He is. I am a police officer

The onus is on you to prove if he really is lying as you accuse him of.

Why? He acused me of fantasizing about being a police officer.

Where's his evidence?

He doesn't have any, and so he stands accused of a false accusation.

We the PN posters would like you to pony-up some legitimate form of official, not fake identification stating clearly and precisely your name and address, and do also enclose a genuine photograph of yourself, not fake. Do all these things that will definitely prove to us you are indeed who you say you are, a volunteer for a bona fide policeforce as a firearmed officer of law and order in South Africa.

Do I also have to write "STOOOPID" on my forehead with a black marker?

Please provide Real credible evidence with immediate effect

No.

or we won't have any reason to believe anything you tell us.

What other reason do you need except practicing the principle of charity on a Philsophy forum?

Thanks in advance.

My pleasure.

IF 'we' were to take and ACCEPT that 'this one' is a so-called "police officer", in "south africa", refers to 'itself' as being "white", KILLED one or more people, and GOT OFF, then I wonder how many would then presume that the one/s KILLED were NOT OF what are called and refer to as "white color"?

[Age]

No evidence, no problem, we don't believe you, you can say you are a police officer until you are blue in the balls, but until you prove it, then your lying.

I am a police officer and no charitable person would require a proof of this.

Since you are the one violating the principle of charity in accusing me of speaking falsehoods best you present some evidence.

Since when has the ABSURDLY and SO called 'principle of charity' been able to be 'violated', and then the 'requirement for proof' is CHANGED or TURNED AROUND.

I thought that 'the one' who makes A CLAIM would ALWAYS be in someway RESPONSIBLE for PROVIDING the ACTUAL PROOF for THE CLAIM?

Otherwise I could CLAIM ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing', and when ANY one does NOT AGREE, does NOT ACCEPT, or does NOT BELIEVE, I could then just SAY and CLAIM, 'you have VIOLATED some (made up) and so-called 'principle of charity' so NOW it is up to you to PRESENT 'your' EVIDENCE or PROOF.

But maybe it is 'I' who has 'things' AROUND the Wrong WAY here?

We WILL just have to WAIT, and SEE.

Of course, no such evidence exists. Because I am a police officer, which makes you a lying piece of shit.

Which, IF True, EXPLAINS A LOT ABOUT and FOR 'your' VIEWS and BELIEFS here.

[Age]

You really seem to have some deep psychological issues pertaining to dealing with uncertainty.

That you are a distrusting misanthrope

Prove that is true...assuming you think it is...otherwise your just talking whatever crap comes out of your big pie hole.

Sure thing!

You don't trust me when I say that I am a police officer - you demand proof.

Q.E.D you are distrusting. And your misanthropy was addressed prior.

Since WHEN has 'distrust' been some sort of 'crime' or 'thing' that was 'wrong' in ANY way?

Or, when would one have to SHOW OFF that they PROVED that "another" adult human being was 'distrusting'?

Do 'you' KNOW of ANY adult human being who is NOT 'distrusting' in some way, especially in regards to 'you', adult human beings?

If yes, then are 'you' REALLY SURE, and WHO are 'they', EXACTLY?

But if no, then WRITING 'Q.E.D' here was, REALLY, just VERY FOOLISH and ILLOGICAL, and just EXTREMELY VERY IMMATURE.

And, by the way, what PROOF or EVIDENCE that "donaskme" dislikes humankind and avoids human society?

It was, let us NOT FORGET, "dontaskme" who SAID that 'it' WOULD have 'a problem with KILLING another human being'. So, WHERE, EXACTLY, did 'you' GET the CONCLUSION FROM that "dontasme" was so-called 'misanthrope'?

[Age]

But most of Skepdick’s posts don’t hang on whether he’s a police officer or not anyway.

I don't care what he is or isn't...anymore.

But he has said he's killed some guys. So I guess that could well be a clue to his real identity as a policeman.


But my point is, what's the point in talking about gun ownwership or none-gun ownership, it's not going to make a blind bit of difference whether we arm ourselves with guns or not if people do not have any problem killing someone with a gun. Until everyone says they have a problem killing other people with guns, then the killing will continue on indefinitely as long as man continues to be on the earth, and there will be nothing anyone can do about it.

REMEMBER that EVERY young child says that they have a problem killing "other people" with guns.

So, 'there in' LAYS the REAL and ACTUAL 'problem'. That is; WHY is it that ONLY 'you', older children and adult human beings, who are THE 'ones' who do NOT have a problem KILLING "other people"?

The ACTUAL ANSWER is REALLY VERY SIMPLE and VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD, if the Truth BE KNOWN.

If people have no problem killing other people with guns, then the killing will never cease, ever, whether we arm ourselves or not.

The killing stops, only when people change their mind about killing people. Guns have no power, the power is all in the mind of the people, it's people intentions to kill that has to stop...until then, no gun on earth will save your life, if someone is determined enough to kill you without having any problem about it whatsoever.

The whole gun debate is stupid now and pointless to discuss it, it's never going to go anywhere, but round and round in circles like most for and against discussions do.

I'm done with this thread.




.

BECAUSE 'things' are MADE INTO 'debates' is the VERY REASON WHY 'you', human beings, back in the days when this is being written, are STILL SO FAR BEHIND, and, SEEMINGLY, NOT PROGRESSING AT ALL.

'Debates' WERE DESIGNED to TRICK and FOOL 'you' ALL INTO BELIEVING 'either' OR 'or' on some particular issue IS true and right, and to ARGUE, or, literally, FIGHT TO THE DEATH, OVER. Which is REALLY BECOMES MORE and MORE ABSURD the MORE 'debating' is thought about and pondered over.

HOW TO RID 'you', adult human beings, of Truly STUPID 'thoughts' like, a society with guns and the killing of people is really NOT an issue AT ALL, guns are necessary, and/or we need more guns', IS, REALLY, some 'thing' that can be, and DID GET, REMOVED, VERY EASILY and VERY SIMPLY FROM society, WHOLLY and COMPLETELY.

REMOVING adult's BELIEFS that 'debating' is GOOD and NECESSARY WAS ACTUALLY HARDER, and ACTUALLY took LONGER.

[Age]

There was a post earlier, where one of you asked Skepdick something about how it feels to have killed someone. I don’t know for certain what the question was, but I remember that his response was that that’s what therapists are for.

I’d like to add my personal experience with killing a human being. It wasn’t a murder, yet I feel guilty anyway and it has haunted me every day since.

Which IS TOTALLY and ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTANDABLE.

I consider myself a pacifist and had no intention of killing anyone. But animal instincts took over and pushed all of my heartfelt pacifism aside.

If you want to know whether or not you would kill someone, I suggest that your animal nature will be spurred into action by the ultimately defining emotion of fear.

But when one has FULL control OVER all emotions, then emotions do NOT GAIN control over 'you'.

I have often wished that I had been killed so that I would not have to bear an involuntary self-imposed life sentence.

Without knowing ALL of the circumstances, it is hard to know whether or not to talk about and refer to 'guns', and/or 'weapons' here now.

And, I thought you were being VERY SARCASTIC in some 'thing' you wrote in reply to "skepdick" before, but your further replies led me to to wonder if you were really serious.

What you have written here might also explain WHY you wrote what you did before, which if you would like to talk about I could be able to SHOW where, EXACTLY, my perspective of the 'flaw' in 'the reasoning' IS. That is; if you really were being 'serious' before.

[Age]

OK, so we’re still stuck at either everyone has guns or no one (except the police and the military) has guns.

If everyone has at least one gun, theoretically everyone would be able to protect himself from someone else who has a gun.

If no one has any guns, then theoretically there would be no need for anyone to protect himself.

In practice, lots of people have guns in the US.

Therefore, on the whole it would be theoretically and practically more sensible to permit everyone to have guns.

Sadly, I must concede that Skepdik has been right all along.

I was anti-gun when this thread began, but Skepdick changed my mind. It makes more sense to arm and train everyone than to collect the guns that are out there.

'This' was EXACTLY what I was referring to, and WHERE the 'flaw in reasoning', from my perspective, EXISTS.

[Age]

There was a post earlier, where one of you asked Skepdick something about how it feels to have killed someone. I don’t know for certain what the question was, but I remember that his response was that that’s what therapists are for.

I’d like to add my personal experience with killing a human being. It wasn’t a murder, yet I feel guilty anyway and it has haunted me every day since.

I consider myself a pacifist and had no intention of killing anyone. But animal instincts took over and pushed all of my heartfelt pacifism aside.

If you want to know whether or not you would kill someone, I suggest that your animal nature will be spurred into action by the ultimately defining emotion of fear.

I have often wished that I had been killed so that I would not have to bear an involuntary self-imposed life sentence.

It's like the Spanish Inquisition has some pre-approved vocabulary for what you are allowed and not allowed to say; what you are and not allowed to feel; and what you are allowed and not allowed to think when you get put in a fucked up situation where all the options are shit.

Normal people don't want to do it.
Normal people get put in a situations where they have to do it.
Normal people hate the fact that they were put in such a fucked up situation and they endure the psychological cost thereof.
Normal people would do it again if they were put in the same fucked up situation.

Does any of this mean they do; or don't have a problem with it?

So-called 'normal people' do NOT think NOR BELIEVE that guns and weapons to KILL human beings ARE NECESSARY.

And, considering the VERY OBVIOUS and IRREFUTABLE Fact that 'they' ARE NOT NECESSARY, this is WHY so-called 'normal people' think the way 'they' DO.

[Age]

There was a post earlier, where one of you asked Skepdick something about how it feels to have killed someone. I don’t know for certain what the question was, but I remember that his response was that that’s what therapists are for.

I’d like to add my personal experience with killing a human being. It wasn’t a murder, yet I feel guilty anyway and it has haunted me every day since.

I consider myself a pacifist and had no intention of killing anyone. But animal instincts took over and pushed all of my heartfelt pacifism aside.

If you want to know whether or not you would kill someone, I suggest that your animal nature will be spurred into action by the ultimately defining emotion of fear.

I have often wished that I had been killed so that I would not have to bear an involuntary self-imposed life sentence.

It's like the Spanish Enquisition has some pre-approved vocabulary for what you are allowed and not allowed to say; what you are and not allowed to feel; and what you are allowed and not allowed to think when you get put in a fucked up situation where all the options are shit.

Normal people don't want to do it.
Normal people get put in a situations where they have to do it.
Normal people hate the fact that they were put in such a fucked up situation and they endure the psychological cost thereof.
Normal people would do it again if they were put in the same fucked up situation.

Does any of this mean they do; or don't have a problem with it?

Amen.

What 'part/s' here are 'you' 'amening', EXACTLY?

[Age]

I was shot by a man impersonating a police officer, right outside the South African Embassy. I hope this explains where I'm coming from.

That's so unfortunate, I am so so sorry to hear that, but I am glad you survived!

Despite having outlawed guns some cop-impersonating asshole still got hold of one.

'you' ARE STILL CLEARLY MISSING THE POINT here "skepdick".

Why didn't your armed police get there in time to stop it?