The Gun Politics Thread

[BostonBeaneater]

I like guns. I rarely see guns in day to day life unless it is on a cop's belt. Cars, tobacco, and drunks kill a lot of people too but I'd be damned if the government tried to tell me I can't have them. It's an ugly world and bad stuff happens. Most of the bad stuff would never be heard about without the media commanding you to be outraged.

More bad stuff seems to happen in the US when it comes to gun violence than in countries with tighter gun laws. It's one thing to acknowledge that a lot of awful stuff happens in the world, but another to facilitate it.

As for the media "commanding" me to be outraged, that's a rather dim view of our discerning abilities. If, in fact, the media wanted people to be outraged, they'd run stories non-stop every day about each and every one of the thousands of gun deaths in the US. Just constantly, numbingly, from every county in the country. To the contrary, when I watch American local news broadcasts, apart from the sensational ones like Columbine, what's striking is how blasé the news stories are about gun violence. It's routine and anything but shocking.

I don't think the US is alone in this. The Germans seem to love killing each other. The Russians, Arabs, and Africans don't pull any punches either. I think the media is often blasé about the many random murders that occur, particularly when it non-white and non-female people getting killed. Give them an pile of dead Amish or a murdered white child and the frenzy is on.

[eumaas]

I like guns. I rarely see guns in day to day life unless it is on a cop's belt. Cars, tobacco, and drunks kill a lot of people too but I'd be damned if the government tried to tell me I can't have them. It's an ugly world and bad stuff happens. Most of the bad stuff would never be heard about without the media commanding you to be outraged.

More bad stuff seems to happen in the US when it comes to gun violence than in countries with tighter gun laws. It's one thing to acknowledge that a lot of awful stuff happens in the world, but another to facilitate it.

As for the media "commanding" me to be outraged, that's a rather dim view of our discerning abilities. If, in fact, the media wanted people to be outraged, they'd run stories non-stop every day about each and every one of the thousands of gun deaths in the US. Just constantly, numbingly, from every county in the country. To the contrary, when I watch American local news broadcasts, apart from the sensational ones like Columbine, what's striking is how blasé the news stories are about gun violence. It's routine and anything but shocking.

I don't think the US is alone in this. The Germans seem to love killing each other. The Russians, Arabs, and Africans don't pull any punches either. I think the media is often blasé about the many random murders that occur, particularly when it non-white and non-female people getting killed. Give them an pile of dead Amish or a murdered white child and the frenzy is on.

The desire to kill is the real problem, yes, but couple it with easy access to guns and it's possible that those who would not have killed otherwise would then kill, or at least that they can kill more people with guns than without. I think that's what the anti-gun crowd usually argues. Guns certainly make murder sprees easier, but of course if you want to kill there's always the serial killer method--I think most serial killers didn't and still don't use guns.

[BostonBeaneater]

I think most serial killers didn't and still don't use guns.

We don't.

[Dr. Medulla]

I don't think the US is alone in this. The Germans seem to love killing each other. The Russians, Arabs, and Africans don't pull any punches either.

I obviously don't want to give the impression that I'm piling on Americans here. Humans may be social animals, but we're also still predatory. But as such, do nations work towards a society that encourages gun proliferation—and in saying this, I should make the statement that I have no problem whatsoever with hunting rifles—and as a culturally acceptable means of redressing grievances? Do we strive to facilitate our primal instincts or make it harder for them to do more damage when they emerge?

I think the media is often blasé about the many random murders that occur, particularly when it non-white and non-female people getting killed. Give them an pile of dead Amish or a murdered white child and the frenzy is on.

But that's both sensationalism and coded racism, not about whipping up anti-gun hysteria. My only objection to your comment about the media is that it's somehow intended to provoke outrage and opposition to gun ownership. On the contrary, I think that the more guns out there, the more rampages to cover.

[Flex]

Also, in this debate, I'm probably around where Wolter is. I feel sympathies to both sides of the coin, and don't totally know where I fall on the spectrum.

[Dr. Medulla]

Also, in this debate, I'm probably around where Wolter is. I feel sympathies to both sides of the coin, and don't totally know where I fall on the spectrum.

Pick a side or be shot/lazed.

[101Walterton]

"See, I believe that applying reason and seeking knowledge and wisdom is a good thing, so I read books and papers and follow the news and try to learn something new every day. I don't just believe that vague feelings are all that matter and that asserting a feeling is the only form of "logical discussion." I don't believe that I'm correct by the virtue of my feelings. I challenge each one of my opinions on a regular basis and actively seek out opposing material so I can see if I'm holding to a view on the basis of its own merit or just because of my feelings. This has led to an uncomfortable process where over the course of six years my opinions have changed radically. I have tested and rejected many beliefs. How many times have you managed to change your mind on something, Wally? Was it because of feelings, or because of facts and rational argument? I'm refining, revising, and rejecting all the time because I believe truth and wisdom are ends in themselves. Reason is a virtue. Try to practice it sometime."

See this is the part I don't get. You claim this open minded approach however you are no different to Steve and every other gun owner I have spoken to in that you dismiss gun legislation for the staus quo without any attempt to do anything to stem the tide of mass shotings.
Also, like Steve, you base your arguments on your 'books and papers' which you like to cut and paste in great quantity to back up 'your opinion'. For every book and paper supporting you there is a book and paper against you so have you dimissed all those ? I have studied a number of related fields none of which I would cut and paste to back up my point of view because that is a futile excersize.
Whilst I concede to you I appear to be stubborn and closeminded in my opinion (just like you and Steve) however I have 27 years of working in related fields and place far more weight on that that than 'others papers' experience I have read about in a book or paper.
My main sticking point, and the reason for my closeminded opinion, is the protection of innocent people from the mass shooting that will occur. I vote for change because your status quo isn't working and surely trying to do something about it is better than standing back and doing nothing whilst people are being slaughtered.

[eumaas]

"See, I believe that applying reason and seeking knowledge and wisdom is a good thing, so I read books and papers and follow the news and try to learn something new every day. I don't just believe that vague feelings are all that matter and that asserting a feeling is the only form of "logical discussion." I don't believe that I'm correct by the virtue of my feelings. I challenge each one of my opinions on a regular basis and actively seek out opposing material so I can see if I'm holding to a view on the basis of its own merit or just because of my feelings. This has led to an uncomfortable process where over the course of six years my opinions have changed radically. I have tested and rejected many beliefs. How many times have you managed to change your mind on something, Wally? Was it because of feelings, or because of facts and rational argument? I'm refining, revising, and rejecting all the time because I believe truth and wisdom are ends in themselves. Reason is a virtue. Try to practice it sometime."

See this is the part I don't get. You claim this open minded approach however you are no different to Steve and every other gun owner I have spoken to in that you dismiss gun legislation for the staus quo without any attempt to do anything to stem the tide of mass shotings.
Also, like Steve, you base your arguments on your 'books and papers' which you like to cut and paste in great quantity to back up 'your opinion'. For every book and paper supporting you there is a book and paper against you so have you dimissed all those ? I have studied a number of related fields none of which I would cut and paste to back up my point of view because that is a futile excersize.
Whilst I concede to you I appear to be stubborn and closeminded in my opinion (just like you and Steve) however I have 27 years of working in related fields and place far more weight on that that than 'others papers' experience I have read about in a book or paper.
My main sticking point, and the reason for my closeminded opinion, is the protection of innocent people from the mass shooting that will occur. I vote for change because your status quo isn't working and surely trying to do something about it is better than standing back and doing nothing whilst people are being slaughtered.

You cannot argue by pathos alone.

[eumaas]

Secondly, linking isn't cutting and pasting. I use citations to back up my opinions and provide context for my statements, but every block of text in this thread under my name is mine. I wrote it. I did not cut and paste it.

[eumaas]

I have studied a number of related fields none of which I would cut and paste to back up my point of view because that is a futile excersize.
Whilst I concede to you I appear to be stubborn and closeminded in my opinion (just like you and Steve) however I have 27 years of working in related fields and place far more weight on that that than 'others papers' experience I have read about in a book or paper.

If you can't back this up, your supposed authority is utterly irrelevant. Argumentum ad verecundiam.

Secondly, you should be aware that rejecting intellectual knowledge (whether through science, ethics, philosophy, etc) puts you in an extremely radical position. The technology you use to post on this forum came from intellectual knowledge. Do you selectively reject its relevance?

[Dr. Medulla]

Just to lighten things up, I think 101 has just chosen scouts over sabrmetrics. Just a joke for maybe three other people. Resume.

[Flex]

Just to lighten things up, I think 101 has just chosen scouts over sabrmetrics. Just a joke for maybe three other people. Resume.

He is the Brian Sabean of political arguments.

[Dr. Medulla]

Just to lighten things up, I think 101 has just chosen scouts over sabrmetrics. Just a joke for maybe three other people. Resume.

He is the Brian Sabean of political arguments.

I was thinking more of Hat Guy (I don't even know the guy's real name at this point).

[Flex]

Just to lighten things up, I think 101 has just chosen scouts over sabrmetrics. Just a joke for maybe three other people. Resume.

He is the Brian Sabean of political arguments.

I was thinking more of Hat Guy (I don't even know the guy's real name at this point).

His real name is inconsequential. I could see the hat guy comp.

Chocolate sundaes anyone?

[Dr. Medulla]

Just to lighten things up, I think 101 has just chosen scouts over sabrmetrics. Just a joke for maybe three other people. Resume.

He is the Brian Sabean of political arguments.

I was thinking more of Hat Guy (I don't even know the guy's real name at this point).

His real name is inconsequential. I could see the hat guy comp.

Chocolate sundaes anyone?

Yes, please!