Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jan 9, 2013, 10:33 AM   #76
hafr
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by elistan View Post
Considering Breivik used firearms, I'm not sure how that's a rebuttal of domrevans's rebuttal of the "hammer argument."

Interestingly, from reading the wikipedia article, I've learned that Breivik originally attempted to illegally purchase weapons in Prague, but was unable. He subsequently was able to legally purchase them Norway. (Including 10 thrity-round magazines over the Internet from the USA.)
He also had a bomb made by manure and fuel explode outside of the parliament building. Yet there is no discussion what so ever about making manure more difficult to acquire...

But do you really think that stricter gun laws would have stopped this massacre from happening?
hafr is offline   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 10:41 AM   #77
ericrwalker
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albany, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moyank24 View Post
scared the big bad black man is going to take their guns away.

Oh noes, not the big scary black mans.
ericrwalker is offline   2
Old Jan 9, 2013, 10:46 AM   #78
hafr
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
First of all I must say that I appreciate a well-sourced article like that. Thank you for providing it.
So what's your take on it?

Quote:
Here is one for you from the American Journal of Epidemiology: Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study

As a fan of science I've noted that there is usually more than one theory vying to be recognized as the most accurately explanation of a subject of study. I have no doubt that in the study of firearms there will be articles—like the one you linked to—arguing with evidence for there being no connection to the number of guns correlating to the amount of gun violence. And there will be studies like the one I linked to that associate the presence of firearms with an increased risk of gun violence.

Neither one is in itself "fact" or "proof" that settles the issue. And that is the problem that I had with the wording of your previous post, that somehow it was an established fact that there is nothing supporting the claim that a society becomes more safe by imposing tougher gun laws.

There are no established facts. There is a great need to study this issue in depth, by many sources, in order to come to a better understanding and general consensus about firearms, their value to society and the best ways to regulate them. Bring on the studies. Let's look at the issue and over time gain a better understanding of it.
Yes, suicidal gun owners are more likely to use a gun during their suicide than suicidal people who don't own a gun. Not really relevant though... And a pretty strange answer to the lack of correlation between gun laws and gun violence in a discussion about gun regulations

It IS an established fact for those who are looking at the data without taking a stand in the gun debate... If not, please show me the data stating the opposite.
hafr is offline   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 10:50 AM   #79
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by hafr View Post
So what's your take on it?
That it's an argument in need of further study and corroboration.
citizenzen is offline   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 11:09 AM   #80
hafr
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
That it's an argument in need of further study and corroboration.
But if the argument is "stricter gun laws will make society safer" and there is no correlation between stricter gun laws and how safe the society is, would you really be prepared to say the argument doesn't lack validity?

Also, it's not really a new argument. It's been shown over and over, just that people don't want to listen. Piers Morgan, for instance, who keeps on interrupting and calling people idiots when they point these things out...
hafr is offline   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 11:27 AM   #81
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by hafr View Post
But if the argument is "stricter gun laws will make society safer" and there is no correlation between stricter gun laws and how safe the society is, would you really be prepared to say the argument doesn't lack validity?
Sure. Science is science. But "fact" is established over time ... especially in an area such as this. If there are more corroborative studies that show "there is no correlation between stricter gun laws and how safe the society is" and this becomes established by experts (which I am not) as the best explanation for the subject, then I'd certainly be "prepared" to accept it.

Bring on the studies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hafr View Post
Also, it's not really a new argument. It's been shown over and over, just that people don't want to listen. Piers Morgan, for instance, who keeps on interrupting and calling people idiots when they point these things out...
It's been shown "over and over"?

I highly doubt that.

And yeah ... it was Piers Morgan who was interrupting Alex Jones "over and over" in that debate.

How rude of him.


Last edited by citizenzen; Jan 9, 2013 at 11:44 AM. Reason: changed "show" to "shown"
citizenzen is offline   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 11:31 AM   #82
samiwas
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
Alive and facing 2nd degree murder charges.[COLOR="#808080"]
Aaaaand...now you've lost me. Of course, that would imply that you had me before. Statements like this prove my theory that people such as yourself are incapable of any actual reasoning.
__________________
A lack of planning on your part should not constitute an emergency on mine.
samiwas is offline   1
Old Jan 9, 2013, 11:37 AM   #83
ericrwalker
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albany, NY
No worries, we in the other side see your comment and see you don't have the ability to reason either. The lefts idea of reasoning is the right has to change their point of view to yours or they are stupid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by samiwas View Post
Aaaaand...now you've lost me. Of course, that would imply that you had me before. Statements like this prove my theory that people such as yourself are incapable of any actual reasoning.
ericrwalker is offline   2
Old Jan 9, 2013, 11:40 AM   #84
Eraserhead
macrumors G4
 
Eraserhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by hafr View Post
SoYes, suicidal gun owners are more likely to use a gun during their suicide than suicidal people who don't own a gun. Not really relevant though
Actually it is, gun suicide has a very high chance of success compared to most other methods of suicide - and people who kill themselves usually do after an acute bad event.

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/mag...s-and-suicide/
__________________
Actually it does make sense. Man created god, so if we exist, He exists. - obeygiant
Eraserhead is offline   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 11:51 AM   #85
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by samiwas View Post
Aaaaand...now you've lost me.
I had to go back and see what that post was about.

Apparently ericwalker knows that Martin would have killed Zimmerman.



Yeah ... I'm a little lost over that claim as well.

But at least I know I can turn to ericwalker when I need psychic advice.

citizenzen is offline   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:00 PM   #86
ericrwalker
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albany, NY
Well you guys seem to know that George attacked Trayvon, and that it was murder and not self defense. Seems you're psychic abilities are just as bad.


I want to know if the liberal would cheer on a woman who kills someone or a group of people who try to rape her.


Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
I had to go back and see what that post was about.

Apparently ericwalker knows that Martin would have killed Zimmerman.



Yeah ... I'm a little lost over that claim as well.

But at least I know I can turn to ericwalker when I need psychic advice.



----------

Farmers have been using guns since their invention to kill Animals that would attack their livestock or animals that would each their crops. It's a wonderful invention.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-Kerrse View Post
I don't think it will happen where i live i am 99.9% sure of that unless a local farmer goes on the rampage, i certainly don't live in fear of it or expect it to ever happen.

I put that down to the fact we don't have guns as an everyday thing.
ericrwalker is offline   3
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:09 PM   #87
zioxide
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
Alive and facing 2nd degree murder charges.
Your twisted, ill-informed reality combined with this speculative ******** isn't helping this argument or your case at all.

If George Zimmerman didn't feel the need to attempt to be a macho rambo vigilante, they would BOTH be alive today. But Zimmerman felt the need to play vigilante, and, instead of minding his own business and letting the police department do the police work, he started following Martin in an intimidating manner for no reason other than the fact he was black, wearing a hoodie, and "looked suspicious". The police report concluded Martin was not involved in any criminal activity at the time and it appeared that he was just walking home.

It appears at this point that Martin confronted Zimmerman to figure out why he was being followed and in this confrontation Zimmerman shot Martin at close range. Sorry, but getting punched in the nose isn't a legitimate reason for lethal force, and Trayvon Martin was not armed, so there's no reason for a 28 year old man to have to use a gun on a 17 year old teenager.

You can speculate all you want as to what would have happened in this confrontation if Zimmerman didn't have a gun, but it's all speculation, and the odds of either of them getting killed when neither had a weapon is EXTREMELY unlikely.

Furthermore, one thing we can say is that if Zimmerman didn't attempt to be a vigilante that night, had just minded his own business, and let the police handle it, he wouldn't be facing 2nd degree murder charges and Martin wouldn't be dead.

And if Zimmerman wasn't carrying a gun, I highly doubt he would have felt the need to be this vigilante and none of this would have ever happened.


So, you can keep bringing this crime up thinking that it's helping your argument, but in reality it's doing the exact opposite.

There's a good chance this case ends with Zimmerman going to prison for 2nd degree murder and Florida modifying or repealing their stand your ground law.


Quote:
Republican is the better of the two evils. Libertarian would be the better choice if the candidate has a chance the win the election.
Yeah, Republican is better of the two evils, if you're a while male who believes that all white males are more important and deserve more rights than other people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
No worries, we in the other side see your comment and see you don't have the ability to reason either. The lefts idea of reasoning is the right has to change their point of view to yours or they are stupid.
Hahaha. Well, there's one thing you can say for sure, and that's the right does provide some entertainment value with their "arguments".

The left idea of reasoning is using logic and facts to deduce and support your argument. Apparently, the right's idea of "reasoning" is to twist reality to fit your beliefs, regardless if there is any logic or factual data behind this belief. We see it time and time again from the right when they use twisted religious beliefs to try to control the lives and restrict the rights of others who do not have the same beliefs.

Last edited by zioxide; Jan 9, 2013 at 12:16 PM.
zioxide is online now   1
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:10 PM   #88
ericrwalker
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albany, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by zioxide View Post
Yeah, Republican is better of the two evils, if you're a while male who believes that all white males are more important and deserve more rights than other people.

I don't need your attacks....White power?

The only one stopping anyone from "rights" is the government. The less power the government has the more power you have to exercise your "rights". A libertarian point of view is the ultimate equal rights point of view. For some reason, I want people who aren't white males to have less rights than me. Since my wife isn't white, nor an American I should find a way to get her to obey me. smh

Last edited by ericrwalker; Jan 9, 2013 at 12:18 PM.
ericrwalker is offline   3
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:18 PM   #89
elistan
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Denver/Boulder, CO
Quote:
Originally Posted by hafr View Post
He also had a bomb made by manure and fuel explode outside of the parliament building. Yet there is no discussion what so ever about making manure more difficult to acquire...
True, he did. I think the general consensus is that the controls on chemicals used in explosives are strong enough, despite not being perfect and sometimes allowing them to be purchased for nefarious reaons.

From wikipedia:
Quote:
Afterwards there was significant debate in Norway how an amateur could acquire such substantial amounts of fertilizer and in addition manufacture and place such a lethal weapon in the middle of Regjeringskvartalet all by himself. The conclusion by Felleskjøpet was that there is no legislation to keep agricultural businesses from buying as much fertilizer as they like, and that there was nothing suspicious about Breivik's purchase.[45] This was confirmed by the director of the Norwegian Police Security Service, Janne Kristiansen, who stated "not even Stasi could have prevented this attack"[46]
Perhaps then the occasional bomber is an acceptable cost of allowing agricultural entities the use of fertilizer.

And there are some mitigating circumstances that make fertilizer bombs less of an issue to people than guns, I think. Lack of portability, agricultural enterprise requirements, reporting to authorities (although obviously that failed here,) lack of glorification of fertilizer bombs, inability for spontaneous use, limited targetability...

Quote:
But do you really think that stricter gun laws would have stopped this massacre from happening?
Perhaps, considering his first attempt to illegally acquire guns failed, and his second legal attempt succeded. But perhaps not. He had been planning this for nearly a decade, for one thing. Keep in mind that it's impossible to eliminate all illegal action - which shouldn't be a reason to not attempt to reduce it.

Last edited by elistan; Jan 9, 2013 at 02:37 PM.
elistan is offline   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:22 PM   #90
zioxide
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
I don't need your attacks....White power?
It's not an attack, it's fact.

You said "the Republican party is the lesser of two evils". Unless you're a rich white Christian, that's not true.

Ask the gay community who the lesser of two evils is. Is it the party who wants to restrict their civil rights, or the party who believes they should be free to live their private lives they way they choose?

How about women? Ask them who the lesser of two evils are. Is it the party who wants to have politicians control what personal medical decisions they can make, or the party who believes that they should have the freedom to make their own personal medical decisions?

Ask people who believe in religions other than christianity (or don't believe at all). Which party is the lesser of two evils? Is it the party who wants to force christian beliefs on them through legislation, or the party who believes that people should be free to believe and/or practice whatever they want?

Ask kids in high school "which party is the lesser of two evils?" Is it the party that believes you should only be able to afford and have access to higher education if your family is rich ("borrow from your parents") or the party that believes every child in this country should have access and the means to get financial aid and pursue an education if they choose?


Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
The only one stopping anyone from "rights" is the government. The less power the government has the more power you have to exercise your "rights". A libertarian point of view is the ultimate equal rights point of view. For some reason, I want people who aren't white males to have less rights than me. Since my wife isn't white, nor an American I should find a way to get her to obey me. smh
Do you not see the ridiculous conflict here? You keep talking about all of these "rights" you have and want to keep yet the party you consider "the lesser of two evils" is the party that wants to restrict the rights of many people who aren't straight white Christians based on their personal religious beliefs.
zioxide is online now   1
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:25 PM   #91
ericrwalker
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albany, NY
You cherry picked my statement. I called both of them evil, both parties tend to limit your rights. You ignored my next sentence, and attacked me.



Quote:
Originally Posted by zioxide View Post
It's not an attack, it's fact.

You said "the Republican party is the lesser of two evils". Unless you're a rich white Christian, that's not true.

Ask the gay community who the lesser of two evils is. Is it the party who wants to restrict their civil rights, or the party who believes they should be free to live their private lives they way they choose?

How about women? Ask them who the lesser of two evils are. Is it the party who wants to have politicians control what personal medical decisions they can make, or the party who believes that they should have the freedom to make their own personal medical decisions?

Ask people who believe in religions other than christianity (or don't believe at all). Which party is the lesser of two evils? Is it the party who wants to force christian beliefs on them through legislation, or the party who believes that people should be free to believe and/or practice whatever they want?

Ask kids in high school "which party is the lesser of two evils?" Is it the party that believes you should only be able to afford and have access to higher education if your family is rich ("borrow from your parents") or the party that believes every child in this country should have access and the means to get financial aid and pursue an education if they choose?
ericrwalker is offline   3
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:31 PM   #92
elistan
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Denver/Boulder, CO
Quote:
Originally Posted by samiwas View Post
Aaaaand...now you've lost me. Of course, that would imply that you had me before. Statements like this prove my theory that people such as yourself are incapable of any actual reasoning.
He's stating his belief that if Z had not had a gun, M would have beat Z to death, and therefore would be facing murder charges.

Along the lines of speculation, I'll state that if Z had stayed in his car after her called 911, and done nothing further, M would not have been killed, and Z would not be facing charges for M's death.
elistan is offline   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:32 PM   #93
zioxide
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
You cherry picked my statement. I called both of them evil, both parties tend to limit your rights. You ignored my next sentence, and attacked me.
Attacking you and attacking the ridiculous statement that you posted are two completely different things. Not once did I direct a personal attack at you.
zioxide is online now   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:38 PM   #94
ericrwalker
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albany, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by elistan View Post
He's stating his belief that if Z had not had a gun, M would have beat Z to death, and therefore would be facing murder charges.

Along the lines of speculation, I'll state that if Z had stayed in his car after her called 911, and done nothing further, M would not have been killed, and Z would not be facing charges for M's death.

Exactly, it's plausible and happens all the time. Another plausible case would be that Z was telling the truth and M had grabbed (or reached for) his Z's gun and would have used it against him.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by zioxide View Post
Attacking you and attacking the ridiculous statement that you posted are two completely different things. Not once did I direct a personal attack at you.

You said I believe white males are superior to anyone else. That's an attack on me.
ericrwalker is offline   3
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:46 PM   #95
elistan
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Denver/Boulder, CO
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
You cherry picked my statement. I called both of them evil, both parties tend to limit your rights. You ignored my next sentence... [about Libertarians]
What does the ranking of the Libertarian party have to do with your ranking of the Republican and Democrat parties? You said Republicans are the lesser evil, he thinks Democrats are. Libertarians are not a factor of his argument about R vs D.

Quote:
and attacked me.
True, calling you "twisted, ill-informed" is a personal attack and shouldn't be part of the discourse. (Although that was in the context of the Z vs M case, not R vs D.)

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
You said I believe white males are superior to anyone else. That's an attack on me.
No. He said Republicans favor white males over other population segments. That's not a personal attack.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
Exactly, it's plausible and happens all the time. Another plausible case would be that Z was telling the truth and M had grabbed (or reached for) his Z's gun and would have used it against him.
And yet another plausible case would be that if Z had no gun he wouldn't have not have felt confident enough follow M and both would be alive and out of jail right now.
elistan is offline   2
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:47 PM   #96
skunk
macrumors Demi-God
 
skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Republic of Ukistan
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
If it weren't for guns George Zimmerman would probably be dead today.
If it weren't for his gun, George Zimmerman wouldn't have got involved.
__________________
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted the spoons." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
skunk is offline   2
Old Jan 9, 2013, 12:59 PM   #97
ericrwalker
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albany, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by elistan View Post
What does the ranking of the Libertarian party have to do with your ranking of the Republican and Democrat parties? You said Republicans are the lesser evil, he thinks Democrats are. Libertarians are not a factor of his argument about R vs D.
Because I said it's the less of two evils, doesn't mean I agree with anything they do that takes away anyone's rights.


Quote:
Originally Posted by elistan View Post
True, calling you "twisted, ill-informed" is a personal attack and shouldn't be part of the discourse. (Although that was in the context of the Z vs M case, not R vs D.)
Damn straight



Quote:
Originally Posted by elistan View Post
No. He said Republicans favor white males over other population segments. That's not a personal attack.
It felt like an attack and still does.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by skunk View Post
If it weren't for his gun, George Zimmerman wouldn't have got involved.

Your opinion stinks, he was part of the neighborhood watch. He saw suspicious activity, called the police and tried to keep an eye on the guy so the police could find him. Gun or no gun he was trying to be a good samaritan and stop the streak of robberies in his neighborhood.
ericrwalker is offline   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 01:03 PM   #98
skunk
macrumors Demi-God
 
skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Republic of Ukistan
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
Your opinion stinks, he was part of the neighborhood watch. He saw suspicious activity, called the police and tried to keep an eye on the guy so the police could find him. Gun or no gun he was trying to be a good samaritan and stop the streak of robberies in his neighborhood.
My opinion is of no particular odour but the truth.
__________________
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted the spoons." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
skunk is offline   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 01:03 PM   #99
zioxide
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
You said I believe white males are superior to anyone else. That's an attack on me.
Nope. I didn't say you said white males are superior. Stop trying to put words in my mouth to help your argument.

I said the only way the Republicans are the lesser of two evils are if you're rich, white, or Christian (or all of the above). Considering the rest, where I pointed out how the republicans are clearly not the lesser of two evils for the gay community, women who want control over their own bodies, kids who want to be able to get a student loan, etc, it's quite clear I was addressing the larger groups of people and not just you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elistan View Post
True, calling you "twisted, ill-informed" is a personal attack and shouldn't be part of the discourse. (Although that was in the context of the Z vs M case, not R vs D.)
Yes, but I didn't say "ericrwalker you are twisted and ill-informed." I said his argument was twisted and ill-informed. When you make claims that go against the official accounts of the incident, that's what's going to happen. It's not against the rules to break down someone's argument.

Quote:
No. He said Republicans favor white males over other population segments. That's not a personal attack.
Thank you.

Quote:
And yet another plausible case would be that if Z had no gun he wouldn't have not have felt confident enough follow M and both would be alive and out of jail right now.
Yup.
zioxide is online now   0
Old Jan 9, 2013, 01:04 PM   #100
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
It felt like an attack and still does.
And to think conservatives like to complain when others play the "victim" card.

You do a very good job of it yourself.
citizenzen is offline   2


Closed Thread
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CNN Fires Piers Morgan LIVEFRMNYC Politics, Religion, Social Issues 28 Feb 28, 2014 10:24 PM
RCP: The Gun Debate - What Liberals Leave Out ugahairydawgs Politics, Religion, Social Issues 131 Apr 11, 2013 01:06 PM
GB, the people have spoken,will you PLEASE take Piers Morgan back? glocke12 Politics, Religion, Social Issues 82 Dec 30, 2012 10:37 PM
Piers Morgan on gun crime for CNN Risco Politics, Religion, Social Issues 116 Dec 23, 2012 11:52 AM
Senator Manchin supports gun debate miloblithe Politics, Religion, Social Issues 9 Dec 18, 2012 10:22 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:28 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC