Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5127
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Thu Mar 31, 2016 2:30 pm

UA,

Really, Hobbes (like Bill and Bob) is harmless (surly, yeah, but harmless)...also: he will not be moved no matter what you post...I suggest - now that you've stated your view - to just let it be.

Only reason to continue the back n forth with any of the anti-gunners in this thread is a pissin' match which nets no profit for any one.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11983
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by Arising_uk » Thu Mar 31, 2016 8:23 pm

UniversalAlien wrote:Hobbes' Choice wrote:
"Just put the gun against your head and squeeze the trigger."

Is this the kind of statement you would expect from a philosopher :?: - Or is this the kind of statement you would expect from a sick psychopath with serious mental problems :?: ...
It could be an ironic observation that 50% of your suicides are done with guns?

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:18 pm

UniversalAlien wrote: And isn't that what the real issue is - NOT GUN CONTROL - BUT MIND CONTROL :!:
"
People who have their minds controlled need gun control. And that means you, you idiot.
You can't be trusted with a pointed stick let alone a hand gun.

User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 3417
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by attofishpi » Fri Apr 01, 2016 1:09 pm

The combined arms sales of the top 100 largest arms producing companies amounted to an estimated $395 billion in 2012 according to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).[2] In 2004 over $30 billion were spent in the international arms trade (a figure that excludes domestic sales of arms).[3] According to SIPRI, the volume of international transfers of major weapons in 2010–14 was 16 per cent higher than in 2005–2009. The five biggest exporters in 2010–14 were the United States, Russia, China, Germany and France, and the five biggest importers were India, Saudi Arabia, China, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Pakistan.

It's late and I cant be bothered to find the actual % US GDP devoted to arms sales, but it is huge. The poor old Mexicans are awash with arms from the US (and not the hugging type) because they refuse to stop snorting white powder. What a diabolical mess for them...meanwhile the US are high and happy and getting richer off of their neighbours woes.

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5383
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Tue Apr 12, 2016 3:41 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote: Of course there are accurate numbers, I just made it your responsibility to provide them. I noticed you don't have a clue, or at least you've provided nothings to support your ravings.
You're bluffing. You don't have the numbers because you would have to make them up.
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Most of us couldn't do that, surely you agree on this? So I am going to stand by my intended point that most of us are not able to easily fashion a terribly well designed implement of mass murder.
NO, it's not guns responsible for M.A.D., it's nucs! Hand guns, nothing more than pop guns.
M.A.D is still completely irtrelevant to the question of household firearms.
Hand guns and pop guns are clearly distinguishable by the fact that thousands of Americans are not murdered every year with real guns.
None to my knowledge are murdered with pop guns.
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
There's really no other type of weapon you can just grab and use to kill loads of people wherever you go when you just feel like it.
BS, there are all kinds of ways. Bombs, as pipe bombs, pretty damned nasty, shrapnel wise, is at least one good example, as one can slip away and not get caught, at least for a little while. Guns, in the way you're using them, are only for those wanting to get caught, or be killed, to be noticed. So if you really cared, you'd give them attention before they picked up a gun. Who is responsible for one using them in that way, you, me, everybody, anybody?
As I already mentioned: I'm not denying you can get yourself a high score lots of ways. But for lazy people with no impulse control, a gun is what you want, when you want to get down to some killing right here and now. Those aren't the people who put together intricate plans with careful doses of poison, those poisoners probably couldn't be stopped anyway. But the lazy fuckers with the guns can. So stop them - take their boom sticks away.
No you're missing the point yet again. It's not the guns, it's the people that are responsible.
Make them sane again, as it's probably you, one of your family members or friends, that made them insane in the first place. Through the unfair and down right selfish constructs of human sociology that you and yours have supported. Look no further than the overall human condition, for the reason people needlessly kill relatively innocent people.

If someone was certainly about to kill you and yours, and I, as a keen observer witnessing the truth of your and there interaction, intervened, stopping them dead in their tracks, you'd praise me, thanking god I had a gun and defended your life, from needless death. It's the person, not the gun! Fix the people!

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5383
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Tue Apr 12, 2016 3:44 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
UniversalAlien wrote:...
and turn its people into gun fearing slaves of the socialist elite now ruling Britain, ...
What 'socialist elite'? You mean the ones from Eton and Harrow? :lol:

We don't fear guns, we fear the lazy loons who would kill us in a fit of lunacy if they had easy access, we think this because we can see the stats between us and those countries who love easy access to guns. It's a no-brainer.
Yet if I killed your would be killer with a gun, the only way I possibly could have done so, you'd be damn glad I had one. You'd probably organize a parade!

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5383
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re:

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Tue Apr 12, 2016 3:50 pm

henry quirk wrote:"we fear the lazy loons"

A legit concern.

Equally legit: being wary of those in power, being wary of those without scruples, being wary of those who eye 'you' as theirs.
Almost all of them are crazy loons, that they kill you with money instead of a gun, is not actually much better. Some would rather die than be a slave to those seeking wealth and power!


Like it or not: we live on a predator-prey axis...not seein' how removing or restricting a viable means of my defense (or, if need be, offense) helps me, or any one beyond cultivating a false sense of security in folks who can't or won't self-defend.
Speaking of sheeple?

I got no solutions to offer for gun violence. All I can say, as I have over and over, is, I won't be punished for the crimes of others, won't be hobbled cuz other folks do wrong.
The solution is for society to stop creating murderers in the first place, that's the real problem!

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5383
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Tue Apr 12, 2016 4:02 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
UniversalAlien wrote:Hobbes' Choice wrote:
"Just put the gun against your head and squeeze the trigger."

Is this the kind of statement you would expect from a philosopher :?: - Or is this the kind of statement you would expect from a sick psychopath with serious mental problems :?: ...
It could be an ironic observation that 50% of your suicides are done with guns?
Because it's believed to be swift, painless, and sure. Personally I'd choose drugs, one last awesome trip, then off to the 'sleep of no dreaming!'

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5383
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Tue Apr 12, 2016 4:05 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
UniversalAlien wrote: And isn't that what the real issue is - NOT GUN CONTROL - BUT MIND CONTROL :!:
"
People who have their minds controlled need gun control. And that means you, you idiot.
You can't be trusted with a pointed stick let alone a hand gun.
Boys can be such a prićk, most of the time. ;-)

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1773
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by FlashDangerpants » Tue Apr 12, 2016 9:03 pm

SpheresOfBalance wrote: No you're missing the point yet again. It's not the guns, it's the people that are responsible.
Make them sane again
They are either sane and responsible.
Or they are insane and thereby incapable of responsibility.
Make your mind up.

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5383
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:04 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote: No you're missing the point yet again. It's not the guns, it's the people that are responsible.
Make them sane again
They are either sane and responsible.
Or they are insane and thereby incapable of responsibility.
Make your mind up.
Great joke, as you side step the real issue, to be expected by one in denial, whose fear runs so very deep.

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1773
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by FlashDangerpants » Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:59 pm

Why would I bother side stepping a blatant false dichotomy?
There should be more done for the psychologically wounded including but not restricted to those who wish to kill.
And guns should also be controlled.
There's no mutual exclusion in these principles.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Tue Apr 12, 2016 11:10 pm

The simple fact is that in everyday society enjoyed by all the countries of Europe and most of the rest of the world, the possession of guns is not a need nor a necessity.
It's not even a useful luxury as in human society guns have no use, except in the hands of qualified employees of a democratic society.

There is no moral or legitimate exception to this, not matter what blarney is talked by 2nd amendment fantasists. If the government could be taken out by these guys, then I'm puzzled why they have not tried to do so in the last 250 years, given their vitriolic hatred.

The ready availability of guns, and the lack of criminalisation for possession afford to the outlaw the tools of their trade; also to the violent, the insane, the angry, and the dispossessed suicidal maniacs all get the guns they think they want.

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 Apr 12, 2016 11:34 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:The simple fact is that in everyday society enjoyed by all the countries of Europe and most of the rest of the world, the possession of guns is not a need nor a necessity.
This statement very much reflects the majority opinion in my country. Most people quite literally would not be able to comprehend why anybody would want such a dangerous and useless toy.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11983
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Why are bombs OK, but guns bad?

Post by Arising_uk » Wed Apr 13, 2016 1:53 am

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Yet if I killed your would be killer with a gun, the only way I possibly could have done so, you'd be damn glad I had one. You'd probably organize a parade!
What are you babbling on about now?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests