What's new
By:

Welcome to 'Murica

Stoked said:
Good luck with that extremely terrible view. Not only that but it pretty much ends any moral argument you may have had.
Click to expand...

How is it a terrible view? Did this not happen several times in US history? In order to make a better society, blood was spilled? The Revolution? The Civil War? Was it not worth it? Or are you saying none of those should've happened and things should've stayed the same because of the possibility of loss of life?

And no, my moral argument is not that the loss of life is the issue in itself. It's that banning guns is the morally right thing to do. And doing the morally right thing doesn't always come without opposition.
 
Stoked said:
The sewer of the internet. It is absolutely ruthless in there. No, for real. Disgusting.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info and warning
I'm not going to check it out
 
It's nice not having dutch in this thread btw
 
Stoked said:
I haven't got into any moral argument on my side.

I have said that the courts have ruled guns are staying. That fight it over.

But I even went on to agree that there are some things that still can be done. Just not the banning or guns (short of a civil war type event) So doesn't that undermine your "pessimistic psychology" argument?

I have no real desire to discuss this again.
Click to expand...

the second you started discussing things was the second you "got into" your moral argument. Like everybody else, your arguments are moral, too.

And, no, you haven't done anything to suggest that you don't harbor a pessimistic psychology at the core of your morals. You'd probably have to walk away from Christianity to have a measurable impact as far as that is concerned.
 
JimLes said:
How is it a terrible view? Did this not happen several times in US history? In order to make a better society, blood was spilled? The Revolution? The Civil War? Was it not worth it? Or are you saying none of those should've happened and things should've stayed the same because of the possibility of loss of life?

And no, my moral argument is not that the loss of life is the issue in itself. It's that banning guns is the morally right thing to do. And doing the morally right thing doesn't always come without opposition.
Click to expand...

How is only allowing the criminals to have guns moral? The hypocrisy...
 
JimLes said:
How is it a terrible view? Did this not happen several times in US history? In order to make a better society, blood was spilled? The Revolution? The Civil War? Was it not worth it? Or are you saying none of those should've happened and things should've stayed the same because of the possibility of loss of life?

And no, my moral argument is not that the loss of life is the issue in itself. It's that banning guns is the morally right thing to do. And doing the morally right thing doesn't always come without opposition.
Click to expand...

So it is not the loss of life but the guns themselves. Then I absolutely disagree that banning guns is the morally right thing.

Being willing to go to the same lengths over gun ownership that people did over things like freedom and slavery is insane to me.
 
NAOS said:
the second you started discussing things was the second you "got into" your moral argument. Like everybody else, your arguments are moral, too.

And, no, you haven't done anything to suggest that you don't harbor a pessimistic psychology at the core of your morals. You'd probably have to walk away from Christianity to have a measurable impact as far as that is concerned.
Click to expand...

Lol. that is awfully pessimistic of you.
 
JimLes said:
I'll pretend that you're not trolling and point out that banning guns would obviously not "allow" criminals to have guns.
Click to expand...

I'm not trolling. That's the whole point, if you ban guns most citizens will follow the law just to not get in trouble while as the evil-doers will still get access to guns one way or another, in the black market etc... So basically it would be a ban aimed at responsible citizens. It's just logical thinking.
 
JimLes said:
I'll pretend that you're not trolling and point out that banning guns would obviously not "allow" criminals to have guns.
Click to expand...

You'd also have to secure the border and destroy all guns committed in crimes. Then maybe in 60-70 years criminals wont really have them.
 
Jamezz said:
I'm not trolling. That's the whole point, if you ban guns most citizens will follow the law just to not get in trouble while as the evil-doers will still get access to guns one way or another, in the black market etc... So basically it would be a ban aimed at responsible citizens. It's just logical thinking.
Click to expand...

I must be in the minority that does not think this will happen. I think a gun ban and requiring citizens to turn in their guns will lead to a huge black market and a large number of citizens (in the tens of millions+) will refuse.
 
Stoked said:
Lol. that is awfully pessimistic of you.
Click to expand...

The pessimistic psychology at the root of Christianity is a well-established fact: repent, or your sinning essence will spend eternity in hell.


Hard to get more pessimistic about humanity than that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top