Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Elitist Hypocrite
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
eeyrjmr
n00b
n00b


Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 38

PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 10:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso wrote:
Still using far too many words to just say "I was wrong"

Stop changing the discussion. Your stance was Obama is a Hypocrite for having armed personnel at his childrens school while simultaneously implying their view is that is something you shouldn't have. Yet the evidence is the Federal government will support any school that chooses to. You need to stop being so verbose and consistantly using the wrong words when "I was wrong" is all that is required.


Now if you want to argue about the finer points of the 2nd amendment and The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. then sure.
When that was written the gun technology at the time was manual loaded, single shot firearms, I would like to see someone try to commit a school massacre with one of them... The bayonet will cause more people injury . I don't see my right to own one of those infringed at all or even hinted at.

The President has, as you quoted, stated he would never come after your handguns so your right to bear arms is not infringed.
Now if you want to go full retard and extrapolate arms then you can't just stop where it is convinient for your arguement if you want to hold to the letter of the 2nd amendment "Right to bear arms"
So that means we all have a right to own a nuclear bomb, or a chemical weapon, or a cruise missile! OMG! my right to own one is a violation of the 2nd amendment!!!! Obama has denied me the right to bear arms.
Wake up and stop making yourself look foolish.

At the other end of the scales "arms" actually encompasses swords. Is your right to own a sword infringed? no so the 2nd amendment is satified, to the letter of the law, by actually banning all guns.


Or you can accept that there is a 3 tier government system, a system with Republican'ts and Democrats plus the supreme court & its judges who's job is to interpret the constitution and its amendments to ensure the government as whole does not violate it, something you are not capable of doing competently as demonstrated by your continued inability to just say "I was wrong" here rather than sitting on Capitol Hill
_________________
-- No pixels were harmed in the making of this post --


Last edited by eeyrjmr on Thu Jan 17, 2013 12:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
viperlin
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 1316
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
There was never a president or politician gunned down in The US.

wait....what? wasn't lincoln shot in washington?
http://i.imgur.com/MRLDM.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikpuppy
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 34
Location: Central Coast, NSW

PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

viperlin wrote:
Quote:
There was never a president or politician gunned down in The US.

wait....what? wasn't lincoln shot in washington?
http://i.imgur.com/MRLDM.gif

JFK? Gabrielle Giffords? I am sure there are more. The comment was either sarcastic or idiotic.
Here's a link from the ultra reliable source, wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinated_American_politicians and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress_members_killed_or_wounded_in_office
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It was an unfortunate attempt at sarcasm, made difficult to detect by the fact that it's encapsulated in logical fallacy (i.e., he was trying to be sarcastically clever, but it wasn't clever, therefore one naturally questions whether he was attempting to be sarcastic to begin with).

In short, fail. :lol:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso's got a point. Obama's only significant responses to this tragedy seem to be focused on reducing access to assault rifles, and no assault rifle was even used. In other words, Democrats are just using the opportunity to pursue their existing legislative agenda, paying no attention whatsoever to the actual problem. They've barely paid lip service to the general issue of violence in culture, and have practically fenced off violence in entertainment as sacred ground (don't want to piss off Hollywood or the TV channels, who have been nicely serving as Outer Party members to the Ministry of Truth).

If the authoritarian leftists had any balls, they insist that civilians only be allowed to use bolt-action, manually-fed, single-round firearms. But they don't have any balls (the people with guns would NEVER tolerate this, even if the majority of the population supported it), therefore, this is all nothing but political theater and populist grand-standing, and it won't make any difference at all to anything. We've had these same bans before, and they didn't make any difference then either.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
viperlin
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 1316
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

while i can say nothing about guns based on your last post. violence in entertainment? lol? really? is that more sarcasm

surely if you think people are too dumb to understand or be trusted with fiction (hollywood being tame tame censored fiction too) you can't possibly be suggesting the same people are allowed rifles
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

viperlin wrote:
while i can say nothing about guns based on your last post. violence in entertainment? lol? really? is that more sarcasm

surely if you think people are too dumb to understand or be trusted with fiction (hollywood being tame tame censored fiction too) you can't possibly be suggesting the same people are allowed rifles

It's a small part of a general culture of glorification of mass killing. It may be related. But rather than hear you criticize the ideas of others, let's hear your ideas: what do you believe the reasons are why incidents such as this (i.e., random mass killings) almost never used to occur but are now common?

I can only speculate what the real reasons are, but it certainly has nothing to do with the availability of firearms (or even the availability of high-capacity or "assault-style" firearms). If you can't answer that question, then you can't possibly address the problem.

So what's your answer?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
viperlin
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 1316
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

almost never used to occur? - well that's not true

your logic is strange, i never tried addressing the problem, only the strange ideas people come up with while they attempt to address the problem, if you can't see how getting a 60+ killcount with a knife is harder than with a gun, you can't possibly address the problem either

personally i blame the people truly responsible, the killer and his or her own individual problems or choices, tools just increase or decrease efficiency depending on the situation

who am i to tell people they can't go and kill a bunch of people, it's a free country right?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jonnevers
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 02 Jan 2003
Posts: 1592
Location: Gentoo64 land

PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
So saying, "why don't you blah blah let the market blah blah..." is kind of asinine. What you should be saying is "Hey, wait a minute... we don't need populist demagogue authoritarians jumping on the opportunity to grand-stand and slip their authoritarianism an inch deeper in our collective ass; we need to give communities and schools a chance to react to this in a way that makes sense and will actually make a difference."

ok, i certainly wasn't getting into all the stuff in the latter sentence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

viperlin wrote:
almost never used to occur? - well that's not true

your logic is strange, i never tried addressing the problem, only the strange ideas people come up with while they attempt to address the problem, if you can't see how getting a 60+ killcount with a knife is harder than with a gun, you can't possibly address the problem either

personally i blame the people truly responsible, the killer and his or her own individual problems or choices, tools just increase or decrease efficiency depending on the situation

who am i to tell people they can't go and kill a bunch of people, it's a free country right?

Stop quibbling, hemming and hawing, and just answer the question. I'll even rephrase it for you:

What do you believe the reasons are why incidents such as this (i.e., random mass killings) have become far more common than they used to be?


NBC just released the results of a poll (this is NBC now, mind you) saying that the majority of Americans believe that these incidents are more attributable to:

1. Lack of involvement of parents with their children
2. Inadequate mental health care
3. Violent video games

than to anything having to do with firearms.

So, if firearms are not the most proximate cause of the problem, then are we not justified in pointing out that Obama is barking up the wrong tree? He hasn't yet so much as mentioned bad parenting, divorced parents, or otherwise dysfunctional families as being related to the issue, yet the statistics show this is the single most common factor in all these massacres. Whether we want to admit it or not (and I certainly would rather it not be true) violent video games have also been a commonality. Practically of these shooters have been avid players of FPS-style games. Decreased religious beliefs may also be a factor (not that this is a bad thing, but people, especially young people, may have a moral and philosophical vacuum of sorts).

But you feel justified somehow in mocking people who point this out and question the validity of efforts to ban guns as some sort of solution to this problem? :?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
viperlin
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 1316
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i do not believe they have become more common

i truly believe the reasons are down to the people involved - not some random cause that you can just blame and ban like video games which are completely unrelated, none of the listed reasons in the poll are a cause for everybody, it's down to the specific individual, mass killers aren't necessarily mentally ill or neglected or even gamers.

i never said guns cause it - i said they make it a hell of a lot easier to get more kills - something you have yet to refute and completely ignore every time twisting my words.

pizza has also been a "commonality" - therefore pizza causes mass killings? it's just as vague and pointless as blaming video games or guns or bad parenting or religion, or lack of religion.

shooters have been avid players of FPS games = virtual guns can't kill people, ban real life shooting ranges? = still no sense

of course i laugh at silly opinions and arguments, they are funny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 4:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

viperlin wrote:
i do not believe they have become more common

Well, then you're starting from an invalid premise to begin with. While they're not increasing year-over recent year, they have been much more common in the past three decades than before. This year has been particularly bloody, and its come to the forefront of public awareness because this last incident was particularly evocative of emotional response, given that the targets were small children and because, full of confidence following Obama's re-election, leftist authoritarians feel justified in taking a new stand on this pet issue of theirs (disarming the population). If you do your research, you'll see the most identifiable inflection point in the rate of these crimes was after the clock tower sniper gunned down 21 people at UT Austin, and that they've generally been a constant issue since the early 1980s.

viperlin wrote:
i truly believe the reasons are down to the people involved - not some random cause that you can just blame and ban like video games which are completely unrelated, none of the listed reasons in the poll are a cause for everybody, it's down to the specific individual, mass killers aren't necessarily mentally ill or neglected or even gamers.

Why do you say "random cause"? Everything has causes: specific ones. What we're seeing here is a repeated pattern of behavior, and in seeking to identify causes and reduce the behavior, people have noted commonalities. Whether any of them play the root cause or contributing factor is a matter for discussion and study.

viperlin wrote:
i never said guns cause it - i said they make it a hell of a lot easier to get more kills - something you have yet to refute and completely ignore every time twisting my words.

I haven't refuted it because I agree with it. I don't believe I've twisted your words at all. What I would say to this is that there are many ways to get lots of kills. Driving a car into a crowd comes to mind. Just wait 'til that catches on (I predict it will become fashionable in China, where they have no access to guns but have a lot of similar social pain and frustration).

viperlin wrote:
pizza has also been a "commonality" - therefore pizza causes mass killings? it's just as vague and pointless as blaming video games or guns or bad parenting or religion, or lack of religion.

Feel free to explore the hypothesis that pizza is a cause, but I don't think you'll get anywhere, because there's no reason to believe pizza would have a causal relationship with mass killings. The statistics which show a clear correlation between divorced parents and behavioral problems and crime, however, when coupled with the evident family problems of the people who have carried out these recent mass murders, do provide a reason to suspect and investigate a such a causal relationship (not to knee jerk and put all children of divorced parents in kibutzes or in one of Obama's precrime databases, or something, but to discuss and investigate). One need only use one's brain to understand that.

viperlin wrote:
shooters have been avid players of FPS games = virtual guns can't kill people, ban real life shooting ranges? = still no sense

Nobody is suggesting people just knee-jerk and ban something convenient (well, the anti-gun nuts are, but nobody else). The underlying behavioral and social factors must be examined, however, if we are really going to reduce this type of behavior. If we ban guns, the behavior will simply be manifested in some other way, like that bitch who pushed some poor, unsuspecting guy she didn't even know in front of a subway the other day.

viperlin wrote:
of course i laugh at silly opinions and arguments, they are funny

Yes, that's what the populists teach our young, insecure, uneducated lemmings -- if you don't understand it, and you can't make an intelligent argument against it, then just ridicule it. It's hard to talk over somebody laughing, and hopefully other insecure lemmings will join in. The only thing silly here is you making a completely unsubstantiated claim and then asserting that somebody else's well-articulated logic is "random".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
viperlin
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 1316
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 5:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

"While they're not increasing year-over year", i'll just take that as an agreement, maybe we define it differently somehow

you focused on the words "random cause" a little too much but anyway- the only repeated pattern i see is people killing people, the rest seems to vary quite a lot (except the tool used at the moment) and studying it is impossible on an internet forum with no access to medical records, life history or anything substantial to look at.

glad you agree guns are efficient killing tools - giving them less efficient tools would be moderately effective at reducing the kill counts and possibly detaining them before they kill (many) people, no? statistically, yes

you took pizza far too seriously, the statistics also show that far more people with divorced parents all over the world do not go on killing sprees.... back to pizza i guess, one only needs to use ones brain to understand that correlation != causation

and plenty of old secure educated lemmings also find internet slagging matches that achieve nothing other than ego-boners for it's participants funny, saying lemmings doesn't make you sound more intelligent by the way, the "intelligent argument" would still be shot down and dismissed like every other idea or opinion here

banning everything other than long range single shot rifles i couldn't argue with, however, enforcing any kind of gun ban in america is impossible i agree, you can't start with a saturated market and expect making them illegal to work, the other way around it would be effective (how many kids have hundreds of dollars for a crap illegal pistol or the contacts in such a scarce gun economy, especially if it's emotionally spontaneous)

you can never "stop" people wanting to kill people, you can study individual cases and figure out the causes after the incident, you can rarely prevent them, and you can almost never discuss them in a truly informed way

basicly the entire argument is pointless unless talking about a specific case - and even then nobody will have the required information to make an informed decision ... and it will quickly deteriorate into people pushing their political agendas... especially with emotionally charged topics such as this
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 5:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Perhaps, but the public debate has been initiated, policy will follow, and one may choose to simply acquiesce to what others decide or to put one's two cents in.

I think we agree that it's a behavioral issue. You see that as an individual problem (which it is), but I think there are systemic influences of behavior. It's not beyond reason, for example, to think that we as a society might be able to do something to improve parenting skills or create better support networks for children of dysfunctional families.

As to gun bans, I think you overlook the rationale behind the U.S. 2nd Amendment. That's understandable given where you come from. We find Monarchy just as baffling.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
viperlin
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 1316
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 6:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wow, almost nothing to say, except we also find monarchy baffling but can't really do anything about it while the queen is still alive
And i do understand the rationale behind the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment, to shoot the British.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prenj
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
As to gun bans, I think you overlook the rationale behind the U.S. 2nd Amendment. That's understandable given where you come from. We find Monarchy just as baffling.


++

That was allure of US for long time, at least the image of it while I was growing up. All in technicolor too.
It just shows that there is no utopia anywhere, and that Buddha was right about life being a struggle, tho the way is not defined. Do you struggle for your own end, or do you struggle to prop up monarch so that they can look X (where X = monarch thinking they look cute).

You struggle either way, so why not struggle for yourself and those around you. But it's hard.

One thing is for sure, if you don't, you end up being a battery for those on top.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 145

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
I think you overlook the rationale behind the U.S. 2nd Amendment.


What do you think that is?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

viperlin wrote:
wow, almost nothing to say, except we also find monarchy baffling but can't really do anything about it while the queen is still alive

Oh, you wanted to argue more? I'm just saying that some things may make sense in for one nation that do not make sense for another. Don't act like you're letting your monarchy die off, either. I see people already trying to estimate the schedule for coronation of their latest unborn spawn. :lol:

viperlin wrote:
And i do understand the rationale behind the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment, to shoot the British.

Something like that, although one would add "British invaders and terrorists" (like when you guys sailed up the Potomac and burned our capitol. Not very nice, by the way. Although it's not explicitly stated in the Constitution or Amendments, the courts have also inferred from other founding documents and correspondence that the intent was also to ensure the people win any sort of roundheads vs cavaliers conflict, and to acknowledge that no state can provide total protection to each individual and their property, and acknowledge their right to defend themselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
I think you overlook the rationale behind the U.S. 2nd Amendment.


What do you think that is?

Was somebody talking to you, Coppertop?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 145

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So you don't know?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff &> /dev/null :?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 145

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 6:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shame you don't know anything about it. Of course, if you did, it would naturally be wrong - I was hoping we could have a nice little bet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prenj
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
Shame you don't know anything about it. Of course, if you did, it would naturally be wrong - I was hoping we could have a nice little bet.


Are you sure? Are you really sure?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, he's sure.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 145

PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Who wants to bet their avatar against the proposition that the 2nd amendment was motivated by a desire to impose tyrannical rule?

Winner chooses loser's avatar for three weeks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum