Philosophy Now Forum

bobevenson wrote:Again, people who misuse guns are the problem, so gun control laws are pointless and only appeal to idiots who think, "Well, we've got to do something!"

People who misuse equipment at my work place are a real problem. It results in accidents to themselves and other workers. However, monitoring and regulating the use of equipment is appealing to management because it has decreased the incidents of accidents and misuse of expensive equipment that requires a lot of money to fix or replace.

So yes we did something.

"...it can be a real problem."

Which is, again, the tool user, not the tool.

And, again: eye of the beholder.

Nation X has atomics and thinks that's a fine thing.

Nation P thinks nation X's possession of atomics is deplorable (but believes its own possession of atomics is just dandy).

*shrug*

Change nation X and nation P to Joe and Stan; change atomics to shotguns.

Same problem; same lack of credible solution.

Alway: it comes down to the use of force (a gun, a bomb) to extinguish the use of force (a gun, a bomb).

Irony, anyone?

##

“we can't ask America”

Damned straight!

HA!

henry quirk wrote:"...it can be a real problem."

Which is, again, the tool user, not the tool.

The tool user is not a problem without the tool.

henry quirk wrote:And, again: eye of the beholder.

Nation X has atomics and thinks that's a fine thing.

Nation P thinks nation X's possession of atomics is deplorable (but believes its own possession of atomics is just dandy).

*shrug*

It's not that simple. Plenty people think there own countries ownership of weapons is deplorable, sometimes because they believe it makes them a target, sometimes because they are used against themselves, sometimes because they simply don't feel it is necessary to have the capability to exterminate thousands or millions of people they have never met and mean them no harm.

henry quirk wrote:Change nation X and nation P to Joe and Stan; change atomics to shotguns.

Same problem; same lack of credible solution.

Same pointlessness; Joe and Stan might feel safer because they are armed, but since each knows the other is probably armed, any confrontation is artificially escalated.

henry quirk wrote:Alway: it comes down to the use of force (a gun, a bomb) to extinguish the use of force (a gun, a bomb).

Irony, anyone?

Why is that irony?

henry quirk wrote:##

“we can't ask America”

Damned straight!

HA!

What I don't understand is why, if you are so indifferent to people, you bother to engage them?

henry quirk wrote:"...it can be a real problem."

Which is, again, the tool user, not the tool.

And, again: eye of the beholder.

Nation X has atomics and thinks that's a fine thing.

Nation P thinks nation X's possession of atomics is deplorable (but believes its own possession of atomics is just dandy).

*shrug*

Change nation X and nation P to Joe and Stan; change atomics to shotguns.

Same problem; same lack of credible solution.

Alway: it comes down to the use of force (a gun, a bomb) to extinguish the use of force (a gun, a bomb).

Irony, anyone?

##

“we can't ask America”

Damned straight!

HA!

"....it can be a real problem" You quoted me out of context this is not what I said. I actually said, " "So yes, it can be a real problem".

This response was an answer in the affirmative to your question. My full quote clearly stated in the beginning that it is a real problem. I think you also saw what you wanted to see.

Nonetheless, I would say that when we think about it both tools and the people who use the tools are a problem.

Ginkgo wrote:People who misuse equipment at my work place are a real problem. It results in accidents to themselves and other workers. However, monitoring and regulating the use of equipment is appealing to management because it has decreased the incidents of accidents and misuse of expensive equipment that requires a lot of money to fix or replace.

So yes we did something.

We are not talking about a company that is supervising the use of its equipment, we are talking about the government stopping law-abiding citizens from buying and owning guns.

bobevenson wrote:Of course Americans have a fine sense of humor, which we prove by laughing at Europeans every day.

That's called an inferiority complex, we 'Europeans' spend zero time thinking about Americans. Much as I suspect most Americans do about Europeans. It's just you bob.

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:Of course Americans have a fine sense of humor, which we prove by laughing at Europeans every day.

That's called an inferiority complex, we 'Europeans' spend zero time thinking about Americans. Much as I suspect most Americans do about Europeans. It's just you bob.

I don't think the only country that has ever put a man on the moon can ever be thought of as having an inferiority complex.

I said you boob. As I seriously doubt you are an engineer or have any productive employment come to that.

Arising_uk wrote:I said you boob. As I seriously doubt you are an engineer or have any productive employment come to that.

I'm sure your only productive employment involves lying on your back, bitch!

bobevenson wrote:I'm sure your only productive employment involves lying on your back, bitch!

I could reply 'and yours is lying on your front'.

Come clean bob, what is it you do for gainful employment?

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:I'm sure your only productive employment involves lying on your back, bitch!

I could reply 'and yours is lying on your front'.

Come clean bob, what is it you do for gainful employment?

Do you have such an inferiority complex that you feel it's necessary to ask such a pathetic question over and over? Why don't you tell me what the fuck it is that you do, and I'll act like your analyst and make some constructive comments.

"The tool user is not a problem without the tool."

The tool user can always use his or her fist, his or her teeth, etc....the tool user him- or her-self is his or her own best tool...the tool user is ALWAYS the problem.

Tools only make for ease of execution...tools never motivate or inspire or spur on.

#

"Joe and Stan might feel safer because they are armed, but since each knows the other is probably armed, any confrontation is artificially escalated."

Sure.

So what's the credible solution?

#

"...if you are so indifferent to people, you bother to engage them?"

Irrelevant.

Ginkgo,

My apologies...

"Plenty people think there own countries ownership of weapons is deplorable"

Irrelevant if those folks aren't callin' the shots.

Here in America, for example, millions are 'ruled' by a few thousand elected and appointed.

The millions may speak their minds; the thousands actually wield the power.

So: we're back to...

(the rulers of) Nation X has atomics and thinks that's a fine thing.

(the rulers of) Nation P thinks nation X's possession of atomics is deplorable (but believes its own possession of atomics is just dandy).

Again: what's the credible solution?

henry quirk wrote:"The tool user is not a problem without the tool."

The tool user can always use his or her fist, his or her teeth, etc....the tool user him- or her-self is his or her own best tool...the tool user is ALWAYS the problem.

A tool user shaking his or her fist is a lot less of a problem than a tool user pointing his or her gun.

henry quirk wrote:Tools only make for ease of execution...tools never motivate or inspire or spur on.

Nonsense. How many people have held up a bank by using their teeth?

henry quirk wrote:"Joe and Stan might feel safer because they are armed, but since each knows the other is probably armed, any confrontation is artificially escalated."

Sure.

So what's the credible solution?

Take their guns away.

henry quirk wrote:So: we're back to...

(the rulers of) Nation X has atomics and thinks that's a fine thing.

(the rulers of) Nation P thinks nation X's possession of atomics is deplorable (but believes its own possession of atomics is just dandy).

Again: what's the credible solution?

Irrelevent.