Welcome to 'Murica

[Stoked]

It took a civil war to end slavery. You gotta break some eggs to make an omelette.

Good luck with that extremely terrible view. Not only that but it pretty much ends any moral argument you may have had.

 

[NAOS]

Good luck with that extremely terrible view. Not only that but it pretty much ends any moral argument you may have had.

what's the root of your moral argument?

It seems to me that the answer to that question lies in your pessimistic psychology: the war is over and people can't/won't change.




Something has to be done. It'll have to happen in small steps, but it is possible for regulators to get their hands on the taps of the gun flow. Slowly, they need to ratchet it down.

 

[Stoked]

what's the root of your moral argument?

It seems to me that the answer to that question lies in your pessimistic psychology: the war is over and people can't/won't change.




Something has to be done. It'll have to happen in small steps, but it is possible for regulators to get their hands on the taps of the gun flow. Slowly, they need to ratchet it down.

Most gun advocates, including Jimles, are upset about the loss of life. They should be as it is a terrible thing. They want to prevent it, a worthy goal. But his post was in support of a method that would result in a massive loss of life to accomplish. So he loses, in my eyes, his moral high ground. IF that is his position.

But I agree that there are some steps that can and should be taken. They have been discussed at length in other threads and I see no need to go over them again. But push to far towards the restriction of guns and the courts will slap you down.

 

[Stoked]

On a side note I am just waiting for the right wing media to start screaming about the growing attacks on Christianity as a result of this Oregon shooting.

 

[fishonjazz]

I think that future generations (and our current younger generations) are/will be falling out of love with guns, little by little.

That makes me happy.

 

[NAOS]

what's the root of your moral argument?

It seems to me that the answer to that question lies in your pessimistic psychology: the war is over and people can't/won't change.




Something has to be done. It'll have to happen in small steps, but it is possible for regulators to get their hands on the taps of the gun flow. Slowly, they need to ratchet it down.

Most gun advocates, including Jimles, are upset about the loss of life. They should be as it is a terrible thing. They want to prevent it, a worthy goal. But his post was in support of a method that would result in a massive loss of life to accomplish. So he loses, in my eyes, his moral high ground. IF that is his position.

But I agree that there are some steps that can and should be taken. They have been discussed at length in other threads and I see no need to go over them again. But push to far towards the restriction of guns and the courts will slap you down.

I asked for the root of YOUR MORAL ARGUMENT on this matter. (And then I pointed to the pessimistic psychology as a likely route to the answer.)

 

[Stoked]

I asked for the root of YOUR MORAL ARGUMENT on this matter. (And then I pointed to the pessimistic psychology as a likely route to the answer.)

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.

 

[Stoked]

I think that future generations (and our current younger generations) are/will be falling out of love with guns, little by little.

That makes me happy.

Honestly I see a slightly different thing. I see mainly two different camps. They are growing farther and farther apart as time goes on. One of the issues in that growing divide is guns. They are still wildly popular in many places.

On a wider scale, at what point does the ideological divide become to great to over come? then what?

 

[Jamezz]

Let's be more elaborate here and not rely on personal attacks. Here you are some interesting articles related with the story:


https://nypost.com/2015/10/01/oregon-gunman-singled-out-christians-during-rampage/

In this article:
President Obama issued a plea for greater gun control and bemoaned that America is “the only advanced country on Earth [that] sees these kind of mass shooting every few months.”


https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...mpqua-college-in-oregon-10-dead-gunfree-zone/

In the meantime Obama advocating for more gun control:

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/7...ama-vows-another-try-gun-regulation?mref=home


Draw your own conclusions. My thought is that a responsible ownership of guns is synonym of liberty. IMO the appearance of wackos lately is what has encouraged other wackos to go about their evil ways and go out in shooting sprees. All in all responsible ownership gives the people of this country more liberty and power over the government and more control over their personal security. I've had someone break into my house once and I can assure you that it's not a pretty feeling. We didn't own any weapons at the time but fortunately my dad and I (I was living with my folks at the time), along with my dog were able to intimidate the burglar and have him run away.

 

[RandyForRubio]

Dude posted about it on 4chan and people were basically egging him on to do it/applauding him. Sad society we live in.

 

[fishonjazz]

Dude posted about it on 4chan and people were basically egging him on to do it/applauding him. Sad society we live in.

What is 4chan?

 

[Stoked]

What is 4chan?

The sewer of the internet. It is absolutely ruthless in there. No, for real. Disgusting.