 |
| |
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:22
|
|
quote:
OK, we'll try a different tact then: Why do you need a gun? |
What's it matter? Why do you need a computer? Or a car?
quote:
And, given your statement that inappropriate use of firearms has nothing to do with you, can you tell us with 100% certainty that it is impossible for a criminal or misguided person to steal your gun and commit crimes with it? Because this happens all the time... |
I agree, but again, this does not affect my basic right to own a gun. It simply says that some people commit crimes. Surprise surprise. But my point is that regardless of the criminal activities of others, I should not be punished in an attempt to stop them.
And quite frankly, if I'm incompetent enough to let a burglar break into my house, steal my gun from right beside me, and use it on me, then I'm pretty much an idiot.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:22
|
|
Different situation. I don't own the road, therefore I can't dictate what rules should or shouldn't be there.
I DO own myself, my gun, and my property, and therefore no rules should be placed upon me within that context.
If a city wants to pass an ordinance against walking down Main Street toting a light machine gun, fine, I can deal with that because it doesn't restrict my rights. People or organizations have the right to make rules about what others do on their property, and a public road, regardless of who owns it, certainly isn't mine.
In a perfect world, roads would be privately built and maintained, and in that context, whoever built the roads would have a say on what rules applied to them.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
I'm not sure what your point is about research. I've frankly never much cared what the research proves, because it is irrelevant to my belief on the subject.
Regardless of how many people use firearms inappropriately, that has nothing to do with me, and I should not be penalized for it. Once someone breaks the law, they should certainly be punished, but they should not be punished in advance through the stripping of property rights. |
Should you also have someone tell you how to build your house? Should the government not wait until your home bursts into flames and burns down your neighborhood before they penalize you?
Should you be forced to have your carr inspected? Should the government not wait for your brakes to fail and cause you to plow into that school bus before penalizing you?
What right has the government to force you to get a license to drive? What right do they have to examine your suitability to drive your possession.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Six Thousand Year Old Man
|
 |
Ad Rock
Aug 2000
time: 00:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
What's it matter? Why do you need a computer? Or a car?
|
It matters because the utility of guns to society is vastly lower than the utility of computers or cars.
If all you could do with a computer was post to Apolyton, say (  ), and several thousand people died annually due to this use, do you think that computers wouldn't be banned?
quote:
And quite frankly, if I'm incompetent enough to let a burglar break into my house, steal my gun from right beside me, and use it on me, then I'm pretty much an idiot. |
Why should my life be in danger from an armed criminal who stole your gun? In my book, I'd rather not stake my life on your competency, or anyone's. I'd rather the risk was zero.
As I said long ago in this thread, there is no way to tell whether a gun owner is 100% competent. Even he's 99% competent, even if he is a splendid, well meaning guy, there is a chance his gun could fall into the wrong hands. Why take that risk? No guns, no risk.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
And quite frankly, if I'm incompetent enough to let a burglar break into my house, steal my gun from right beside me, and use it on me, then I'm pretty much an idiot. |
No, you're just drowsy, having been just awoken, while he is wide awake.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:22
|
|
quote:
It matters because the utility of guns to society is vastly lower than the utility of computers or cars. |
I dunno about that. Your computer won't help you if someone breaks into your house. A gun could though.
quote:
If all you could do with a computer was post to Apolyton, say ( ), and several thousand people died annually due to this use, do you think that computers wouldn't be banned? |
No, I don't think they would.
quote:
Why should my life be in danger from an armed criminal who stole your gun? In my book, I'd rather not stake my life on your competency, or anyone's. I'd rather the risk was zero. |
Again, criminals commit crimes. That's why they're called criminals. It isn't my fault if a criminal steals my car and runs over you with it, so don't hold me responsible if a criminal steals my gun and shoots you with it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sinapus
|
 |
Houston, Texas
Jun 1999
time: 23:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Sure they do, because what's at stake here are competing natural rights, the right of one group to own dangerous objects and the right of another group to live.
|
Sorry, the acts of criminals do not fall under the right to own "dangerous objects". Your attempt to associate them is nothing more than a cynical attempt to exploit people's emotions so they'll gallop over to your side.
quote:
The simple fact is that in America many more people are killed by guns each year than are saved by them.
|
The lowest estimate (not by Kleck, btw) is 80,000 via the National Crime Victimization Survey. Which is the number of reported defensive gun uses.
Or were you using another way of counting saved lives?
quote:
The fact that you really seem to be completely untouched by the vast amount of suffering caused by your so called right to own a mere piece of metal ought to cause you some concern David.
|
The fact that you presume that someone who doesn't jump on your bandwagon must not care makes you look rather contemptible. But hey, it might fool someone into thinking your opponent is somehow less than human so you'll run with it, right?
Some people might actually blame the person responsible (you know, the one who committed the crime) instead of trying to launch a culture war against people who haven't harmed anyone.
quote:
A few years back one of the nurses at the clinic I work at was killed in the parking lot by her boyfriend. The gun he used had been bought legally sometime back at a private gun sale. In Virginia private gun sales do not require the background check that gun stores are required to make. The man who killed her had been released from prison shortly before meeting her. he had been convicted of assaulting another woman. The truly pathetic thing about this affair was that the girl's brother had been killed by a gun during an argument with a friend of his a few years before. Her death left her parents childless. |
So now you must punish all gun owners for this crime?
Anyone else you'd like to collectively punish?
A few years ago coworker of mine was murdered by her husband, who then committed suicide. AFAIK, he had no criminal record. I blame him for the crime.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:22
|
|
quote:
The problem I have with gun owners is that they assume that their right to own a gun doesn't put anyone's life in danger. And that's what I have an issue with. |
The act of me owning a gun DOESN'T put you in danger. The act of someone stealing my gun does. There's a big difference.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Akka
|
 |
In front of my computer.
Nov 2001
time: 06:22
|
|
quote:
Different situation. I don't own the road, therefore I can't dictate what rules should or shouldn't be there. |
Exact same situation, you own the car and are using it dangerously. Due to it's nature, a gun is ALWAYS dangerous. Banning guns is just a way to ban dangerous situations, just like banning excessive speed.
quote:
I DO own myself, my gun, and my property, and therefore no rules should be placed upon me within that context. |
You do own your car though. I do own my flat too. I still don't have the right to put some explosive in it, or to set it on fire. Because it's dangerous for others.
quote:
In a perfect world, roads would be privately built and maintained, and in that context, whoever built the roads would have a say on what rules applied to them. |
You're completely obessed by the idea of possession, aren't you ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:22
|
|
quote:
Exact same situation, you own the car and are using it dangerously. Due to it's nature, a gun is ALWAYS dangerous. Banning guns is just a way to ban dangerous situations, just like banning excessive speed. |
It's different because what I do on property I own is my business, and what I do on property I don't own is up to someone else.
quote:
I still don't have the right to put some explosive in it, or to set it on fire. Because it's dangerous for others. |
No, you don't have the right to blow up or burn down your house IF that explosion or blaze damages someone else's property. You can blow up YOUR property all you want, you just can't let it extend to someone else's.
quote:
You're completely obessed by the idea of possession, aren't you ? |
It's called property ownership, actually.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:22
|
|
quote:
Yeah, the act of driving like a mad does not put you in danger. It's only if you're on the way that it does. |
Actually that's correct (of course I'm not in danger unless I'm in the way), but again you're talking about a different situation.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Six Thousand Year Old Man
|
|
Ad Rock
Aug 2000
time: 00:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
The act of me owning a gun DOESN'T put you in danger. The act of someone stealing my gun does. There's a big difference. |
Yes it does. Your owning a gun, in conjunction with the criminal stealing it, puts me in danger.
To prevent the danger, we can do two things:
1) Ban the criminals.
(We're trying, but I think you'll agree, there are still criminals out there. Howver, once crime and criminals has been eliminated, 100%, I will fully support the right to own guns. 100%.)
and/or
2) Ban the guns.
(Also difficult - but a lot easier than eliminating criminals)
If we do either 1) or 2), my chance of being killed by a criminal with a gun drop to zero.
Again, I'm appalled that there are people who value their right to own a gun more than the lives of other people. Life is full of disappointments.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:22
|
|
No, the principle is not the same. In one situation I am acting on property I own. In the other situation, I am not.
Fundamental difference.
Surely you wouldn't say that driving regulations can extend to my private ranch, for example, would you?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:22
|
|
quote:
Yes it does. Your owning a gun, in conjunction with the criminal stealing it, puts me in danger. |
No, the act of me owning a gun harms you not in the least.
My gun might eventually cause you harm, but only once another crime has already been committed - that of burglary. Probably several crimes, in fact - breaking and entering, burglary, assault and battery, etc.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:22
|
|
quote:
This reasoning is completely dumb, because it assumes that you will never use your gun in a criminal manner.
If we would know in advance who will be a criminal and who won't be, we would not need to ban anything - we would just put people in prison preventively. |
Right, if you knew who was going to commit crimes, you would punish them in advance (Minority Report, anyone). But because you don't know, you punish everyone by banning or restricting guns.
However, people are legally innocent until proven guilty.
Hence, you are advocating punishing the innocent for something they have never done.
quote:
If you can't follow my logic... well... I can't help you there. |
It isn't my logic that's the problem.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sava
I'm pro-gun and pro-gun control. I think honest, responsible, law abiding citizens should be allowed to own guns. |
I'm pro gun period.
quote:
I think what's necessary is to make getting guns harder for criminals. The first thing you can do is create a much more elaborate screening process required for gun licenses. It's easier to get a gun license than a credit card these days. |
In Calif. there is a 15 day waiting period for regular people. For bad guys, they steal, buy on the street or any other means to aquired guns. The screening will not work for them, only you and I.
quote:
Second, I'm in favor of taxing guns heavily to make them more expensive. This would also make illegal weapons more expensive and harder to get. |
No it won't. It will just raise the price nothing more.
quote:
Because human beings are evil, violent animals; you will never have a utopian society without gun violence. The only thing we can hope to do is decrease the proliferation of guns. |
No body will turn in illegal guns.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22.
Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-08-2002 05:20
where do these violent criminals get their guns, if there are none in society?
|