|
|
#131
09-16-2007, 04:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Guns in America
[ QUOTE ]
He also got us involved in war in Kosovo without Congressional action, which nobody bitches about when they bitch about Iraq. BTW, we still have forces in Kosovo today. [/ QUOTE ] Nobody complains about that because it actually improved life a lot for the Kosovans and didn't cost huge numbers of lives. 
|
|
#134
09-17-2007, 02:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Guns in America
I didnt really read this whole thing, because if we are debating gun control (this is about gun control, right?)nobody ever changes their minds. But i did see something the other day that was very interesting. I'm probably not going to change your mind, the same way i can't change your views on abortion no matter what i say, but here's an interesting occurence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalac...f_Law_shooting
|
|
#135
09-17-2007, 03:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Guns in America
[ QUOTE ]
Claiming someone must be scum because Thompson thought they are scum is pretty pointless, the guy thought EVERYONE was a pig. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I don't consider him scum. Hunter was given to exaggeration. But it does lower my opinion of Clinton.
|
|
#136
09-17-2007, 03:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Guns in America
[ QUOTE ]
I didnt really read this whole thing, because if we are debating gun control (this is about gun control, right?)nobody ever changes their minds. But i did see something the other day that was very interesting. I'm probably not going to change your mind, the same way i can't change your views on abortion no matter what i say, but here's an interesting occurence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalac...f_Law_shooting [/ QUOTE ] I changed my mind somewhat, as have others in this thread, after reading Paul Phillips write about it.
|
|
#137
09-17-2007, 11:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Guns in America
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Ouch. Buy lots of Advil first. [/ QUOTE ] QFT. Get some earplugs while you're at it. [/ QUOTE ] The 3 handguns that I've shot with the most kick so far were : 3 - Grizzly Win Mag 2 - Desert Eagle .50AE 1 - S&W 629 2" barrel 44mag with wood MFN grips for those that have shot guns like these how much more will the Casull with the 2 1/2 barrle kick(Hogue grips)?
|
|
#138
09-18-2007, 01:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Guns in America
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] How can there be a natural right to something that doesn't exist in nature? [/ QUOTE ] Just about every living thing defends itself. [/ QUOTE ] Irrelevant, you're discussing the right to bear arms, not to defend oneself. Besides which, since when does an is imply an ought? [/ QUOTE ] First, that is really dense. Second, I don't understand your Clintonspeak. [/ QUOTE ] Dense? Expand. If you believe that 'natural rights' come from the example of living things and we observe that weapons are not used by any living things other than humans then it seems to run contrary to your point. [/ QUOTE ] Self-defense is inherent to the nature of every living thing. Most living things do not use weapons (tools) because they are intellectually and/or physically incapable of using tools, not because of any choice or ethical decision. The fact that a fish does not use a weapon to defend itself against a fisherman is a result of the physical capabilities of the fish, not a result of its nature or its natural instinct. By your logic, we should restrict ourselves to the least common denominator, and use no tool that is not available to every form of life. Self-defense is a natural instinct, and I defy anyone to logically argue that I have no right to self-defense. If I do not have a natural right to self-defense, then someone has a natural right to harm or kill me. I may chose to give up my right to self-defense for what I consider to be a greater good, but no one has a right to demand that of me. You might argue that society can trump the individual right (that's why Socrates drank the hemlock), but that is an individual ethical choice. If I have a right to self-defense, how can anyone draw an objective limit on the means of self-defense? Is it OK to defend myself with a baseball bat, but not with a knife? With a knife but not with a gun? With a shotgun but not with a handgun? If I have the right to defend myself, why do I not have the right to use all of the technology and human intelligence available to me? And why do I not have the right to use all of the technology and human intelligence available to a potential attacker? [ QUOTE ] If you believe that 'natural rights' come from the example of living things and we observe that weapons are not used by any living things other than humans then it seems to run contrary to your point. [/ QUOTE ] Every living thing uses every weapon available to it to defend itself. Game animals do not choose to not use firearms against hunters. If they could, they would. They all do the best that they can. I have yet to see any logical argument that a human cannot use any means for self preservation (which includes protection of family and community). I think that self-defense is a sufficient argument for the right to bear arms.
|
|
#139
09-18-2007, 01:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Guns in America
ben,
AFAICT the argument you are presenting simply 'why don't I have the right to bear arm?', which is not an argument at all. The onus is not on someone else to prove that you don't have that 'right', it's on you to give a convincing argument that you do. Preferably while avoiding both Hume's Guillotine and Hume's Fork.
|
|
#140
09-18-2007, 01:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Guns in America
[ QUOTE ]
ben, AFAICT the argument you are presenting simply 'why don't I have the right to bear arm?', which is not an argument at all. The onus is not on someone else to prove that you don't have that 'right', it's on you to give a convincing argument that you do. Preferably while avoiding both Hume's Guillotine and Hume's Fork. [/ QUOTE ] The right in question is the right to self defense. If you agree that's a right, then the onus is on you to explain why it should be "the right to self defense except with guns."
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
