Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Contractor
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 06:06pm PT
|
I honestly could go in and tear down MB's lengthy argument piece by piece and I may- or I could go upstairs right now, take a little pipe hit and daydream about that forest trail I'm working on to a hidden fist crack- stand by...
|
|
rick d
climber
ol pueblo, az
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 09:06pm PT
|
aspendougy wrote
"Private citizens are not allowed to own artillery, grenades, or nuclear weapons, don't know why people are so ga-ga about guns. "
Sorry but you are wrong. There are a number of destructive devices including 3" and 5" naval deck guns, 105mm howitzers, and 90mm canons that private US citizens can own, possess and fire. I have seen the 90mm fired (see http://www.armamentsales.com/videos.htm);.
I shot the 3" near Globe myself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZQpR888QuU
There are 180,000 fully automatic weapons that can be bought and sold to private parties on a form 4 (https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/form/form-4-application-tax-paid-transfer-and-registration-firearm-atf-form-53204); ranging from mac submachine guns to a fully automatic Bofors 40mm gun.
I believe there also to be some grenades in the registry but at $200 tax stamp each they are a waste to throw.
You dont have to be ga ga about guns but dont be an ass to those who use them. Your stats about offshore crime are also disputed. Across the globe there are bad people who do mean things with many weapons including money.
***More important, Geoff was a friend and we always spoke at length whenever I came back to Carderock and it is a tragic loss that he was killed by a fellow climber he considered a friend.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 09:06pm PT
|
So will DiPaolo be killed in prison?
Did he kill anyone while awaiting plea bargaining?
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 09:35pm PT
|
'regulation' guaranteed by the constitution. "Well Regulated".
First, you mistakenly call a "guarantee" what is really the antecedent of a conditional.
Second, "well regulated" doesn't mean what you say it does. "Regulated" in that day meant "trained," and the idea was that a "gun culture" would ensure that the everyday person would be comfortable and competent with firearms, so that the everyday person could be called into service as necessary for national defense (there was not supposed to be a professional, standing military as we know it today).
Finally, the 2nd amendment does not grant any right; it refers to and presumes the preexistence of the right of self-defense, which implies the right to bear arms.
So, the "guarantee" you get from the 2nd is that the everyday person is well-versed in the usage of firearms for their own defense and the defense of the nation. Sounds good to me!
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 09:38pm PT
|
I honestly could go in and tear down MB's lengthy argument piece by piece
Impressive bravado. LOL
Okay, why don't you start with the Australian stats? We're not talking about knife wounds that weren't fatal. The cited stats included only deaths... "mass murder." You know, as many of them in a comparable period before and after the infamously ineffective gun-ban that the left keeps citing as "how to do it." Yup, just a shifting of chosen implement, and it turns out that fire is pretty effective after all.
|
|
Flip Flop
climber
Earth Planet, Universe
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 10:17pm PT
|
And Mad Bolters fans go wild with cheers.
Chirp chirp
120 IQ tops.
(Hey genius, if you're holed up in your house and I've got a tank of gas then who you gonna call?) ( your philosophy is one of force but the aggressor always has the advantage. Cmon genius? Start the synapses. Show us your intellect)
|
|
Contractor
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 10:44pm PT
|
Mad Bolter- I see your love for statistics. I also see how you like to confine debate to the statistics of your choosing.
If we're going to study the gun debate through statistics, let's move to the most definable and contrasting circumstances related to gun ownership. This will yield the most definitive results for comparative analysis.
The United States- Highest gun ownership per capita in the world at 112 guns per 100 people.
United Kingdom- 6.6 guns per 100 people, ranked 82nd lowest per capita.
The US had 30 times more gun murders per capita than the UK in 2012.
Sorry Madbolter, I like my statistics better than yours.
Oh, and please read on...
Mass shootings: There were 372 mass shootings in the US in 2015, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker, which catalogues such incidents. A mass shooting is defined as a single shooting incident which kills or injures four or more people, including the assailant.
Source: Mass Shooting Tracker
School shootings: There were 64 school shootings in 2015, according to a dedicated campaign group set up in the wake of the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre in Connecticut in 2012. Those figures include occasions when a gun was fired but no-one was hurt.
Source: Everytown for Gun SafetyResearch
All shootings: Some 13,286 people were killed in the US by firearms in 2015, according to the Gun Violence Archive, and 26,819 people were injured [those figures exclude suicide]. Those figures are likely to rise by several hundred, once incidents in the final week of the year are counted.
Source: Gun Violence Archive
How the US compares: The number of gun murders per capita in the US in 2012 - the most recent year for comparable statistics - was nearly 30 times that in the UK, at 2.9 per 100,000 compared with just 0.1.
Of all the murders in the US in 2012, 60% were by firearm compared with 31% in Canada, 18.2% in Australia, and just 10% in the UK.
Source: UNODC.
Homicide rate graphic
The home front: So many people die annually from gunfire in the US that the death toll between 1968 and 2011 eclipses all wars ever fought by the country. According to research by Politifact, there were about 1.4 million firearm deaths in that period, compared with 1.2 million US deaths in every conflict from the War of Independence to Iraq.
Source: Politifact.
Total number of guns: No official figure exists but there are thought to be about 300 million in the US, held by about a third of the population. That is nearly enough guns for every man, woman and child in the country.
The NRA: The right to own guns is regarded by many as enshrined in the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, and fiercely defended by lobby groups such as the National Rifle Association, which boasted that its membership surged to around five million in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook school shooting.
Gun violence and terrorism: The US spends more than a trillion dollars per year defending itself against terrorism, which kills a tiny fraction of the number of people killed by ordinary gun crime.
According to figures from the US Department of Justice and the Council on Foreign Affairs, 11,385 people died on average annually in firearm incidents in the US between 2001 and 2011.
In the same period, an average of 517 people were killed annually in terror-related incidents. Removing 2001, when 9/11 occurred, from the calculation produces an annual average of just 31.
It's coming-
The...
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 10:49pm PT
|
Would you be as Libertarian Richard if you didn't want to bear arms but your government made it a legal obligation to do so ?
With my IQ of merely 120 (tops), I don't follow your question. Or perhaps you don't follow what "libertarian" means. I'm not sure.
For the government to legitimately issue any "legal obligations," it has to demonstrate that such obligations fit within its enumerated powers and that it is not violating negative rights in the process. There could well be situations (such as actual defense of the nation, and I'm not talking about foreign entanglements or "police actions") in which a "draft" can be legitimate. I can be both "libertarian" and agree with principled force of government.
The problem most of your guys have is that you conflate legitimate force with ALL force, and during our lifetimes the vast, vast majority of governmental force has not been legitimate.
|
|
Flip Flop
climber
Earth Planet, Universe
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 10:54pm PT
|
You make retarded proclamations. Full of yourself, much? In truth, the vast majority of government force ( call it work as defined by science) has been collaborative and cooperative.
You're a scared child crawling under his desk with a pop gun. Grow up chicken sh#t.
|
|
Todd Eastman
climber
Bellingham, WA
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 10:56pm PT
|
MBter, you took the wrong turn in the worm hole...
... call for rescue when ready..
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 10:56pm PT
|
your philosophy is one of force
You are wildly confused if you think that my philosophy is one of force.
I'm one of the very few on the taco stand that is not about force!
You guys want to force all sorts of things, when I prefer to be (particularly by the feds) left pretty much alone. You are the ones wanting to force everybody to conform to your positions, while my philosophy is literally the opposite of force!
You want to smoke, drink, do drugs, do prostitutes, gamble, or any other vice? More power to you! Doesn't violate any of my rights; have at it.
Wanna have (or support) abortions? More power to you. Doesn't violate ANYBODY'S rights that I know of; have at it.
Wanna not have a gun? More power to you. Have a gun? More power to you.
Wanna butt-ram another guy? More power to you. Lesbian, trans, whatever. I don't care. Doesn't violate any of my negative rights. More power to you.
You name it, and unless it violates negative rights (and most behaviors don't), I encourage you to do what you will!
YOU guys are the ones cherry-picking what government must demand and prohibit to fit your particular preferences, not me.
So YOU guys are the ones that are all about using governmental FORCE to get your way, not me.
but the aggressor always has the advantage
LOL.... If you are convinced of that, you will certainly be the one to start a fight. But we'll see if you can finish it as the last man standing.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 11:07pm PT
|
I like my statistics better than yours.
Of course you do, but you're shifting the argument.
You started out talking about other countries, and many on these threads cite Australian gun-control as "the way." So, I pointed out, just as I said, that if you can manage to take away a lot of guns, people still commit mass-murder; they just use other implements.
It was my only point regarding the statistics cited, and the point has strong empirical support in other countries that have tried it.
Unless you can remove the violent mindset that had bred in this nation for many, many decades, then you'll have to eliminate guns (not just reduce their quantity) to have any measurable effect. And even if you could eliminate guns, the same sorts of people would just choose other implements (fire being particularly effective) to kill others.
Instead of drive-by shootings, you'd just get drive-by Molotov cocktails.
The problem in this nation is not the number of guns, as the vast, vast majority of gun owners are law-abiding citizens who will never misuse (or even have an accident) with their guns. "The problem" that grabs headlines are the edge-cases that are the tiny minority.
In typical liberal fashion, you are trying to solve entirely the wrong problem, and your "solution" is to penalize the vast majority for the evils of the tiny few.
Look, you are NOT going to eliminate guns in this nation. And anything short of that solves nothing (and won't even have a statistically significant effect). So, why don't you think about the actual nature of the problem, which is not the chosen implement, so that you can devote efforts where they actually might do some good?
You cannot prohibit your way to utopia, safety, or security.
|
|
Flip Flop
climber
Earth Planet, Universe
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 11:07pm PT
|
Is that a wimpy call-out?
You've never been in a fight or you wouldn't be such a wuss. Typical conservatard, would rather shoot an innocent kid than take a punch like a man.
You're a caps and exclamation point pussy.
My comment about the aggressor versus the defender is based on military theory. No amount of guns will protect your little prefab castle from a middling siege. All your armaments are useless against a few jugs of petrol.
Tell me you've got someone in your life that doesn't just tolerate you. You're a mad and close minded sophist.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 11:17pm PT
|
Regarding your list of stats, they've been cited in countless ways and times by people just like you on various threads. They all suffer from a few basic problems:
1) They are comparing relatively small, relatively culturally homogeneous countries with the USA, which is not a small nor culturally homogeneous society.
2) They are comparing governments that are constitutionally much freer to infringe on the negative rights of their citizens in order to achieve the goals of the "masterminds." That's fine... for them, and if you want that sort of government, then you should move to one of those countries. Our nation was not supposed to be anything like them.
3) They are comparing societies that have been around much, much longer than the USA and have settled into cultural norms that are almost universally adopted. By contrast, the US is a fairly young nation that has grown incredibly rapidly and without a corresponding settling-in regarding cultural norms.
4) They are comparing societies that during the lifetime of the US have been relatively non-violent by comparison to the US that violently took its place in the world. Violence is embedded in the American mindset in ways that it simply is not in the other compared societies.
5) The US has bred pockets of violence in a few inner-cities that do not exist in the comparative countries. (See 1.) If you take the top five most violent cities in the US out of the US statistics, then the US rates suddenly drop to the "norms" cited in the comparative countries. So, "the problem" is not a "US" problem but is instead concentrated in a very few "hot spots" that are not found in the comparative countries.
There is more, but this is becoming another "wall of text."
"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." Of course you like yours better than mine. That's the nature of statistics!
But I'm not attempting to use MY stats to violate any of your rights, while you are depending upon yours as "justification" to attempt to violate mine.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 11:26pm PT
|
Is that a wimpy call-out?
LOL... just wow!
You strike me as exactly the sort of aggressor that is why America will always be a violent place compared to "more civilized" nations.
You "argue" with insults, attempting to out-aggressive your "opponent."
You've never been in a fight or you wouldn't be such a wuss.
Wrong. And "wuss"? Are you serious? LOL
Typical conservatard
Again, flat-wrong. I'm the farthest thing from a conservative. Your ignorance is palpable.
would rather shoot an innocent kid than take a punch like a man.
Seriously, get a grip. And if you'd like to meet somewhere and trade punches to see who can take it like a man, I'm game. I'm in the Denver area. Drop by sometime. I'm sure we can find a nice, quiet place to play.
You're a caps and exclamation point pussy.
More insults. Reasonable people will take this as evidence that "the aggressor" does not "always have the advantage."
My comment about the aggressor versus the defender is based on military theory. No amount of guns will protect your little prefab castle from a middling siege.
Your cherry-picked subset of "theory." Not starting a fight doesn't mean you just sit on your ass and wait for the aggressor to take you out! LOL
Wow.
All your armaments are useless against a few jugs of petrol.
Are you serious? I mean, really. You have to be trolling.
Tell me you've got someone in your life that doesn't just tolerate you.
Well, by definition somebody that just doesn't tolerate me isn't going to be "in my life." Duh.
You're a mad and close minded sophist.
LOL
ROFL
At least I try to argue, which is the necessary condition for sophistry. You just devolve into insults, which is even more close-minded.
Pot calling kettle.
|
|
Contractor
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2016 - 11:36pm PT
|
Did someone say pot?
|
|
Flip Flop
climber
Earth Planet, Universe
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2016 - 06:38am PT
|
Sophistry is false by definition.
And there you are.
( I don't debate with gun nuts. I just mock them)
9-11, every terrorist attack and every mass killing prove my point that the aggressor always has the benefit of surprise, timing and position. You're just a blabber mouth.
"“Go, prick thy face, and over-red thy fear, Thou lily-liver’d boy.”- MacBeth (that's a Shakespearean insult.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2016 - 07:52am PT
|
Prohibitions which for the most part work. Add your own.
In California one is prohibited from driving a car without a valid license, insurance and registration. Is it violated? Most certainly.
How often? I'm sure someone can dredge up the stats.
Who does it benefit? Most certainly insurance compainies. but also people who get get by other cars.
|
|
overwatch
climber
Arizona
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2016 - 07:55am PT
|
Shakespeare's insults are the s. h. i. t! Saved for future use, thanks
|
|
brotherbbock
climber
Alta Loma, CA
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2016 - 08:02am PT
|
Stoopid punk.
Killing someone more than double his age.
These a-holes have no respect nowadays.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!