Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperI was joking about the cars - in truth I would like a sports car.
Your outlook on both cars and guns is preposterous.
I've owned performance cars in the past (a 99 Corvette and a 2001 Saleen Mustang S281). When I had the Corvette my girlfriend at the time had the same attitude you did, that all the power and handling was wasted. That is until we traded cars one day so she could take it to the shop while I was ...[text shortened]... war and for hunting, just like guns. He owns multiple bows, so is he out to frighten people?
Whilst I struggle with the concept of people being at liberty to own a gun as I realise people kill people - not guns, and culturally some Americans think it is their right to own weapons
My source of confusion comes from why anyone would want to own a gun?
I don't understand flower arranging either but at least that is harmless.
I went on stag weekend to Lithuania, the sort of weekend when the sole aim was to prove your machismo by drinking heaps of beer, eating stupid stuff and chasing women.
As part of the activities we went to a rifle range, half of us did not take part as were uncomfortable with the idea of shooting a weapon, even if it was just for fun. It just seems to me morally wrong.
Originally posted by invigorate"Like a status symbol? How crazy is that?"
Buying gun because you can? Like a status symbol? How crazy is that? They serve no useful purpose whatsoever!
Guns serve to other purpose but kill, maim or frighten people. Maybe you pick your noses with yours by I find my finger a safer option.
At least with a sports car fat middle aged men can show people they've they have turned into an insecure twit and actually use it to get from A to B.
Like a Rolex watch? Or a Lexus automobile. A Timex or Honda does the basic function as well. One of my favorite guns is a replica 1860 Army revolver .44 ball and cap, kind of like owning a Model T which is rarely driven but constantly improved and maintained.
How much useful function is a video game? Many of them mimic shooting. It is very satisfying and not easy to hit a small target with a projectile at 200 yards.
"Guns serve to other purpose but kill, maim or frighten people."
Sometime you may meet bad people, or even wild animals and find it a good thing to be able to kill the threat. I've never considered picking my nose with a loaded gun.
Because you don't find value in something is no indication that it has no value to others.
1 edit
Originally posted by invigorateWhy do people play the lottery when their chances of winning are less than getting struck by lightning?
My source of confusion comes from why anyone would want to own a gun?
The fact is people often have a skewed understanding of probabilities. Some people are obsessed with fears that they'll be the victim of a home invasion, so they'll invest hundreds or thousands of dollars buying guns, ammunition, and other accoutrements, and spend scores of hours training, all in preparation for the possibility that someone might attack them. As with the lottery, someone has to "win"...right?
And yet, for all their concern for contingencies at the tail ends of the bell curve, they'll often ignore threats that are far more likely to get them killed, such as smoking, lack of exercise, bald tires on their pick-up truck, or whatever. They also often ignore the statistics that show they are as likely as not to become the victim of their own weapons in any confrontation, such as the mother of the latest mass shooter. Each gun owner on this forum probably thinks of himself as immune to such statistics on account of their exceptional experience, toughness, and divine individuality, but that's just another aspect of human folly.
Anyway, a far more effective way of reducing the chances of a home invasion or burglary is to get a dog. Doesn't even have to be a big dog, just a loud one.
EDIT: Obviously lots of gun fans get a kick out of target practice and basically just shooting stuff. It's weird, yes, but if it blows their dress up I suppose it's understandable.
Originally posted by normbenignRolex's don't harm people. Model T cars don't harm people either very often. However keeping a gun has the potential to harm people.
"Like a status symbol? How crazy is that?"
Like a Rolex watch? Or a Lexus automobile. A Timex or Honda does the basic function as well. One of my favorite guns is a replica 1860 Army revolver .44 ball and cap, kind of like owning a Model T which is rarely driven but constantly improved and maintained.
How much useful function is a video game? Many o ...[text shortened]... Because you don't find value in something is no indication that it has no value to others.
I don't understand shooting video games or movies either - I avoid both on the grounds that they glorify killing.
"Sometimes I may meet bad people" - I've never met anyone who deserves shooting!
I live in the country, but don't feel threatened by the wildlife.
If a farmer needs to shoot an animal he can call out a professional.
There are several ways of getting satisfaction from hitting targets that don't involve shooting.
Guns are not toys. If guns were safe I would have no issue with people wanting to own them, however it strikes me the price of the your liberty, is rather high.
How many people getting shot would be too many for you?
Originally posted by invigorateDue to their value, Rolex wearers are sometimes robbed and killed. Model Ts have accidents due to ancient braking systems. Sure a gun has the potential to harm, but so does ice cream in your fridge.
Rolex's don't harm people. Model T cars don't harm people either very often. However keeping a gun has the potential to harm people.
I don't understand shooting video games or movies either - I avoid both on the grounds that they glorify killing.
"Sometimes I may meet bad people" - I've never met anyone who deserves shooting!
I live in the count ...[text shortened]... ur liberty, is rather high.
How many people getting shot would be too many for you?
I sincerely hope you never meet anyone who deserves shooting. I've met a number, and spared them after they stopped threatening my life.
Usually the first time you are threatened by wildlife is the only time if you aren't prepared. A friend's 14 year old killed a charging grizzly bear while on a salmon fishing trip near Anchorage, Alaska. Better the bear than the boy.
There was a thread here earlier this year about a farmer who shot a grizzly cub that was menacing his prize hogs. No time to call in a professional.
True guns aren't toys, but they are useful tools, and tools can be dangerous, and tools are often used in sporting competitions as well as work. All powerful and dangerous tools need to be treated with care and respect.
Any death is too many, but we don't and never will live in a perfect world. People die in frivolous and useless ways all the time, doing things that have no where near the utility of firearms.
Originally posted by normbenignIf people you meet are constantly threatening to kill you, you might need a personality tune-up. 😉
Due to their value, Rolex wearers are sometimes robbed and killed. Model Ts have accidents due to ancient braking systems. Sure a gun has the potential to harm, but so does ice cream in your fridge.
I sincerely hope you never meet anyone who deserves shooting. I've met a number, and spared them after they stopped threatening my life.
Usually the fir ...[text shortened]... nd useless ways all the time, doing things that have no where near the utility of firearms.
1 edit
Originally posted by SoothfastI haven't been threatened in years. I did for years work on the street in some of the most dangerous areas of the city of Detroit. I refused to give up my living to street thugs.
If people you meet are constantly threatening to kill you, you might need a personality tune-up. 😉
Maybe hardheaded, but I believed then and still do that if one gives in to criminal wrong, it will flourish.
2 edits
Originally posted by sh76Unfortunately, we are in the minority. I used to react with the mute button but now I have become acclimated to society's belief in (and comfort found in) religious superstition. I grew up religious brainwashed, and then broke out of it and went to the other extreme in a Bertrand Russel kind of way, and now while a non-believer, I do not profess to know what is best for society. Plus, it is what it is. Though, I do agree there are big negatives with religious fundamentalism. And religion historically has attacked and hindered science, and slowed progress (the Bertrand Russel still remains).
As soon as Presdient Obama started quoting scripture last night I turned on the mute button and waited for the Pats-SF game to come back. Wake me up when we get to policy discussion. I don't care what you think God thinks about the wanton murder of children.
Anyway, I noticed a cartoon making the rounds on Facebook of a bunch of children in a classroom in th l, the vast majority of independent'e developed societies developed some sort of religion.
Lastly, an interesting point I have read in more than one place (I think the first was in Newsweek) is that the human brain through evolution is hardwired for religion, to believe in the supernatural, a supernatural entity. Probably not but the argument goes that primitive man found mortality unsettling and evolved to believe in a supernatural entity to get to the afterlife.
Originally posted by moon1969I don't understand why people are threatened by the beliefs of others, whether theist or atheist, so long as the other isn't attempting to force his beliefs on them.
Unfortunately, we are in the minority. I used to react with the mute button but now I have become acclimated to society's belief in (and comfort found in) religious superstition. I grew up religious brainwashed, and then broke out of it and went to the other extreme in a Bertrand Russel kind of way, and now while a non-believer, I do not profess to know w ...[text shortened]... d mortality unsettling and evolved to believe in a supernatural entity to get to the afterlife.
Originally posted by no1marauderSee. If I had to take a guess, I'd reckon individualism has got something to do with it. That the shooters can get hold of guns... Obvious.
I linked to this article in another thread, but I'll post it in its entirety:
Yet these sorts of headlines are also becoming gut-wrenchingly familiar. Of the 12 deadliest shootings in U.S. history, six have taken place since 2007. (The Newton school shooting will likely rank second on that list.) Mass killings appear to be on the upswing — even as oth ...[text shortened]... re-frequent/
There are links to the studies mentioned in the article itself.
That the shooters have varying degrees of mental issues... Obvious.
If I try to place myself in a situation where I'd start shooting loads of people for a non-political reason... That's hard. Not only do I need to lose a sense of reality (how bad is my situation compared, say, to someone in Africa who's starving), I need to feel such an urgent desperation for attention that my suicide alone won't do the trick.
How lonely, frustrated and angry would I have to be?
How is nobody putting a reality check on my growing desperation?
Or is it a sudden snap? Hardly likely, me thinks. Such a total and seemingly sudden psychotic outburst would be preceded by years of lesser in idents. And then, again, how come this never came to anybody's attention or rang any bells.
If you're part of a society, these sorts of feedback and checks would be reflected upon you, time and time again.
So, that's why I can only imagine that when the individual becomes more important than the group, that's when the usual safety valves stop functioning.
Originally posted by normbenignI don't have any problem with religion as long as it doesn't demand that it's people infringe on my natural rights. It just has me bored and nonplussed when politicians cite scripture. First, scripture is mostly vague and of little meaning when applied to a current situation. Second, politicians really ought to talk about the law from the bully pulpit. I also think Obama's religion is probably a sham (he obviously didn't attend rev. Wright's services much of he'd have had more of a clue about what Wright stood for and his "My religion makes me believe marriage is between a man and a woman... Oh, I changed my mind" thing surely didn't impress me with his religious sincerity.
I don't understand why people are threatened by the beliefs of others, whether theist or atheist, so long as the other isn't attempting to force his beliefs on them.