Philosophy Now Forum

henry quirk wrote:Mass killings happen even where guns are forbidden, so - yeah - I thought about it.

If not guns, bombs...or a machette, as was used by a loon to decapitate some one on the street somewhere in Britain in the past few years.

That was two guys. They ran a soldier down with a car. Cars are easily available because they are useful for lots things besides killing. Then they took advantage of him being run over already to behead him. Then they got shot by the cops because they tried to charge armed police officers with a knife.

If those guys had had guns, they would surely have gone on a better murder spree. Something like like the ones you have so frequently.

Guns are definitely part of the problem. Easy access to guns is definitely what makes them part of it.

henry quirk wrote:Mass shootings happen even where guns are forbidden, so - yeah - I thought about it.

If you thought about it a little more deeply you'd see that this is not denied by the anti-gun lobbyists. Their argument is that such mass shootings are far less common in countries where the ownership of guns is more strictly regulated and this argument is supported by an overwhelming mass of empirical evidence. This is the argument you are required to address, henry.

Flash, this is the one I'm thinkin' about...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... arden.html

But, leo, I have addressed it...I've acknowledged we have a problem in the US...I've said I don't believe the solutions offered in this thread, by Hobbes, for example, would amount to anything, and have explained why...I've even gone as far as to offer up the one solution that would work, here, to end or curtail gun violence (but not violence in general).

I think I've held up my end of the poster's/debater's contract pretty well.

henry quirk wrote:Flash, this is the one I'm thinkin' about...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... arden.html

Wasn't aware of that one.
It's a good job he didn't own a gun.

henry quirk wrote:But, leo, I have addressed it...I've acknowledged we have a problem in the US...I've said I don't believe the solutions offered in this thread, by Hobbes, for example, would amount to anything, and have explained why...I've even gone as far as to offer up the one solution that would work, here, to end or curtail gun violence (but not violence in general).

I think I've held up my end of the poster's/debater's contract pretty well.

I conceded the point earlier that the US now has so many guns in the general population that this problem is likely to take several generations to remedy. The problem will never be remedied as long as a minority of your population continue to insist that no problem even exists and that this minority has such a disproportionate influence on public policy. There is no quick fix for this, henry, but as they say, the longest journey always starts with a single step. Why not start by saying that if your name appears on the NSA "terrorist watch list" then you can't legally buy a gun. It won't make the slightest bit of difference to the terrorist but it might give your population some confidence that your policy-makers are not stark raving mad.

henry quirk wrote:Mass shootings happen even where guns are forbidden, so - yeah -

Mass shootings happen mostly in the USA, where there is a promiscuous attitude to gun ownership.

Are you really a fucking moron, or are you running in that brain for a dickwad?

Obvious Leo wrote:Why not start by saying that if your name appears on the NSA "terrorist watch list" then you can't legally buy a gun. It won't make the slightest bit of difference to the terrorist but it might give your population some confidence that your policy-makers are not stark raving mad.

It's only the remnants of the British Empire that are stark raving mad, and it started when the USA kicked King George's ass clear across the ocean to Australia.

bobevenson wrote:It's only the remnants of the British Empire that are stark raving mad, and it started when the USA kicked King George's ass clear across the ocean to Australia.

There was no USA at the time and 'you' did it with Spanish and French money and the French Navy and Artillery and the ex-squaddies from the British Army. I know you're the child of immigrants but your historical knowledge of American warfare is scandalous.

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:It's only the remnants of the British Empire that are stark raving mad, and it started when the USA kicked King George's ass clear across the ocean to Australia.

There was no USA at the time and 'you' did it with Spanish and French money and the French Navy and Artillery and the ex-squaddies from the British Army. I know you're the child of immigrants but your historical knowledge of American warfare is scandalous.

Who are you, the Nitpicking Queen of Great Britain?

Leo,

I think we've both acknowledged and conceded and stated...good eggs, the both of us.

#

Hobbes,

Where did I say mass shootings weren't an american problem? Where did I non-american mass shooting happen with a frequency rivaling America's?

And: why do you have to post as though you were some garden-variety p****? You're better than that but you consistently default to insult. What have I done in-thread or in-forum to justify being called a 'fucking moron'? I aim to discuss and debate and mostly work to be civil and then you dump sugar in the gas tank and progress stops.

bobevenson wrote:... Nitpicking ...

What are you doing upon a Philosophy forum?

Oh! I know, banned from everywhere else.

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:... Nitpicking ...

What are you doing upon a Philosophy forum? Oh! I know, banned from everywhere else.

Wait a minute, Lisa, or whatever your real feminine name is, you forgot the "Queen" part (or maybe you didn't).

Facts scare you don't they bobby.

Arising_uk wrote:Facts scare you don't they bobby.

Not as much as people presenting false pretenses to the world.