Cyberdemon
Register | User Profile | Member List | F.A.Q | Privacy Policy | New Blog | Search Forums | Forums Home
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Misc. > Everything Else > Kentuckids need more dakka
Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]  
Author
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:04. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
myk
volveré y seré millones


Posts: 15137
Registered: 04-02



Naked Snake said:
They come from China or other South American countries, not the United States, that was a deception being pushed by the DoJ.
So you've got the genuine sources as opposed to propaganda from your gun industry?

I can read that about half may come from the US, and the way the weapons get there is principally as arms for the security forces that then make their way to other groups, or are used by security forces who massacre people or that are working for drug lords, which is made worse and augmented by NAFTA policies and a repressive policy on drugs (as demanded by the US).


I also like the completely bullshit line about the gun industry in the US "doing whatever it wants."
I said arms industry, which includes small arms as well as military equipment. I'm saying it more or less owns your country and defines good chunk of its international policy.

By the way, I'm not entirely against arms ownership or use, I'm pointing to ideas that are being used by the industry to sustain the influence I mentioned above, which people hold on to in a naive and self-important manner. Particularly that your guns really protect you against abuse by the State (they don't) or that they make people safer (hardly, they're better for defending property than people).

Old Post 05-16-13 18:37 #
myk is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Gez
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 10709
Registered: 07-07



Quasar said:
The problem is when the state increasingly interjects itself into the parent-child relationship and decides that it is enabled to act as proxy to the parent.

Quite often because the parents keep relinquishing responsibilities and requesting for the state to take care of their children so that they don't have to.

Old Post 05-16-13 19:11 #
Gez is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Csonicgo


Posts: 4403
Registered: 03-04



Quasar said:


Or maybe that it's even illegal to own a firearm if you have a child. Maybe that's what you're aiming for? Now try to tell me that is not an attack on everyone's rights. Bullshit.



Telling little Timmy that he needs a license to shoot (just like he needs to when he drives), even though it'd make 100% sense when it comes to safety, is somehow a bad thing in this case?


You know what's really bullshit? The American mindset of regeneration and purity through violence. Which is all I hear from the NRA, and now straight from their new president! Yay!

I apologize if my right for myself (and my kids) to stay alive gets in the way of the right to potentially cleanse the land.

Old Post 05-17-13 08:20 #
Csonicgo is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
DoomUK
Forum Spammer


Posts: 3838
Registered: 04-04



Quasar said:
passing an unconstitutional law stating that minors cannot carry or fire a weapon

The Second Amendment seriously needs readdressing. It was written in an age when it was intended for drastically different political reasons, and when muskets had little in common with modern firearms.

Since when is a 5-year-old with a modern rifle (albeit small calibre) a "well regulated Militia"?

EDIT: Gez beat me to it, two pages ago. The point stands, though.

EDIT2: In principle, you could teach a 5-year-old to drive a car responsibly, and without killing anyone. Doesn't mean it's a good idea to make it legal.

Last edited by DoomUK on 05-17-13 at 09:04

Old Post 05-17-13 08:48 #
DoomUK is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
GreyGhost
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 8153
Registered: 01-08



Quasar said:
Or maybe that it's even illegal to own a firearm if you have a child. Maybe that's what you're aiming for? Now try to tell me that is not an attack on everyone's rights. Bullshit.
How about requiring firearms and/or ammo to be secured in a locker, so little Timmy can't play with them unsupervised?

As I see it, the situation's little different to leaving medicine or power tools where children can reach them. It's the parent's responsibility to keep hazardous stuff like that out of reach. If they're unwilling, unable or simply too damn lazy to act in their children's best interest, the state should be allowed to intervene. Compulsory sterilization of the parents would be a good first step.

Old Post 05-17-13 09:15 #
GreyGhost is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Quasar
Moderator


Posts: 5763
Registered: 08-00


Intervention where it's required is one thing. Pre-emptive intervention is statism. Declaring that rights should be taken from everyone because a few are irresponsible. You could make that argument about potentially anything that humans do which involves risk. Finance, sex, health care, sports, transportation. It's a slippery slope. You demand more and more government intervention against people you feel are irresponsible, suddenly you find you have more government intervention in your own life too, where you didn't want or need it.

It should not be lost on anyone that "public health" was used as a false justification to suppress Occupy protests. The nanny state is SO concerned for "public health" that there's nothing more important, that could override that argument.

Old Post 05-17-13 18:17 #
Quasar is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Technician
Still no custom title


Posts: 7618
Registered: 08-04



DoomUK said:
The Second Amendment seriously needs readdressing.
No. Ambiguity ensures freedoms and deters tyranny. If some kid's parents are retarded enough to give their child a weapon, that's their fault; they're paying for their mistake with the loss of a child.

Old Post 05-17-13 19:21 #
Technician is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Gez
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 10709
Registered: 07-07


Kids do not have the right to vote, nor to buy and drink alcohol, nor to drive, nor to watch pornography, nor to candidate for public office, nor to put their parents in a retirement home; but removing their right to own and operate guns? That would be going too far.


Quasar said:
Intervention where it's required is one thing. Pre-emptive intervention is statism.

And where do you draw the line between preemption and requirement? That is rather subjective on issues like this.

Should somebody have intervened to prevent the boy from killing his sister? Should nobody have intervened?

Sure, at the core, the problem isn't one of laws. It's one of irresponsible parents.

But this irresponsibility stems from many factors; one of which is the fanatical devotion to gun culture that exists in the USA (where, historically, everybody needed to have some guns at all time to shoot marauding redskins whining about how it was "their" land and lazy niggers trying to dodge their work). No other democracy in the world is so adamantly persuaded that firearms are a necessity for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Old Post 05-17-13 19:48 #
Gez is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Graf Zahl
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 7627
Registered: 01-03


Strange that the only thing many Americans defend with their teeth is the right to own a device that's designed to kill.

I call that insane and frankly, the entire NRA and all their supporters should be placed in a mental institution. These people present a clear and present danger to the safety of society.

Such things as this tragedy simply do not happen in countries with stricter gun laws.

And why is this a part of 'freedom'.?I consider it 'freedom' if I'm not potentially threatened behind every corner by some nutjob with a firearm.

It's sad that fear is such a profound part of American mentality.

Old Post 05-17-13 19:55 #
Graf Zahl is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Gez
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 10709
Registered: 07-07


See, if you had a firearm too, then you could shoot the nutjob before he shoots you! All that you'd need for that to work would be for you to be constantly on a state of paranoid vigilance, watching everybody else for signs of potential nutjobbery. Someone looks like a threat? Shoot him! Someone looks like he's been driven insane by constantly treating everybody else as a threat and might shoot you because he's afraid you'll shoot him first? Shoot him!

This is why an armed society is a polite society, and other platitudes.

Old Post 05-17-13 20:45 #
Gez is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
hex11
Forum Staple


Posts: 2237
Registered: 09-09



Gez said:

Quite often because the parents keep relinquishing responsibilities and requesting for the state to take care of their children so that they don't have to.



Well the parents are products of public school system, so it's no wonder they think it's normal to have the state manage every aspect of their life. It's what they were taught since childhood after all: you show up to class/work on time, you don't question the teacher/boss, you don't think independently, you submit to authority (and it's unthinkable if someone else doesn't). Personal responsibility and independent thought are scary things! Could corrupt the youth! They should be banned! ;-)

Old Post 05-17-13 22:25 #
hex11 is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
myk
volveré y seré millones


Posts: 15137
Registered: 04-02


Parents "relinquish responsibilities" because of the work-reward oriented individualistic society they live in. The State is the most inclusive means to offer services that are otherwise very expensive if paid individually. Child nannying outside the traditional family doesn't work that much unless you're particularly rich and can hire servants.

Fill your mind with elitist myths all you want but private schools tend to be more authoritarian than public schools, and public schools tend to vary according to the regional wealth and public spending. Neglected areas have poor schools just like they have poor housing, medical services, job security and many other things. Never mind a nation without public schools: Either a shithole with a semiliterate subemployed underclass or with illiterate slaves, or else an exclusive enclave of a fortunate rich minority.

Old Post 05-18-13 23:14 #
myk is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Belial
Senior Member


Posts: 2175
Registered: 09-05


http://www.newschannel5.com/story/2...d-by-4-year-old
http://www.nj.com/ocean/index.ssf/2...ot_to_head.html
http://www.kctv5.com/story/21864151...ld-shot-in-head
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/..._n_2625386.html

Here's to exercising your 2nd amendment rights.

Last edited by Belial on 05-18-13 at 23:36

Old Post 05-18-13 23:28 #
Belial is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
myk
volveré y seré millones


Posts: 15137
Registered: 04-02



Wagi said:
Those children need those guns to defend themselves from their tyrannical parents.
I was just thinking, this is doubly funny (if it can be funny at all) because one may as well use it for the "second amendment rights to stop tyranny" stance itself, as these children parody what happens to adults or civil society in general.


Quasar said:
Declaring that rights should be taken from everyone because a few are irresponsible.
If you have unreal expectations about what can be done with a phenomenon, the "exceptions" are an aspect of the rule. You can't run a nation out of voluntarism. It's as flawed as the American Dream of an all-privatized society. A society of gun owners is as safe as a society of all-owners is sustainable.

Old Post 05-18-13 23:53 #
myk is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Ladna
Member


Posts: 271
Registered: 04-10


God finally, a DW gun thread.

I'm all for rights, but we wouldn't have to have laws curtailing those rights if no one ever behaved unreasonably. This incident, along with countless others, only further proves this isn't possible. This is why we have things like speed limits, food preparation standards, zoning laws, blah blah blah.

In order to drive, you need to be a minimum age, pass a test demonstrating your knowledge and competency of driving, and maintain your license as well as your car's condition and registration. You also have to have insurance in case accidents happen, because things go wrong even when everyone follows the rules.

This is for something that is far less dangerous than a gun (unless you drive through a crowded parade or something), and something that has critical value to our society. Say what you want about hunting or self-defense, the truth is the vast majority of Americans will never fire a gun, let alone hunt or even get the chance to fight off an in-home invasion. Practically everyone drives, and unless you live in one of the 5 largest cities in the US (or on Walden Pond), you can't live reasonably without a vehicle.

It just makes no sense that it's easier to get and use a gun than it is to get and use a vehicle. Say what you want about the nanny state, privatized prisons, defending yourself against the government (ridiculous) and 2nd Amendment rights (which basically make no sense anymore), it should be way, waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay harder to get a gun, and way, waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay harder to get bullets for it.

Old Post 05-20-13 02:50 #
Ladna is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:04. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]  
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Misc. > Everything Else > Kentuckids need more dakka

Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread

 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are OFF
[IMG] code is ON
 

< Contact Us - Doomworld >

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.2.5
Copyright ©2000, 2001, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.

Message Board Statistics