Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by bobevenson » Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:40 pm

When terrorists kill and maim people with bombs, people don't blame the bombs, they blame the terrorists. But when the terrorists use guns, people blame the guns.

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by Lacewing » Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:56 pm

bobevenson wrote:When terrorists kill and maim people with bombs, people don't blame the bombs, they blame the terrorists. But when the terrorists use guns, people blame the guns.
I think people focus on the most immediate threat... whether it be a tool, or a poison, or a person. If someone is coming at you, either AS or WITH a weapon, you'll do whatever you can to immobilize them and/or remove the weapon. Whichever option offers the fastest resolution, is the one that seems most reasonable to focus on. Some weapons have only one use... to wage war on others and destroy as much as possible. Bombs, assault rifles, and chemical warfare are hideous creations of humankind. I don't see how removing them from society and our beautiful planet is a bad thing. This idea that everything has a right to exist and be used because it can, seems extraordinarily foolish. What's the point of having any intelligence at all if we can't self-regulate the things we can dream up?

bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by bobevenson » Mon Feb 22, 2016 3:18 pm

Lacewing wrote:Assault rifles are hideous creations of humankind.
How does an assault rifle differ from a non-hideous rifle? Also, I think you mean "mankind," but you have a hard-on for men, right?

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by FlashDangerpants » Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:02 pm

bobevenson wrote:When terrorists kill and maim people with bombs, people don't blame the bombs, they blame the terrorists. But when the terrorists use guns, people blame the guns.
If they bought the bombs in a shop, we would suggest bombs should not be sold in shops. If they buy the guns in a shop, we sometimes suggest that guns should not be sold in shops. On the whole, the fact that people can just go to a shop and buy a weapon suitable for killing lots of people is a little bit dangerous. It might not be a good idea at all.

bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by bobevenson » Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:30 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote:
bobevenson wrote:When terrorists kill and maim people with bombs, people don't blame the bombs, they blame the terrorists. But when the terrorists use guns, people blame the guns.
If they bought the bombs in a shop, we would suggest bombs should not be sold in shops. If they buy the guns in a shop, we sometimes suggest that guns should not be sold in shops. On the whole, the fact that people can just go to a shop and buy a weapon suitable for killing lots of people is a little bit dangerous. It might not be a good idea at all.
No, I'm talking about blaming the bomb people, but not the gun people.

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by Obvious Leo » Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:51 pm

bobevenson wrote:No, I'm talking about blaming the bomb people, but not the gun people.
Are you saying that people who kill other people with bombs are held accountable for their crimes and that people who kill other people with guns are not held accountable for their crimes, Bob. It's no fucking wonder you live in such a dangerous country. Get yourself a passport and piss off without delay, mate. Come to Australia. Beautiful weather, naked women on the beaches and being a brainless fuckwit is no impediment to success.

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by FlashDangerpants » Tue Feb 23, 2016 1:21 am

bobevenson wrote:
FlashDangerpants wrote:
bobevenson wrote:When terrorists kill and maim people with bombs, people don't blame the bombs, they blame the terrorists. But when the terrorists use guns, people blame the guns.
If they bought the bombs in a shop, we would suggest bombs should not be sold in shops. If they buy the guns in a shop, we sometimes suggest that guns should not be sold in shops. On the whole, the fact that people can just go to a shop and buy a weapon suitable for killing lots of people is a little bit dangerous. It might not be a good idea at all.
No, I'm talking about blaming the bomb people, but not the gun people.
That's not very sensible though is it? We blame the people who do the naughty blowing up and shooty stuff in both cases. We also blame the people who give lots of money to terrorists - there's laws against that sort of thing. We blame people who give terrorists bombs very much indeed - there's laws against that too. We tend to apportion some blame the people who sell terrorists guns when they shoot us, but this is only intermittently illegal in your country.

Are you confused by the prospect of multiplicity of blame?

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by Obvious Leo » Tue Feb 23, 2016 2:21 am

If you're trying to highlight the logical inconsistency of your utterly absurd 2nd amendment, Bob, then I'm in full agreement with you. If you can be allowed to buy a fully automatic military assault rifle down at the local shop as a basic human right then why not a bomb, or a stealth bomber, or a ballistic missile, or a tank, submarine or aircraft carrier.

The rest of the world would be a far safer place if your government were to extend your 2nd amendment rights to include all this modern ordnance because your people would then blow themselves off the face of the earth in no time.

bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by bobevenson » Tue Feb 23, 2016 2:39 am

Unfortunately, you have no understanding of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The right to bear arms has nothing to do with hunting or protecting yourself from criminals, unless, of course, those criminals are the government itself, and the right to bear arms becomes your ultimate line of defense. That's something you foreigners will never understand.

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by Obvious Leo » Tue Feb 23, 2016 2:45 am

bobevenson wrote:Unfortunately, you have no understanding of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The right to bear arms has nothing to do with hunting or protecting yourself from criminals, unless, of course, those criminals are the government itself, and the right to bear arms becomes your ultimate line of defense. That's something you foreigners will never understand.
I think I understand it better than you do, Bob. The right to bear arms was enshrined in your constitution so that your citizenry could defend itself against the tyranny of your own government. However you've not kept up with recent developments and now you find yourself outgunned. No matter how lethal your machine gun might be it's not going to be much use to you when you're up against a nuke. Bolt the doors and hide, mate, the bastards are coming to get you.

bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by bobevenson » Tue Feb 23, 2016 2:01 pm

Obvious Leo wrote:
bobevenson wrote:Unfortunately, you have no understanding of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The right to bear arms has nothing to do with hunting or protecting yourself from criminals, unless, of course, those criminals are the government itself, and the right to bear arms becomes your ultimate line of defense. That's something you foreigners will never understand.
I think I understand it better than you do, Bob. The right to bear arms was enshrined in your constitution so that your citizenry could defend itself against the tyranny of your own government. However you've not kept up with recent developments and now you find yourself outgunned. No matter how lethal your machine gun might be it's not going to be much use to you when you're up against a nuke. Bolt the doors and hide, mate, the bastards are coming to get you.
Please, talk sense. The U.S. government can't even handle tribesmen in the Middle East. How is it going to overcome citizens with an estimated 300 million guns at their disposal?

BigWhit
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 7:20 pm

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by BigWhit » Tue Feb 23, 2016 3:31 pm

First, you can't buy a machine gun in a shop in the US. Fully automatic weapons are rare and highly regulated. The "assault" weapons the left wing wankers talk about are semi automatic just loke any other semi auto hunting rifle. The only difference is the exterior. Calling an AR-15 an "military style" rifle is like calling a honda civic a race car just because the owner put a wing and a hood scoop on it.

Furthermore, there were posts and talk about "gun violence" after Paris where you can't hardly get a gun at all. The weapons they used WERE fully automatic and they sure as fuck were not bought in any shop. Some estimates have 2x as many illegal guns in France as there are legal ones, so banning them doesn't get rid of them. Like drugs, it means only criminals will have them.

As far as taking the second amendment to some logical extreme like being able to buy an aircraft carrier, who the fuck would buy one of those? Even Bill Gates or Zuckerberg could hardly afford to buy and maintain one of those and why in the fuck would they want to? Tanks? There are people who own tanks and armored vehicles legally in the US and not one has been used in any sort of crime at all.

Just because there are a bunch of people with guns in an area doesn't mean that a wild west style shoot out is bound to happen. I've never been to any armed rally where even one shot was fired by accident let alone anger.

bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by bobevenson » Tue Feb 23, 2016 3:56 pm

Everything you say is true. In my estimation, the NRA is a pussy organization. My U.S. Gun Club proposal has the tag line, "Not for the namby-pamby."

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by FlashDangerpants » Tue Feb 23, 2016 10:38 pm

Do you own any guns Bob?

And do you, Whit, think Bob's guns should probably be taken away given that he's he's clearly psychotic?

Scott Mayers
Posts: 1391
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:53 am
Location: Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by Scott Mayers » Tue Feb 23, 2016 10:47 pm

bobevenson wrote:When terrorists kill and maim people with bombs, people don't blame the bombs, they blame the terrorists. But when the terrorists use guns, people blame the guns.

But then I had argued similarly that,

If guns are okay because they don't kill people,

We should all be allowed to have bombs too!


I think it would be cool to 'collect' a few nukes! :roll:
Oh, ...and I'm a 'law abiding citizen too'!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests