American guns on dark web.

Duck and cover
bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11060
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:56 pm

add correlation to a well founded physics/chemical proven cause and effect relationship .... and you are about 99% to proof as accepted by most rigorous scientists: ".... as close as we can get." Depending on the word game you want to use to cover up you have departed from common sense, "proof" only applies to mathematical problems.

Xouper saying: "That doesn't prove anything" is the idiots retreat.

Indeed..."the best evidence we have" is as close as you can get to most of life's issues. And again: the best evidence we have combined with rational clear logical thinking (eg: no guns means no death from guns as a beginning point.... with everyone has a gun as the final point) and cross cultural studies, and longetudinal studies of the same society....and the "truth" IS KNOWN......as best we can.

But......when Xouper says facts and statistics don't matter..........there is no argument or proof required.
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: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:45 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote: If you want to talk policy, then for me, the statistics are totally irrelevant to the Second Amendment right to own and carry firearms.
and that is your transparent and effective spin. OF COURSE its the EFFECTS of various laws, rules, actions, constitutional provisions that are important. What are the effects with and without whatever rule is being considered? And the only way to appreciate that is with logic (Guns kill people) and with statistics (what kinds of guns kill how many people). All to be balanced by what benefits are secured by having guns. The list is quite long: target practice, shooting deer, making political statements on road signs, and the vaunted: protecting your home against invasions. Should preventing our police and military from imposing their will as they might still even on anyone's list? I hope not.....but that is the pro-Gun position. "Just imagine if everyone had a gun......" Yeah...that would be great.

xouper wrote: I does not surprise me that people in other countries might not understand why many Americans have that position.
Americans don't. Vast majority are for greater gun restrictions if not outright ban. Its our "culture" that is sick...covered up with notions that "Americans" are gun loving. We aren't.............only the nuts.


You are entitled to your opinions, even though I disagree with them.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:48 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Xouper saying: "That doesn't prove anything" is the idiots retreat.


I never said that.


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:But......when Xouper says facts and statistics don't matter..........there is no argument or proof required.


That is a gross misinterpretation of what I said. Statistic may matter to you, they may matter to Lance, but they are not relevant to my core philosophical position.

Please stop misstating my position.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:55 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote:However, that is a discussion about policy, not correlation and causation.

My intention with that example was to make a point about correlation and causation, not policy.

No, your point intentionally or in Pavlovian fashion was to obscure the policy issue with irrelevant sidetracking.


Sorry, you do not get to define what I meant or to tell me what my motives are. Especially since you are mistaken.


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Your policy position is you want your guns for the emotional reasons you do, the majority who think otherwise can lump it, and facts and statistics won't change your mind. Yes.....we have it. You are a gun nut.


Calling me names does not refute my position, which is based on the notion of civil liberties, that all human beings have certain rights merely by virtue of having been born human. And that includes the right to self-sovereignty and self defense.

If you want to argue that people do not have the right of self-sovereignty, then be my guest, but I have already heard all the arguments and I do not accept them as valid.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 5:16 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:The problem is that Xouper is still conflating the words evidence and proof.


Stop lying, Lance.

I have done no such thing.

How many times do I have to say I am not asking for proof?

I have said that at least a hundred times and yet here you are claiming I never said it.

What the {!#%@} is the matter with you??

Seriously, why do you keep saying this falsehood about me? Have you not considered the damage you keep doing to your reputation when you repeat the same old lie over and over and over?

Seriously Lance, this is getting close to becoming harassment and I will not stand for it.


Lance Kennedy wrote:Correlations increase the probability of cause and effect.


That is factually incorrect.

The scientific community does not agree with you, Lance.


Lance Kennedy wrote:The statement that correlation does not imply causation, is a slogan. Not a truth.


Sorry, Lance, the scientific community does not agree with you.


Lance Kennedy wrote:The important question here is how much the probability increases, to demonstrate cause and effect with correlations. It depends to a degree on how high the correlation coefficient is, and whether the correlation is alone, or whether other studies also show similar correlations.


That is factually incorrect.

The scientific community does not agree with you, Lance.


Lance Kennedy wrote: In this case, between gun possession and gun murder, there are numerous correlations from numerous studies, and the coefficient in some studies is close to unity.


You have cited some studies, but the coefficient is not anywhere near unity.

Secondly, as I have repeatedly shown in previous threads, there are also studies that show the opposite.

For example, here is a graph comparing the 50 states:

Image

The data points are scattered all over the place and thus there is no correlation whatsoever.


Lance Kennedy wrote: To a degree, the probability also depends on whether a cause and effect relationship makes sense. In this case, does the idea that more guns results on more gun murders make sense ? Absolutely it does.


Except that does not explain places like Vermont and other states where there are more guns but less gun murders. Clearly it is not always the case that more guns means more gun murders.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10226
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Aug 08, 2017 5:25 am

Xouper

You truly do not understand numbers, do you ?
An occasional exception like Vermont does not obviate the rule.

Where did the numbers come from in your graph, by the way ? From an NRA publication ? Harvard University got a clear cut correlation across 50 states, so I do not think your numbers are likely to be correct.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 5:37 am



That source does not support your assertion that correlation is evidence of causation. Not even close.


Lance Kennedy wrote:We can all think of dozens of situations where correlation means causation.


That's not phrased correctly. We can find find dozens of cases with known causal relations that also show a correlation, but the correlation itself is never evidence of cause.


Lance Kennedy wrote: For example, if I took the minimum of 12 sets of data pairs, altitude and temperature, at various sites up a mountain, I would get a beautiful negative correlation between altitude and temperature. Does this correlation mean high altitude causes low temperature. Yes, of course it does.


That is factually incorrect.

The correlation by itself is not evidence of the actual cause.

Furthermore, if you take samples at higher altitudes, you will find that the temperature goes back up.

Image

Sorry, Lance, but your own example refutes your claim that correlation is evidence of causation.



Lance Kennedy wrote:There will always be examples that show the opposite, of course. But we are talking of probability, not certainty. If you obtained 100 strong correlations, you will find a majority will be cause and effect.


That is factually incorrect.

I we take a million random factors and run correlations on all the possible combinations of pairs, there will be some strong correlations. The vast majority of those strong correlations will be specious, meaning there is no causal relationship whatsoever.


Lance Kennedy wrote:I know, of course that Xouper will reject this. If I got a submission from 100 top scientists to back, me, . . .


You can't get any scientists to agree with you. Whereas in previous threads, I cited many scientists who disagree with you.


Lance Kennedy wrote:. . . Xouper would still reject it, since Xouper has sclerosis of the opinion.


Lance, this is your final warning. Knock it off.

These repeated and false derogations are bordering on harassment and I will not stand for it.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 5:45 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Xouper

You truly do not understand numbers, do you ?


Knock it off, Lance.

Insults (especially false insults) don't count as a valid rebuttal.


Lance Kennedy wrote:An occasional exception like Vermont does not obviate the rule.


I gave more than an "occasional exception", I gave so many exceptions that there is no rule.


Lance Kennedy wrote:Where did the numbers come from in your graph, by the way ?


If you can read, then you will have noticed that the source of the numbers is cited at the bottom of the graph.


Lance Kennedy wrote:Harvard University got a clear cut correlation across 50 states, so I do not think your numbers are likely to be correct.


It doesn't matter what you "think". You don't get to dismiss numbers merely because you don't like them.

It only matters what the evidence says.

And in previous threads, I have shown studies and evidence that contradicts your precious Haahhvard study.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7630
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby TJrandom » Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:38 am

xouper wrote:... based on the notion of civil liberties, that all human beings have certain rights merely by virtue of having been born human. And that includes the right to self-sovereignty and self defense. ...


I too have those rights - but not to prepare weapons for such use. I may be forgiven for use of a weapon that falls at hand (a stone, or a tool for example), but my preparation must be limited to my body. I may not own a weapon for such use or even have one handy - such as a knife kept in the driving compartment of my car/truck. When I finish a tool assisted job and return those tools to my truck, I think about this law and act accordingly. To do otherwise is illegal.

Not having weapons of force at hand helps keep the peace and limits confrontations to words and fists. Use of fists still gets you arrested no matter that you were assaulted. I am legally permitted to hold and shove and speak. We have far fewer gun murders, and murders in general, as a result.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:30 am

TJrandom wrote:
xouper wrote:... based on the notion of civil liberties, that all human beings have certain rights merely by virtue of having been born human. And that includes the right to self-sovereignty and self defense. ...


I too have those rights - but not to prepare weapons for such use. I may be forgiven for use of a weapon that falls at hand (a stone, or a tool for example), but my preparation must be limited to my body. I may not own a weapon for such use or even have one handy - such as a knife kept in the driving compartment of my car/truck. When I finish a tool assisted job and return those tools to my truck, I think about this law and act accordingly. To do otherwise is illegal.

Not having weapons of force at hand helps keep the peace and limits confrontations to words and fists. Use of fists still gets you arrested no matter that you were assaulted. I am legally permitted to hold and shove and speak. We have far fewer gun murders, and murders in general, as a result.


I understand your point of view. Or at least I assume I do. Thanks for explaining.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10226
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:37 am

Xouper

Get your facts straight.

For example, my illustration of a correlation between altitude and temperature was stated as climbing a mountain. You say temperatures will rise again . Sure, but not on a mountain. Do not distort matters.

Correlations are evidence of causation. You still insist on acting as if it was proof, not evidence required. This is especially true when the correlation coefficient is high. Very few high correlations are accidental. When I did my correlations between western advanced nations for gun possession versus murder rate, the coefficient was very high. That is evidence and quite strong evidence that it is causation. Just as a strong coefficient between smoking and lung cancer led eventually to experimental proof that smoking causes lung cancer.

Among western advanced nations, the correlation between gun possession and murder rate is very strong. Sure, it is not proof, but it is real evidence. Quoting a slogan does not change that.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:13 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Xouper

Get your facts straight.

For example, my illustration of a correlation between altitude and temperature was stated as climbing a mountain. You say temperatures will rise again . Sure, but not on a mountain. Do not distort matters.


In your original claim you did not specify a limit for the altitude. You made the blanket claim that altitude correlates with temperature.

In any case, it is not valid to cherry pick a subset and then claim that the correlation is evidence of causation. The correlation fails when all the data is considered.

This is the same error you make with gun statistics. You have cherry picked a subset that gives the numbers you like and ignore the rest that contradicts your narrative.


Lance Kennedy wrote:Correlations are evidence of causation.


The scientific community still disagrees with you, no matter how many times you repeat it.


Lance Kennedy wrote: You still insist on acting as if it was proof,


I have clearly stated I do not do require proof.

How many times have I warned you to stop lying about my position and yet you keep doing it. That does not reflect well on your character, Lance.


Lance Kennedy wrote:This is especially true when the correlation coefficient is high.


That is factually incorrect.

In the correlation I mentioned previously with a coefficient of 0.95, which is a very high coefficient, there is no causal relationship between X and Y.

None.

Zip.

Nada.

And yet here you are claiming such a correlation is evidence of causation.

Before I reveal what X and Y are, I will give you one last chance to change your answer and avoid embarrassing yourself.


Lance Kennedy wrote:Very few high correlations are accidental.


That is factually incorrect.

The vast majority of correlations are specious, primarily because they are between two random factors that cannot possibly have a causal relation.


Lance Kennedy wrote: When I did my correlations between western advanced nations for gun possession versus murder rate, the coefficient was very high. That is evidence and quite strong evidence that it is causation.


Wrong. It is not evidence of causation.

I have explained why in several previous threads, including citing reputable scientists on the matter of correlation and causation. You have cited no one except your own ignorant opinion.


Lance Kennedy wrote: Quoting a slogan does not change that.


It is not a slogan, it is what the scientific community says.

Sorry, Lance, the scientific community does not agree with you. And that's why you cannot cite any reputable scientist whatsoever to support your opinion.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3288
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby ElectricMonk » Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:28 am

Murder rates don't mean anything anymore: the chances to die from a gunshot wound have dropped massively, just because 911 can tell where you are from your phone location, there are more properly equipped hospitals and treatment has gotten so much better.

So we look at injuries or incidents, not deaths, and they have been consistently going up.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7630
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby TJrandom » Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:32 am

xouper wrote:
TJrandom wrote:
xouper wrote:... based on the notion of civil liberties, that all human beings have certain rights merely by virtue of having been born human. And that includes the right to self-sovereignty and self defense. ...


I too have those rights - but not to prepare weapons for such use. I may be forgiven for use of a weapon that falls at hand (a stone, or a tool for example), but my preparation must be limited to my body. I may not own a weapon for such use or even have one handy - such as a knife kept in the driving compartment of my car/truck. When I finish a tool assisted job and return those tools to my truck, I think about this law and act accordingly. To do otherwise is illegal.

Not having weapons of force at hand helps keep the peace and limits confrontations to words and fists. Use of fists still gets you arrested no matter that you were assaulted. I am legally permitted to hold and shove and speak. We have far fewer gun murders, and murders in general, as a result.


I understand your point of view. Or at least I assume I do. Thanks for explaining.


My point - would be that guns are not necessary to having civil liberties, including the right to self-sovereignty and self defense.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:57 am

TJrandom wrote:My point - would be that guns are not necessary to having civil liberties, including the right to self-sovereignty and self defense.


That's what I thought. Thanks for confirming.

My point (which I assume you already know and do not agree with) is that owning and carrying a gun is also a civil liberty.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7630
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby TJrandom » Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:15 am

xouper wrote:
TJrandom wrote:My point - would be that guns are not necessary to having civil liberties, including the right to self-sovereignty and self defense.


That's what I thought. Thanks for confirming.

My point (which I assume you already know and do not agree with) is that owning and carrying a gun is also a civil liberty.


We would likely differ on whether the right to bear arms is for the good of the community - i.e. a civil liberty that ought to be protected.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:29 am

ElectricMonk wrote:Murder rates don't mean anything anymore: the chances to die from a gunshot wound have dropped massively, just because 911 can tell where you are from your phone location, there are more properly equipped hospitals and treatment has gotten so much better.

So we look at injuries or incidents, not deaths, and they have been consistently going up.


Interesting point. Can you point me to some information about that?

I found this from the US government:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4700838/

In figure 2, "Nonfatal firearm injury rates declined sharply from 1993 to 1999, decreasing 50% from 38.3 to 19.3, and then remained relatively stable" through 2012.

That does not seem to match what you were saying about injuries going up.

Perhaps you could clarify what you had in mind?

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3288
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby ElectricMonk » Tue Aug 08, 2017 12:39 pm

You haven't got up-to-date data.

http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls

gun injuries:
2014: 23,000
2015: 27,000
2016: 30,000
2017: 18,700 so far

this is a remarkable increase.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:38 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:You haven't got up-to-date data.

http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls

gun injuries:
2014: 23,000
2015: 27,000
2016: 30,000
2017: 18,700 so far

this is a remarkable increase.


Those numbers are less than half the injury rate (per 100,000) for 2012 and 2013.

2012: 24.0
2013: 23.1
2014: 07.2
2015: 08.4
2016: 09.4

For example, in 2013 there were 73,505 firearm injuries, which then divided by the population gives 23.1 per 100,000 population.

Something doesn't add up.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3288
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby ElectricMonk » Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:21 pm

so?

we see (again) a clear upward trend.

And this does coincides with an acceleration of the upward trend of guns being sold (NRA claiming that Obama will take their guns any decade now).

And yes, this is correlation, not causation.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:35 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:so?

we see (again) a clear upward trend.


A three year trend? OK.

From 2000 to 2014 the trend was flat, despite increasing number of guns.

So is this three year trend actually a trend? Too soon to tell. It could just be a momentary bump in the road.

But I see your point.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:39 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:. . . (NRA claiming that Obama will take their guns any decade now).


Why does the NRA always get blamed? They don't control what people buy.

And in any case, Obama himself is on record as saying he wanted to impose more restrictions on guns. Every time there was a shooting, he got up on his soapbox and said we gotta do something about all these guns. People don't need the NRA to point that out.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11060
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:11 pm

xouper: I admire your dexterity with ideas, statistics, definitions. Assuming all data points are correct....your position on "trends" is the better one.

Then you ask: "Why does the NRA always get blamed."===>now forgive me if I recognize you are smart enough to know this is a BS statement. You are a mix of Good and Bad. Good: you are smart and can actually respond to an issue. Bad: you have some kind of attachment to guns that clouds everything else about you.

...............just talking psychology, and the obvious.
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
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3288
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby ElectricMonk » Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:16 pm

Why doesn't the NRA get blamed, when they repentantly call for violence against the state and fellow citizens?
When they undermine any attempt of talking about gun violence, especially after mass-shootings?
When they constantly lie about the positions of politicians vis-a-vis gun laws (see Clinton/Obama).


In most countries, the NRA would long have been banned.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:24 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:Why doesn't the NRA get blamed, when they repentantly call for violence against the state and fellow citizens?
When they undermine any attempt of talking about gun violence, especially after mass-shootings?
When they constantly lie about the positions of politicians vis-a-vis gun laws (see Clinton/Obama).


In most countries, the NRA would long have been banned.


You are of course entitled to your opinions, but I do not agree with them.

Regarding the NRA undermining attempts to further infringe the Second Amendment, I am all for that. Especially after mass shootings.

When has the NRA called for violence against anyone?

When has the NRA lied about Clinton/Obama about gun laws?

And why would the NRA get banned?

Enquiring Minds Wanna Know ™. ;)

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12404
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby JO 753 » Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:29 pm

repentantly? You mean either repeatedly or unrepentantly.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:31 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:. . . you have some kind of attachment to guns that clouds everything else about you.


I thought I explained that. I have a fundamental core belief that humans have an inalienable right (by mere virtue of having been born human) to self-sovereignty and self defense. Having a gun is a core civil liberty right up there with the right of free speech.

Everyone's core beliefs "cloud" everything about them. I'm no different from you in that respect. We just have different "clouds" it seems.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11060
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:41 pm

Yes xouper.....but all rights have to be balanced against all other rights. NO right is absolute as you make this gun right. Of note....all the other rights are with all people everywhere throughout all time. Gun rights are unique in that they require technology. How can an Egyptian in 2000 BC be born with an inalienable right to own a gun?

TJ laid it out quite well.

You make the moral/rational equivalency argument all the time. Its mostly wrong. For instance: your cloud is a nonsensical non common sense attachment to weapons of mass destruction as a form of liberty. MY cloud is balancing all the competing interests. Not all clouds are the same.
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
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12404
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby JO 753 » Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:19 pm

Az I'v explained in other thredz on this topic, gunz are not very good for self defens. They are far better at offens, therefor more gunz = more advantaj for offenderz.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:10 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Yes xouper.....but all rights have to be balanced against all other rights.


In a sense that is mostly correct.

Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose. Or so the it says on my bumper sticker.

However, I do not need to balance my right of gun ownership against your right to deny me ownership of a gun, since you do not have that right.

What rights did you have in mind that the Second Amendment needs to be balanced against?


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: NO right is absolute as you make this gun right.


It was not my intention to make it absolute.


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: Of note....all the other rights are with all people everywhere throughout all time. Gun rights are unique in that they require technology.


Not so. Freedom of the press requires a press.


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: How can an Egyptian in 2000 BC be born with an inalienable right to own a gun?


I don't argue that an Egyptian has the right to own a gun. I assert that he has the right to own a personal weapon of self defense (or hunting or sport), of whatever technology may be available at the time.


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:TJ laid it out quite well.


He expressed his opinion, and I expressed mine.


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:You make the moral/rational equivalency argument all the time. Its mostly wrong. For instance: your cloud is a nonsensical non common sense attachment to weapons of mass destruction as a form of liberty.


Sorry, I do not agree. My cloud does not ask for weapons of mass destruction.


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:MY cloud is balancing all the competing interests. Not all clouds are the same.


That's fine. Are you suggesting your cloud takes precedence over mine?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:16 pm

JO 753 wrote:Az I'v explained in other thredz on this topic, gunz are not very good for self defens.


Your opinion on that point is not relevant to the right to own and carry a gun.

In any case, according to government statistics, armed victims of assault usually experience a better outcome (on average) than unarmed victims. Not by a large margin, but still better than you portray it. Just sayin'.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11060
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:44 pm

xouper wrote: That's fine. Are you suggesting your cloud takes precedence over mine?

No. I'm saying that expressly. AS STATED and all too obvious: your cloud is single issue and violates common sense.

Actually......any and all positions/clouds are better than yours..........other than "arm everybody."

Silly single issue hooman.
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: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:08 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
xouper wrote: That's fine. Are you suggesting your cloud takes precedence over mine?

No. I'm saying that expressly. AS STATED and all too obvious: your cloud is single issue and violates common sense.


Thanks for misunderstanding my position. As usual.

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but obviously I do not agree.

My position does not violate common sense. It merely violates your personal prejudices.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:10 pm

xouper wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Yes xouper.....but all rights have to be balanced against all other rights.


In a sense that is mostly correct.

Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose. Or so the it says on my bumper sticker.

However, I do not need to balance my right of gun ownership against your right to deny me ownership of a gun, since you do not have that right.

What rights did you have in mind that the Second Amendment needs to be balanced against?


Were you planning to answer that question sometime in the near future?

Or do you not have an answer?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11060
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:12 pm

Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. Its in the penumbra.
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: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:25 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness.


How does my owning or carrying a gun infringe any of those rights?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11060
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:50 pm

Its not YOU xouper. Obviously.........its everyone else. Everyone who uses a gun to commit crime.

Childish to think you should be an exception...... even when you are.

Ain't that the shi-ts?
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
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10226
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:23 pm

The so-called "right to bear arms " is a crock. It comes partly from a historical event, where the government wanted to make sure it had access to unpaid militia with their own guns, in case of invasion. The rest of it comes from the big money being spent by gun makers to ensure their market remains untouched. They have hundreds of millions of dollars to bribe those who might get in the way of their ability to sell billions of dollars of guns each year.

In other advanced western nations, governments remain unbribed and realise that this freedom is harmful to society. They control it. In that sense, it is no different to the controls put on the right to drive drunk.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11060
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:27 pm

The right to bear arms has been expanded and very much supported by the last 2-3 Supreme Court rulings.

In essence, the Supremes and xouper are singing from the same hymnal.

Lance: just because you are generally right, don't go off half cocked. That is not good gun safety.
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: 10715
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: American guns on dark web.

Postby xouper » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:47 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Its not YOU xouper. Obviously.........its everyone else. Everyone who uses a gun to commit crime.


I am not saying that anyone has the right to commit a crime, gun or no gun.


Return to “Guns”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest