Defend the Second Amendment!

why would i want to defend what is illogical on the face of it?

the right to rob the freedom of others results in there being less freedom, not more.

i think people should have the 'right' to posses whatever they can make or grow themselves,
but not to buy, sell or mass produce, what are essentially and primarily instruments of harm and destruction.

 

Old

Have you even tried to look for it? I mean you seem to be saying you have based your viewpoint (and solution) on it?

But while you look how about –

Does Teaching Kids to Shoot Guns Make Them Safer?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/teaching-kids-shoot-guns-make-safer/story?id=23916846

But many of your replies are what I’d call ‘whatever’ replies, basically brush offs or misdirections.

They are often evasive not addressing what’s been said but attacking the way the question is asked or phrased or presented, or claiming that something has not been said forcing us to repeat it only then to have you reply complaining we repeat stuff (while still not addressing it), you accuse us of misdemeanors (you never substantiate) and you force us to go round in circles while all the time whining that we are going in circles – I mean man it is hilarious the lengths you seem willing to go to try and shut down the debate or stop it moving on.

These are open forums if you wish to have a private conversation - where others cannot join in - then use the PM system. Saying things here is like having a conversation at a table in a bar with lots of other people that are also part of that conversation and can and will join in. The PM system is like getting a private booth.

The duel thing was a bit of a rhetorical question, I mean any rational person is going to choose the gun because they know rationally that it is the superior and more effective weapon, hence the saying ‘bringing a knife to a gunfight’ to mean you haven’t got the firepower.

You’ve accused me of this kind of stuff before but whenever asked for evidence you seem unable to supply it - again this just seems like yet another form of brush off, another attacking another supposed failing to try and misdirect people from noticing that you having actually addressed anything.

 

Old

So let us try and get this clear, so we can try and move on -

You think a knife is as effective a weapon as a gun.

But large numbers of homicides (suicides and fatal accidents) are gun related.

So you think the problem (the main one or one of them?) is that children just don’t learn about gun safety the way they learn about knife safety. Kids get to know that knives are dangerous by been told and through experience but kids don’t understand how dangerous a gun can be.

So your solution to the large number of gun related deaths is to teach every child in the US (from kindergarten age up) to be experienced in the handling and shooting guns so they will ‘respect’ them

You believe that teaching all children to shoot will lower the levels of gun related homicides (suicides and fatal accidents) in the US, because those children will be respectful of guns and grow up to know how dangerous guns can be.

Is that basically your stance?

 

Do I understand you correctly, are you saying people should not have have the right to own anything that uses electricity, no TVs, radios, phones or even lights not even coal lamps or flash lights. Obviously no cars, really no vehicles at all, not even a skate board. Most people can not afford to own enough land to grow their own food let alone grow trees for handles for their tools. So it seems that you are saying that the majority of people do not even have the "right" to own the food they eat.

 

Is there really any need for these kinds of comments? They do not address the OP and only serve to try and antagonize and you know it, so why do it? And yes I have looked and even emailed a gun advocate and he recommend checking out the National Shooting Sports Foundation but I still have not found the information I mentioned.

No, I merely mentioned it as a possible solution.

Thank you for the article, it was interesting. Perhaps you noticed, like I did, that although it spoke of children being taught gun safety and how to shoot guns, it quickly turned to talking about youthful gun accidents without even bothering to ask the question, had any of those youths involved in these gun accidents been trained in gun safety and how to shoot.

This is pretty much your subjective opinion isn't it and thus may be only in your mind.

Interestingly, it is you that has spent several posts talking about my one time use of the word "whatever" and that to me seems like the "hilarious lengths you seem willing to go to try and shut down the debate or stop it moving on".

Thanx for the "information"? But even in a "bar" if something is said to someone other than you, whereas it is fine to interrupt and make a comment, it is poor etiquette to interrupt and act like the comment was directed to you.

Talking about brush offs or misdirections and being evasive and not addressing what’s been said. I answered this Illustration with one of my own which I couldn't help but notice you didn't bother to address. It pointed out that ofttimes what is a "superior and more effective weapon" depends on the circumstances and not solely on the weapon in question.

Can't accept a compliment I see, I'll try to control myself in the future.

 

Okay.

Depending on circumstances, yes.

Yes but there could be any number of reasons for that other than the one you are implying.

Yes, I believe that could be one of the problems.

Not the solution but a part of the solution, yes.

In reality, without actually doing so or at least better statistics of gun related homicides (suicides and fatal accidents) to people who have been trained in gun safety, it is difficult to say for sure but yes, I think it could be part of the solution.

Yes.

 

Old

[SIZE=11pt]Good so you are looking for it, since it would be interesting to look at, I’d help if you can give me anything else you can remember? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]So yes you have based a stance and possible solution on it?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]It was interesting watching the kids who’d been taught not to touch guns and always get an adult then going on to play with the guns they found. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]And the example about the youthful gun accident was firmly in the section about guns not been locked away safely from kids (did you miss that?) and that while 14 states do have laws saying guns must be locked away (which studies say reduce accidental gun deaths amongst kids) most states don't - oh and that the NRA opposes such laws. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]LOL in the right circumstances a pillow or paper clip can be an effective weapon and we can all construct some fiction to make those the best (or only) option.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]But we have always been talking about in general not in some murder mystery circumstance, I mean for general protection or for committing say a holdup with the choice between a pillow, paperclip, knife or gun I think most people would pick the gun. [/SIZE]


Your stance doesn’t seem rational, that in effect you wouldn’t mind if you got the paperclip for general protection, arguing that in the right circumstances it was still an effective and lethal weapon.

 

[SIZE=11pt]Old [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]You think a knife is as effective a weapon as a gun. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]And as said in the right circumstances a paper clip could be an effective weapon but in general you are convinced that a knife is as effective a weapon as a gun, is that correct? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt][edit] and when comparing knives and guns it has always been in general, as a whole and I thought that was clear. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]* [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]But large numbers of homicides (suicides and fatal accidents) are gun related. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]But the one you are putting forward at the moment is that people are just not trained enough in the use of guns, is that correct? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]So your solution to the large number of gun related deaths is to teach every child in the US (from kindergarten age up) to be experienced in the handling and shooting guns so they will ‘respect’ them.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]But as you go on to say you have nothing to back this up it’s just a belief based on the belief that knives are just as effective weapons as guns and there are not as many knife related deaths as gun related one - is that correct? [/SIZE]

 

Thanx, it's kind of vague but I seem to remember it had to do with school shootings and that none of the shooters had been in a youth shooting program. But like I've said before; that's one of the problems with being a voracious reader with a poor memory, you remember what you read but have no idea where or when.

Honestly, when I started discussing these things I didn't really have a stance and I still don't have anything written in stone but there are some things like youth shooting and safety training that seems to make sense.

Yes, I agree but they were not the ones being trained at the beginning of the video. I think there is a difference between just watching a video and being told not to do something and the actual intensive hands on training shown at the beginning of the video.

No, I did not miss that but did you notice in the beginning of the video with those that went though the shooting school, even though the father said he trusted his daughter to handle a gun properly, the gun were kept in a safe. Also that in the shooting death that was mentioned there was no mention that that youth had ever been to any type of intensive shooting and safety training.

Kind of like your constructed fiction of a duel between a gun and a knife?

All things being equal probably so but we not taking about all things being equal. But people still use knives to kill other people, why do they do that and not just use a gun. I had a friend held up with a broken bottle, why didn't he use a gun, maybe he couldn't afford one or perhaps the broken bottle was just handy, who knows?

Tell that to my nephew, who works in the "bad part of town", he carries a knife for protection and not a "super lethal, highly deadly, put a knife to shame" gun and that seems rational to me.

 

Yes they are.

Yes that is one possible reason for the number of gun related homicides that I have mentioned?

One possible solution, yes.

In a way but my question is more about the fact that there is probably over 1000 knives to one gun in the US and a lethal knife is available to every man women and child whereas guns are not, so why are there more gun homicides than knife homicides? Are guns really over a thousand times more lethal than a knife? To me it just seems like there might be another reason involved than just how much more lethal than knives are than Guns.

Also it is true, that there have not been any studies conducted on youth gun training, at least not that I'm aware of and thus I can only claim it as a possible partial solution to the problem.

 

Old

[SIZE=11pt][/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]This is unclear - are you saying you think guns in general are more effective or not? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt][/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]I don’t think anyone is saying that knives can’t kill it’s just that guns are much more effective at killing people that guns. [/SIZE]

So are you saying you believe in general that guns are more effective as weapons and at killing than knives?

 

Old

[SIZE=11pt][/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]But America is not the only place where such entertainment is watched (or in the case of games played). So while this might be a factor in violent behavior (although I believe nothing has been shown conclusively) it would not seem to account for the US’s higher homicide rates. [/SIZE]

 

Unclear? What is "unclear" about saying the effectiveness of a weapon often depends on circumstances.

No matter how effective a gun may be people survive gun shots all the time and no matter how ineffective knives may be people can die from knife wounds.

I really don't see what the point of trying to argue over what weapon is more effective than another is.

This really has nothing to do with the comment you seem to be addressing it to.

 

First, are you accounting for America's seemingly endless fascination with such entertainment which does not seem to be as prevalent in other countries?

And second, I was not saying that entertainment is the "only" reason for the US’s higher homicide rates but that it could be a factor in it.

Also, if you don't mind, please stop acting like the US’s higher homicide rates is a simple problem with only one possible contributing factor and only one possible solution.

 

[SIZE=11pt]Old[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]This is unclear - are you saying you think guns in general are more effective or not? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Another brush off – is it in general[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Another misdirection – isn’t relevant to the question asked. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]I don’t think anyone is saying that knives can’t kill it’s just that guns are much more effective at killing people that guns. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Another brush off – it’s been explained many times – again do we have to repeat it again forcing us to go in circles? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]So are you saying you believe in general that guns are more effective as weapons and at killing than knives?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Another misdirection – it does - in the comment you suggested you did think guns were in general more efficient - only that in your opinion they were not a “a thousand times more lethal than a knife”.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]But America is not the only place where such entertainment is watched (or in the case of games played). So while this might be a factor in violent behavior (although I believe nothing has been shown conclusively) it would not seem to account for the US’s higher homicide rates. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Have you been to other countries? [/SIZE]


[SIZE=11pt]*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Another misdirection – I never even suggested you did think it was the ‘only’ reason. [/SIZE]

Another misdirection – I have never ever suggested it has a simple solution and have written at length and in detail about the need for a holistic approach and put forward multiple things I think could help [SIZE=11pt]– all you seem to want to do is obfuscate. [/SIZE]

 

Old

As I’ve said before you don’t seem interested in an honest debate you are often evasive not addressing what’s been said but attacking the way the question is asked or phrased or presented, or claiming that something has not been said forcing us to repeat it only then to have you reply complaining we repeat stuff (while still not addressing it), you accuse us of misdemeanors and nitpick over wording or suggest things that are untrue and you force us to go round in circles while all the time whining that we are going in circles – as said it is hilarious the lengths you seem willing to go to try and shut down the debate or stop it moving on.

 

Meagain

[SIZE=11pt][/SIZE]

The fact that we have to keep repeating that we are not talking about a complete ban is systematic of the problem because the pro-gun lobby seem to see any regulation as inevitably leading to a complete ban and so the default reaction seems to be to oppose anything, accusing anyone suggesting regulation as wanting a ‘complete ban’.

So we end up going in circles explaining ourselves over and over – it comes across as a delaying tactic so the issues are not properly addressed.

As I’ve said before often the stances taken don’t seem logical or rational - sometimes there seems to be a denial that there is a even a problem – sometimes there is acknowledgement of a problem but that guns are in no way a factor in the high numbers of gun related deaths and some seemingly suggesting that the situation has to be accepted as the price for some mythical American sense of ‘freedom’

The rationally obvious becomes the contentious, the prudent becomes the dangerous and the waters are mudded.

For example we get things like someone seemingly denying over several pages that in general a gun is a more effective weapon than a knife.

To any rational person that would be a given but….

 

Interestingly every comment I made was my answer to the question you asked and on the another hand your posts are barely even an attempt to deal with those answers. So who here is actually using misdirection.

Things like asking if I've ever been to other countries? Yes I have but what does that to with anything. It certainly isn't an answer to to my question "are you accounting for America's seemingly endless fascination with such entertainment which does not seem to be as prevalent in other countries?". So here is using misdirection?

And things like this; "[SIZE=11pt]I never even suggested you did think it was the ‘only’ reason." [/SIZE]"I have never ever suggested it has a simple solution and have written at length and in detail about the need for a holistic approach and put forward multiple things I think could help" whereas they may be true, fly in the face of comments like this; "But the one you are putting forward at the moment is that people are just not trained enough in the use of guns, is that correct?" "So your solution to the large number of gun related deaths is to teach every child in the US (from kindergarten age up) to be experienced in the handling and shooting guns so they will ‘respect’ them.", which talk about not "one of my solutions" plural but "the one" and "your solution" which implies that it was what I thought was the only solution, again who is using misdirection?

If you can't be more honest in the discussion perhaps you should take a break from the discussion and come when you can.

 

Old

LOL and why should I be surprised that you reply with yet more misdirection and brush offs, and yet more false accusations.

[SIZE=11pt]- Are you saying you think guns in general terms are more effective than knives or not? [/SIZE]-