The shooting death of Alison Parker

Duck and cover
User avatar
Monster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4970
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:57 pm
Location: Tarrytown, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby Monster » Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:14 pm

gorgeous, which of these were hoaxes, perpetrated by lizard people (aka "they")?

1. The Oklahoma City bombing, by Timothy McVeigh
2. The sinking of the Lusitania
3. The death of Leonard Nimoy
4. The sacking of Baghdad by the Mongols
5. The crucifixion of Jesus
6. The extinction of megafauna in North America and South America
Listening twice as much as you speak is a sign of wisdom.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4124
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby gorgeous » Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:03 pm

answer mine and I'll answer your's.....
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12218
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby JO 753 » Sat Sep 05, 2015 1:49 am

Its a huje scandal if they are real.

If you lissen to wut Pete sez, hiz explanation iz that therez a jiant ongoing 'false flag' conspirasy. The 'crisis actorz' are there to supply non-info to help hide any cluez that the entire thing wuz stajed.

A better explanation iz that the newz outlets employ actorz in order to avoid getting sued by real witnessez, keep nuts from doing nutty stuff that gets them in trouble with the FCC, get the linez delivered clearly and quickly, etc. If they are doing this, I'd bet therez sumthing in the fine print during the credits about it. If this iz the case, even if its legal, I still think its a scandal.

A less interesting explanation iz that this woman iz a nut who lissenz to a polise scanner and showz up at newzworthy events in order to get on TV.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26356
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Sep 05, 2015 3:33 am

JO 753 wrote:Its a huje scandal if they are real.
J0 753, They are different people. Please remember that Gorgeous only shows heavily edited "woo" footage intended to deceive people on the David Icke forum.

You should have picked up on the main problem that the "same" bloke didn't age despite the time difference between the two videos. Please remember that Gorgeous belongs to the David Icke's "Lizard people control the world" cult and they put up photos of public people with half closed eyes, by reviewing endless video footage. As they are also running the "crisis actors" cult, they are also keeping an eye out for similar looking people in the same footage. It's how David Icke sells books through that forum for profit.

Gorgeous is an unwitting idiot, who is here to help David Icke sell books.


Mark.jpg
Mick.jpg


https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-compa ... lax.t2651/
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4124
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby gorgeous » Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:29 am

same guy....what about the hilarious acting video?...where a 'dad' is shouting and later smiling and laughing...?
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19633
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby scrmbldggs » Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:45 am

What about answering the questions you were asked and producing supporting evidence for your claim this recent shooting is a hoax?
Hi, Io the lurker.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26356
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Sep 07, 2015 2:04 am

gorgeous wrote:same guy...
Not only is it a different person, but we know their different names. I gave you the link. You are lying to promote the David Icke videos promoting "Crisis actors". David Icke stole the idea from a web phenomena from five years ago, when people scoured civil war photos to find look-a-likes of modern actors.
download (9).jpg
images (7).jpg
137ea4f76c9d554adc45f8e874fe9b8a (1).jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4124
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby gorgeous » Mon Sep 07, 2015 2:10 am

the dad and fiancé are fake, the video was an obvious fake...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26356
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Sep 07, 2015 2:15 am

gorgeous wrote:the dad and fiancé are fake, the video was an obvious fake...
No. you are a troll, who posts here to promote David Icke's books and forum.

Either produce evidence the video is fake Now, or go away.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19633
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby scrmbldggs » Mon Sep 07, 2015 2:19 am

gorgeous wrote:the dad and fiancé are fake, the video was an obvious fake...


Where's your evidence?
Hi, Io the lurker.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26356
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Sep 07, 2015 2:33 am

I thought about this over the weekend. Let 's pretend I'm David Icke and I want to maximise profit from book sales by exploiting the idiots on my forum. The last thing I want to do is put out books on UFOs and aliens, because every other idiot in the world puts out those books already. Other people would make the profit. Therefore I have to invent new "woo" topics that I can have a monopoly on.

Soooo.... I invent the idea that alien Lizards control the world and I release a book. I then get idiots from the Icke forum, like Gorgeous, to join other forums and promote my book sales. After ten years or so, I invent new woo topics like "crisis actors" and get idiots, like Gorgeous, to promote this on other forums.

This is all part of a commercial process and Gorgeous should be banned, unless she starts to produce evidence, rather than just spamming our forum.
images (14).jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby xouper » Mon Sep 07, 2015 11:39 am

scrmbldggs wrote:
gorgeous wrote:the dad and fiancé are fake, the video was an obvious fake...

Where's your evidence?

As you already know, she has been asked repeatedly for evidence and she has repeatedly avoided giving any. She has merely stated the unsubstantiated opinion that the video is fake, based merely on questionable assumptions, personal opinions, and conjecture, but no actual evidence. Because of that, I consider her blatherings more or less worthless. Except perhaps for their amusement value.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4124
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby gorgeous » Mon Sep 07, 2015 3:30 pm

I showed you the videos...the dad's an actor, the fiancé was faking, both started talking gun control from day one.....abnormal...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19633
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby scrmbldggs » Mon Sep 07, 2015 4:08 pm

xouper wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote:
gorgeous wrote:the dad and fiancé are fake, the video was an obvious fake...

Where's your evidence?

As you already know, she has been asked repeatedly for evidence and she has repeatedly avoided giving any. She has merely stated the unsubstantiated opinion that the video is fake, based merely on questionable assumptions, personal opinions, and conjecture, but no actual evidence. Because of that, I consider her blatherings more or less worthless. Except perhaps for their amusement value.


So far, I found hardly anything amusing in the repetitious nonsense, and especially not in this despicable example. :(
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19633
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby scrmbldggs » Mon Sep 07, 2015 4:11 pm

:sigh: ... Really, if I wanted an amusing pet, I'd prefer a roach over this rancid pimply basement dweller...


gorgeous wrote:I showed you the videos...the dad's an actor, the fiancé was faking, both started talking gun control from day one.....abnormal...


Your preconceived imaginings are not evidence. Show how those lives and the reported circumstances were fake.
Hi, Io the lurker.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26356
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Evidence of "Crisis Forum Blogger"

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Sep 08, 2015 12:16 am

My god! It's true!. I have found hard evidence that there are people who use fake names, to spread untrue stories on the internet, to promote their own agenda.

Lori100 on Wire forum 2 years ago. ".the Reptiles are real.....remember Rumsfield never denied his lizard identity......"
https://www.wireclub.com/topics/politic ... 8C6-s-3Yk0

Gorgeous on Skeptic Forum this month ".the Reptiles are real.....remember Rumsfield never denied his lizard identity......"


Lori100 on Wire forum 2 years ago. "Einstein believed in God, spirit and religion......he was a Creationist.....case closed....------------- But, on the other hand, every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe—a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. — Albert Einstein"
https://www.wireclub.com/topics/science ... sUBKkR0/17

Gorgeous on Skeptic Forum this month "Einstein believed in God, spirit and religion......he was a Creationist.....case closed....------------- But, on the other hand, every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe—a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. — Albert Einstein"

Gorgeous? Are you a "crisis blogger" using different names to promote your agenda on the internet?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26356
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Gorgeous is a "crisis blogger"

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Sep 08, 2015 12:20 am

I hope everyone sees the irony in Gorgeous's posts. Gorgeous is doing exactly what she claims others are doing. Gorgeous is spamming forums to help David Icke sell books, by posting "woo" talking points on topics controlled by David Icke. (Alien lizards, crisis actors and so on)

It's a blatant commercial activity.
:D

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19633
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby scrmbldggs » Tue Sep 08, 2015 3:16 pm

...and seemingly also posting as "Monstrous" in the HD subforum. :roll:


If it wasn't so depressing, it would almost be funny.
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4124
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby gorgeous » Sat Sep 12, 2015 12:52 am

fake dad dancing at memorial party....sure...everyone does that... https://youtu.be/2tCA6GX6mXc
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby xouper » Sat Sep 12, 2015 5:03 am

Gorgeous, what you are doing in this thread is disgraceful.

Where is the evidence that Alison Parker is not dead?

Without that, you got nothing more than mere hand-waving.

You are making serious accusations here, all without any credible evidence.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26356
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Gorgeous is the Crisis Blogger actor

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Sep 12, 2015 5:38 am

gorgeous wrote:fake dad dancing at memorial party....sure...everyone does that... https://youtu.be/2tCA6GX6mXc
Gorgeous, it you who is the crisis blogger, who uses different names, on different forums to spam the same posts over and over again, to promote your agenda.


Lori100 on Wire forum 2 years ago. ".the Reptiles are real.....remember Rumsfield never denied his lizard identity......"
https://www.wireclub.com/topics/politic ... 8C6-s-3Yk0

Gorgeous on Skeptic Forum this month ".the Reptiles are real.....remember Rumsfield never denied his lizard identity......"


Lori100 on Wire forum 2 years ago. "Einstein believed in God, spirit and religion......he was a Creationist.....case closed....------------- But, on the other hand, every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe—a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. — Albert Einstein"
https://www.wireclub.com/topics/science ... sUBKkR0/17

Gorgeous on Skeptic Forum this month "Einstein believed in God, spirit and religion......he was a Creationist.....case closed....------------- But, on the other hand, every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe—a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. — Albert Einstein"

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4124
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby gorgeous » Sat Sep 12, 2015 2:25 pm

would you be dancing a jig at your murdered daughter's memorial dance party?
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby xouper » Sat Sep 12, 2015 2:50 pm

gorgeous wrote:would you be dancing a jig at your murdered daughter's memorial dance party?

Hmmm. Let's think about that for a moment. Dancing at a dance party . . .

Where have I seen that before . . .


Now I remember, New Orleans:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazz_funeral

. . . There is raucous music and cathartic dancing where onlookers join in to celebrate the life of the deceased . . .

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4124
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby gorgeous » Sat Sep 12, 2015 3:46 pm

it was a memorial...the dad's an actor playing a role...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19633
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby scrmbldggs » Sat Sep 12, 2015 3:55 pm

So in your view, all those people that in recent years chose a so-called "Life celebration" for their deceased loved ones are crisis actors perpetrating a scam... :roll:
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19633
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby scrmbldggs » Sat Sep 12, 2015 4:04 pm

And don't forget about this:


xouper wrote:Gorgeous, what you are doing in this thread is disgraceful.

Where is the evidence that Alison Parker is not dead?

Without that, you got nothing more than mere hand-waving.

You are making serious accusations here, all without any credible evidence.



Where is your evidence?
Hi, Io the lurker.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26356
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Sep 13, 2015 1:38 am

gorgeous wrote:it was a memorial...the dad's an actor playing a role...
No Gorgeous. You are lying again. You have no evidence. :D

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4124
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby gorgeous » Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:40 am

only in obvious shooting/gun control hoaxes with known crisis actors..
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19633
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby scrmbldggs » Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:59 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
gorgeous wrote:it was a memorial...the dad's an actor playing a role...
No Gorgeous. You are lying again. You have no evidence. :D

Small wonder the last facility it was institutionalized in absolutely refuses to readmit it.
Hi, Io the lurker.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26356
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Sep 13, 2015 4:09 am

gorgeous wrote: known crisis actors..
That would be you Lori100 and your spam posts that you copy from other forums here to promote your agenda.

Can you please explain why you did this in your own words?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Sep 13, 2015 7:22 am

Back to the original question: "What I find disingenuous is that in this case, and also the case of Kate Steinle, the gun control advocates do not explain what law they would enact that would have prevented the tragedy. Even when asked directly, they avoid answering that question. Maybe someone here can do better." //// The answer is a near total ban on gun ownership. Details at the edge as may be required to minimize protest (eg gun clubs for the Already Too Rich). The response to this is usually "it won't work." but it did work in australia and britain when they finally had enough. Will it work overnight? No...could take years but slow and steady progress towards a worthwhile goal is.... "success."

What is the end goal sought? Will the current laws/activities get you there or not??? Private gun ownership if for an agrarian/rural/wild environment. That is no longer the USA.

This has nothing to do with whether or not the Parker shooting was a hoax. The two subjects are independent of one another. I don't see the interest in discussing whether or not the Parket shooting was a hoax or not. As stated, the interesting issues to be examined are independent.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby xouper » Sun Sep 13, 2015 8:15 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote:What I find disingenuous is that in this case, and also the case of Kate Steinle, the gun control advocates do not explain what law they would enact that would have prevented the tragedy. Even when asked directly, they avoid answering that question. Maybe someone here can do better. . . . I confess, I am unable to think of anything that would also not further infringe the civil liberties of responsible law abiding citizens.

The answer is a near total ban on gun ownership.

I thought I was clear in asking for a solution that does not violate the civil liberties of responsible law abiding citizens. Your proposed solution would be a gross violation. It would also require taking guns away from federal agents. That ain't ever gonna happen. Try again.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: The response to this is usually "it won't work." but it did work in australia and britain when they finally had enough.

That is factually incorrect. For example, in the decade after the 1997 handgun ban in Britain, the homicide rate went up, not down.

Furthermore, none of the gun control laws in Australia or the UK would have prevented Kate's death. Try again.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Private gun ownership if for an agrarian/rural/wild environment. That is no longer the USA.

That is your personal opinion. I do not agree. Neither do most Americans.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Sep 13, 2015 8:53 am

xouper: 'I thought I was clear in asking for a solution that does not violate the civil liberties of responsible law abiding citizens. /// No. You asked for a solution that would work. Of course, it would infringe on gun ownership, but not the right to own guns....once the Supreme Court EVENTUALLY modifies that provision.

Your proposed solution would be a gross violation. /// Only of current law.... but you know.... EVENTUALLY common sense overcomes notions and laws "that don't work."

It would also require taking guns away from federal agents. /// I implied just the opposite...but actually that would be ok with me.

That ain't ever gonna happen. Try again.//// EVENTUALLY.

"That is factually incorrect. For example, in the decade after the 1997 handgun ban in Britain, the homicide rate went up, not down." /// EVENTUALLY, we might have to LINK up, but for now, I'll just assume the homicide rate due to mass shootings remained low? You do raise an interesting point though worth my own research. Related: the death from knives and hammers, yes, all very interesting.

"Furthermore, none of the gun control laws in Australia or the UK would have prevented Kate's death. Try again." /// If there are no guns, how does one die from a gun? You assume facts not present. More a product of dogma than analysis.

" bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Private gun ownership if for an agrarian/rural/wild environment. That is no longer the USA.
That is your personal opinion. I do not agree. Neither do most Americans. /// Good point if true, raising the issue I agree with: "basically, gun policy should follow the majority opinion of Americans. Ha, ha.... and if and when it does..... EVENTUALLY guns will be banned for the killing weapons they are.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Sep 13, 2015 9:24 am

The first evidence is that restricting gun ownership RESULTS IN higher homicide rates. Counter intuitive and the explanation for it strikes me more as one of continuing dogma. But still.........I prefer my dogma to contradicting dogma until the truth cannot be denied. I see no LOGICAL LINK between fewer guns and higher homicide so that result could well be tied to other factors. I also see an ABSOLUTE CAUSAL LINK between guns and death by guns. When your problem is malaria caused by mosquitoes from the swamp, the solution is not to add more mosquitoes.

Still, the initial graphs/histories does cause concern: http://crimeresearch.org/2013/12/murder ... -gun-bans/
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby xouper » Sun Sep 13, 2015 9:48 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote:I thought I was clear in asking for a solution that does not violate the civil liberties of responsible law abiding citizens.
No. You asked for a solution that would work.

No I didn't. You don't get to tell me what I meant. I was very clear that I asked for a solution that would not violate the civil liberties of responsible law abiding citizens. If it was not clear then, it should be now.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote:Furthermore, none of the gun control laws in Australia or the UK would have prevented Kate's death. Try again.

If there are no guns, how does one die from a gun? You assume facts not present. More a product of dogma than analysis.

I find it amusing that you accuse me of dogma and not knowing the facts. Apparently you did not know that Kate Steinle was killed with a gun stolen from a federal agent. Contrary to your claim, Kate's death would NOT  have been prevented by any of the laws in Australia or Britain. That is a fact, not dogma.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Private gun ownership if for an agrarian/rural/wild environment. That is no longer the USA.

That is your personal opinion. I do not agree. Neither do most Americans.

Good point if true, raising the issue I agree with: "basically, gun policy should follow the majority opinion of Americans. Ha, ha.... and if and when it does..... EVENTUALLY guns will be banned for the killing weapons they are.

That would require an amendment to the US Constitution. It has of course been amended a few times in the past and it can be amended again in the future. You predict it will be. I don't agree.

The ONLY  time it was ever amended to infringe civil liberties was the Eighteenth Amendment, which was repealed a few years later. Good luck getting any amendment that infringes civil liberties. In any case, that's too far in the future to be of any use in solving the problem today.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Sep 13, 2015 10:05 am

1. No I didn't. You don't get to tell me what I meant /// I did not. I pointed out what you SAID. Totally different. Just read what you wrote.

2. Once more---if there are no guns, how do you get killed by a gun?

3. The 13th Amendment infringed on property rights. All rights are infringed by other rights...takes a Supreme Court to find the balance.

4. As explained to you, the Supremes can change the meaning of the Second Amendment. They do it all the time.... its their very function.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby xouper » Sun Sep 13, 2015 10:16 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:The first evidence is that restricting gun ownership RESULTS IN higher homicide rates. Counter intuitive and the explanation for it strikes me more as one of continuing dogma.

I do not pretend to know what the causal link is.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I see no LOGICAL LINK between fewer guns and higher homicide so that result could well be tied to other factors.

You may be right. Or maybe not. I can think of a possible explanation, but I have no evidence for it. When criminals know their victim is unarmed, they may be more likely to commit a violent crime against them. I do not know if that is the correct explanation, but I offer it because you said you could not think of one.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I also see an ABSOLUTE CAUSAL LINK between guns and death by guns.

I do not dispute your observation. Death by "object x" requires the existence of "object x". If there were no swimming pools there would be no accidental drownings of toddlers, which is the leading cause of death in the age group one to four years old. Without automobiles, there would be no death by drunk drivers. So while I agree with your observation, I suspect you do not actually argue that "object x" should be banned merely because there is a correlation between the existence of "object x" and death by "object x".

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:When your problem is malaria caused by mosquitoes from the swamp, the solution is not to add more mosquitoes.

I do not accept that as a valid analogy. Mosquitoes are self-acting autonomous agents, whereas guns are not. More guns do not automatically mean more gun homicides. Gun homicides are caused by bad guys using guns unlawfully, not because the gun decided to go shoot someone on its own. The problem is the bad guys, not the guns. So while it's true that if there were no guns there would be no gun homicides, it is also true that if there were no bad guys there would also be no gun homicides.

Example: Vermont has the highest gun ownership of any state and yet has the lowest rate of gun homicides. The problem is not the number of guns. I think that is sufficient to show why the mosquito analogy is not useful.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Still, the initial graphs/histories does cause concern: http://crimeresearch.org/2013/12/murder ... -gun-bans/

I do not offer statistics as justification for my position on guns. My position derives from the fundamental natural right of self-sovereignty. In other words, my position is based on the notion of civil liberties, which is not subject to statistics, regardless which way they go.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Sep 13, 2015 10:36 am

xouper--well thought out response. Thank you.

1. I suspect you do not actually argue that "object x" should be banned merely because there is a correlation between the existence of "object x" and death by "object x". /// Correct. In all such cases, we look to a cost/benefit ratio and perhaps ease of control. Pools increase the quality of life==put a fence around it===teach the kiddies. Would society survive if private pools with kiddies in the family were outlawed? I think so. Maybe even beneficial to get the kiddies all out to the community pool where they could learn social skills. Pros and cons to all we do.

2. I do not accept that as a valid analogy. /// All analogies break down otherwise they would be direct analysis. They are used to highlight some aspect of the issue. Pros and cons to every analogy used.

3. Example: Vermont has the highest gun ownership of any state and yet has the lowest rate of gun homicides. /// Yep. lots of variables all interacting with one another. Makes it very easy to believe whatever one wants to.... pro or con.

4. My position derives from the fundamental natural right of self-sovereignty. /// Yep. But that is balanced against public safety and sound social policy. Pros and cons to all we do.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby xouper » Sun Sep 13, 2015 11:28 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:xouper--well thought out response. Thank you.

I prefer to keep the conversation civil and focused on the issues.
Perhaps you will continue to help with that.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote:I suspect you do not actually argue that "object x" should be banned merely because there is a correlation between the existence of "object x" and death by "object x".

Correct. In all such cases, we look to a cost/benefit ratio and perhaps ease of control. . . . Pros and cons to all we do.

It appears we are on the same page. Perhaps we disagree on how to assess the cost/benefit ratio for guns?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:All analogies break down otherwise they would be direct analysis. They are used to highlight some aspect of the issue. Pros and cons to every analogy used.

I agree. I have said that same thing more than once on this forum over the years in defense of my own analogies.

The point, as you say, is to try to find the part of the analogy that works to illustrate one's point. I get the point of your mosquito analogy. More of a bad thing is generally not helpful. Where I disagree with your point is that I do not see guns as a bad thing. What's bad is the unlawful use  of guns, not the guns themselves.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote:Example: Vermont has the highest gun ownership of any state and yet has the lowest rate of gun homicides.

Yep. lots of variables all interacting with one another. Makes it very easy to believe whatever one wants to.... pro or con.

Exactly. My position on guns is not based on what happens in Vermont. I offered it merely as a counter-example to the notion that more guns means more gun homicides. I agree that no guns means no gun homicides — that's an obvious tautology — but the statistical data do not support any correlation between the number of guns and the homicide rate (unless of course one cherry picks one's dataset, as I did).

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote:My position derives from the fundamental natural right of self-sovereignty.

Yep. But that is balanced against public safety and sound social policy. Pros and cons to all we do.

I agree with the desire for balance. However, certain fundamental civil liberties almost always take precedence over public safety or social policy. I do not claim that any civil liberty is absolute, but I do claim that the right of self-sovereignty and freedom of expression, for example, should not be compromised for the sake of public safety or social policy.

Example: President Obama has repeatedly defended free speech — perhaps reluctantly — even when public safety is at risk and people are getting killed because of it.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/obama-free-speech-paris-attacks-114042

My right to own my own liver and the right to defend it against those who would violate my self-sovereignty is what justifies my right to have and use defensive tools that are effective for self defense. I hold that belief so deeply and fundamentally, it is not ever likely anyone can change my mind on that point. I can't rule out that possibility, but perhaps you can understand the magnitude of the task should anyone try. And believe me, some on this forum have tried.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: The shooting death of Alison Parker

Postby xouper » Sun Sep 13, 2015 11:28 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote:You don't get to tell me what I meant

I did not. I pointed out what you SAID. Totally different. Just read what you wrote.

Please, go back and look again at my opening post. It says this:

In the opening post, xouper wrote:Seriously, I hear all these protests from certain politicians and others who demand something be done. So I ask, what, specifically, could have been done to prevent these two homicides?

I confess, I am unable to think of anything that would also not further infringe the civil liberties of responsible law abiding citizens. Perhaps it is simply a lapse of imagination on my part, in which case, I would be interested to hear if there are any really good ideas out there.

Contrary to your accusation, I clearly wrote that I was looking for a solution that does not further infringe the civil liberties of responsible law abiding citizens. So do not tell me I did not write that.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Once more---if there are no guns, how do you get killed by a gun?

Kate was killed by a gun stolen from a federal agent. In order for there to be absolutely no guns, you must also take them away from the federal government. That will never happen, so proposing that as a solution is pointless, in my opinion.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:The 13th Amendment infringed on property rights.

I disagree with your spin on that. But that is perhaps a semantic quibble that has nothing to do with anything else in this thread.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:As explained to you, the Supremes can change the meaning of the Second Amendment. They do it all the time....

I disagree. But I am willing to be shown that my knowledge has some holes in it. Name some Supreme Court cases that have changed the meaning of any amendment. If they do it all the time, as you claim, then it should be easy for you cite several examples.


Return to “Guns”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest