Gun Control

Abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering, Just War theory and other such hot topics.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Gun Control

Post by Walker »

Advocate wrote: Wed Aug 03, 2022 5:50 am Gun control is tyranny lite. Only after gun control do we get regular tyranny.
I've read this a number of times. Brilliant.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Sculptor post_id=588108 time=1659651827 user_id=17400]
[quote="henry quirk" post_id=581965 time=1657214039 user_id=472]
Let's talk about it.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mUZ9HCi6wBs
[/quote]


The idea that guns are needed to "check the gummint" is the dumbest most stupid myth in the whole debate, What a bunch of shite.
[/quote]

It's the explicit reason for the second amendment and the most important check against tyranny and only tyrants could call those things a stupid myth.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Gun Control

Post by henry quirk »

Sculptor wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 11:23 pmThe idea that guns are needed to "check the gummint" is the dumbest most stupid myth in the whole debate, What a bunch of shite.
8B68B616-1133-41AE-BFB6-B95C0CF868A0.jpeg
8B68B616-1133-41AE-BFB6-B95C0CF868A0.jpeg (53.06 KiB) Viewed 640 times
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7219
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by iambiguous »

Walker wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 11:56 pmSuch hot rhetoric. Decent folks are just doing their best under conditions created by the Left, conditions that have been festering for decades in schools and in the social engineering that really started strutting in the sixties.

These MAGA forces are not fascist. They are anti-swamp. The swamp are the unelected who make the rules and regulations to keep the blame off Jane Congress. The elected do the bidding of the more influential swamp denizens. The less influential just stuff the ballot boxes.

What's happening now is China. China is flexing and weak, confused Brandon is stumbling around, squinting at the script. Abandoning thousands of Americans in Afghanistan prompts China to say, we just might murder your high-ranking politician when she flies to Taipei, Brandon. What say you?

And it's not empty words. China is loaded for bear. The US is loaded for Tranny Awareness.
Hot rhetoric?

Over and again, I make it clear that my own assessment of guns, and "decent citizens" and "the swamp"** and China and "Tranny Awareness" reflect but the subjective political prejudices I acquired existentially given the life that I lived.

I'm not a fulminating and fanatical moral and political objectivist insisting that only how I understand these things reflects the way the world really, really, really is.

That's why, from my own "fractured and fragmented" frame of mind, I construe the "best of all possible worlds" in regards to gun control as revolving around "democracy and the rule of law".

This as opposed to the might makes right and right makes might schools of thought.

You're the one that seems to seethe in dispensing your own "arrogant, authoritarian, self-righteous" value judgments.

If I do say so myself.

** https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.p ... s#p2187045
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8535
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Sculptor »

henry quirk wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 3:07 pm
Sculptor wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 11:23 pmThe idea that guns are needed to "check the gummint" is the dumbest most stupid myth in the whole debate, What a bunch of shite.
8B68B616-1133-41AE-BFB6-B95C0CF868A0.jpeg

Gosh. Thank you for confirming my point.
commonsense
Posts: 5115
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by commonsense »

Has anyone noticed this?

“If you’re opposed to having guns or abortions, then don’t have any. But don’t tell me not to have guns or abortions.”

The language is the same for both controversies.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7219
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by iambiguous »

commonsense wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 7:30 pm Has anyone noticed this?

“If you’re opposed to having guns or abortions, then don’t have any. But don’t tell me not to have guns or abortions.”

The language is the same for both controversies.
The "for all practical purposes" problem with this is that when it comes to guns, the henrys of the world will nod in agreement:

"You don't want to own bazookas or tanks or grenades or mortar rounds or claymore mines, or artillery pieces, then don't."

But when it comes to abortions, if others who aren't them want to perform or to have one, then they should be arrested, charged with first degree premeditated murder and, if tried and convicted, sent to death row.

At least in Texas.
commonsense
Posts: 5115
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by commonsense »

iambiguous wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 7:54 pm
commonsense wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 7:30 pm Has anyone noticed this?

“If you’re opposed to having guns or abortions, then don’t have any. But don’t tell me not to have guns or abortions.”

The language is the same for both controversies.
The "for all practical purposes" problem with this is that when it comes to guns, the henrys of the world will nod in agreement:

"You don't want to own bazookas or tanks or grenades or mortar rounds or claymore mines, or artillery pieces, then don't."

But when it comes to abortions, if others who aren't them want to perform or to have one, then they should be arrested, charged with first degree premeditated murder and, if tried and convicted, sent to death row.

At least in Texas.
That’s what I’m saying. And on the other side, we could be saying, “If you don’t want to have an abortion, then don’t, but when it comes to guns all of yours should be taken away.”
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7219
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by iambiguous »

commonsense wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 8:53 pm
iambiguous wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 7:54 pm
commonsense wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 7:30 pm Has anyone noticed this?

“If you’re opposed to having guns or abortions, then don’t have any. But don’t tell me not to have guns or abortions.”

The language is the same for both controversies.
The "for all practical purposes" problem with this is that when it comes to guns, the henrys of the world will nod in agreement:

"You don't want to own bazookas or tanks or grenades or mortar rounds or claymore mines, or artillery pieces, then don't."

But when it comes to abortions, if others who aren't them want to perform or to have one, then they should be arrested, charged with first degree premeditated murder and, if tried and convicted, sent to death row.

At least in Texas.
That’s what I’m saying. And on the other side, we could be saying, “If you don’t want to have an abortion, then don’t, but when it comes to guns all of yours should be taken away.”
No doubt about it: there's a left-wing/liberal and a right-wing/conservative rendition of it.

It's like the conservatives bitching about liberals adopting a "politically correct" stance, as though they don't have their own rendition of that.

Of course, being "fractured and fragmented" as "I" am, that doesn't apply to me. Other than in terms of the admitted political prejudices that I came to espouse over the years.
commonsense
Posts: 5115
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by commonsense »

iambiguous wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 9:45 pm
Of course, being "fractured and fragmented" as "I" am, that doesn't apply to me. Other than in terms of the admitted political prejudices that I came to espouse over the years.
You lost me here.

Is there any particular reason you characterized yourself as fractured and fragmented?

Why have you enclosed the I in quotes? Are you saying “so called”?

What is it that doesn’t apply to you?

Somehow I feel I’m making much ado about nothing. I guess any clarification will do.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Gun Control

Post by henry quirk »

commonsense wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 7:30 pm“If you’re opposed to having guns or abortions, then don’t have any. But don’t tell me not to have guns or abortions.”
Let's recast it a little...

If you’re opposed to having property or killing babies, then don’t. But don’t tell me not to have property or kill babies.

You see the problem?

Probably not.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Gun Control

Post by henry quirk »

Sculptor wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 5:51 pm
henry quirk wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 3:07 pm
Sculptor wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 11:23 pmThe idea that guns are needed to "check the gummint" is the dumbest most stupid myth in the whole debate, What a bunch of shite.
8B68B616-1133-41AE-BFB6-B95C0CF868A0.jpeg

Gosh. Thank you for confirming my point.
You're very welcome. When, if, the shit hits the fan it won't be The State that's the problem (cuz if the shit hits the fan that means The State has already collapsed). No, here's an example, from yesterday, of a possible tomorrow...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xWMj-mFUDGA
commonsense
Posts: 5115
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by commonsense »

henry quirk wrote: Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:31 am
commonsense wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 7:30 pm“If you’re opposed to having guns or abortions, then don’t have any. But don’t tell me not to have guns or abortions.”
Let's recast it a little...

If you’re opposed to having property or killing babies, then don’t. But don’t tell me not to have property or kill babies.

You see the problem?

Probably not.
It was meant to be an exercise in logic, not in ethics. But since you bring it up, I’ll give you another version:

If you’re opposed to murdering children or destroying women’s lives, then don’t murder children or destroy women’s lives.

I see the point you made by recasting it in terms of property v babies, but I wonder if you caught my point that the pro guns camp and the pro lifers are using the same skeleton to hang their arguments on.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Gun Control

Post by henry quirk »

I wonder if you caught my point that the pro guns camp and the pro lifers are using the same skeleton to hang their arguments on
Pro-choicers, you mean.

I get it, but your point is dull. They use the same skeleton to say vastly different things.

If you don't want a gun, don't have one, but don't tell me I can't have one.

If you don't want an abortion, don't have one, but don't tell me I can't have one.

These are two completely different lines.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8535
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Sculptor »

henry quirk wrote: Sat Aug 06, 2022 1:24 am
Sculptor wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 5:51 pm
henry quirk wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 3:07 pm

8B68B616-1133-41AE-BFB6-B95C0CF868A0.jpeg

Gosh. Thank you for confirming my point.
You're very welcome. When, if, the shit hits the fan it won't be The State that's the problem (cuz if the shit hits the fan that means The State has already collapsed). No, here's an example, from yesterday, of a possible tomorrow...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xWMj-mFUDGA
This happens in America BECAUSE people have guns, you fuckwit.

I cannot express just how wrong you are. That field is too vast to explain.
Post Reply