Exaggerated hyperbolic analogies won't accomplish much, at least try to keep the discussion based around things that are really happening.
It's neither hyperbolic nor exaggerated. Either your rights are yours or they're not. I changed the context to illustrate the absurdity of the idea that individual rights are subject to the whims of the thinnest of majorities.
And yes, to many pro-gun owners, any discussion of controlling guns does come across that way, when in reality, it's often the same prostate exam the doctor was trying to conduct.
Yet, you can decline the prostate exam and your doctor will give you something along the lines of "OK, it's your prostate." for a response.
There is a misconception that you can just put whatever shit into the Founding Fathers mouths and have it accepted as truth. Guys were progressives, much more progressive than the people of the time let them be. If they were around today they would ask why health care having advanced to a stage where it is both effective and plentiful, isn't as available as books in libraries.
And they'd be mystified that negroes and women are free to own property.
I have long since grown weary of the canonization of the founders.
They were human beings, just like the rest of us, they were flawed and imperfect.
They don't even recognize their fanatical zealotry, they just seem to be determined to keep their guns regardless, and have shut themselves off to any discussion by creating a false image that anybody who wants to control the use of firearms is somehow mindlessly calling for their banning.
Are you fanatically zealous in your defense of your anus? Would you be willing to engage in a discussion, ANY discussion about what items will be placed into it by strangers? Would you accuse someone who wants to open a dialog with you about what will be placed into your anus and when of mindlessly calling for your butt-rape or will you be reasonable and have a discussion?
The problem with letting random citizens own guns is that most people are too careless, too random, too emotional to be predictable and safe.
You're just making shit up now.
Let's run some quick numbers.
There are roughly 30,000 "firearm related" murders each year in the US. There are roughly 85,000,000 gun owners in the US.
Now, let's make one assumption. Every murder victim is killed by a different shooter. This isn't the case, but since the numbers would skew in favor of your argument, I don't think I'll argue the point.
So, each year 30,000 out of 85,000,000 are unsafe/unstable.
That means that 0.03529% of gun owners shouldn't be trusted in any given year.
No matter how you slice it, that's far from "most".
So these people are harboring fantasies of hiding in the bushes fighting their own government! Hardly what I could call a patriotic attitude...
George Washington...
Only people who have a job that requires guns should have guns.
I honestly don't know a person with guns who wants to ban them.
I know people like that. They have a "Well, I just own a revolver or a hunting rifle/shotgun, but I want to ban YOUR guns. You know, those semi-automatics" mindset.
When my neighbor has a gun, it means the people robbing houses in the neighborhood may feel they need to carry guns too, or they may acquire one when they rob my neighbor, putting me at greater risk.
Your neighbor should put this sign in his front yard.
Stop using the NRA's, manufacturer's and their lobbyists' terminology and start using your brain.
The manufacturers and the buyers are the ones who get to choose the terminology. If I make Widget-X and my customers want to buy Widget-X, there's nothing wrong with us coming to an agreement about the terminology used to refer to Widget-X.
This "assault weapons" bullshit would be akin to someone unilaterally choosing to call all cargo vans "rape mobiles". Call it a "rape mobile" all you want, but the makers and buyers of cargo vans aren't going to take you seriously.
at the end of that diatribe: "Fix your f*cking "compliance tool", because it is obviously broken. And fix your approach to kernel programming"
is:
"How about you go and fix your f*cking social skills. When you can carry on a conversation without resorting to childish profanity, I'll come back and donate my free time to your project. Until then, go f*ck yourself."
Linus is fast becoming another RMS but without the benefit of a cohesive set of values.
I was just thinking that Linus is showing himself to be the bastard child of ESR and Theo.
This will probably go in one ear and out the other, but I'll do this anyway for the sake of observers who might not understand.
A trained soldier with an assault weapon who has no fear of hitting innocent bystanders would mow down teacher with guns easily enough.
No. Soldiers are not issued "assault weapon"s. "Assault weapon" is a neologism that was crafted to describe civilian firearms that look like military firearms, the intent of the word is to cause confusion between the two and it appears to have been effective in your case. Soldiers are issued M4s and M16s. Civilians, at best, can get their hands on AR-15s, which look quite similar to the M16, but on the inside are vastly different.
But arming teachers is just a silly idea.
It's silly to arm every teacher. But it's a good idea to have at least some form of armed resistance. Several school shootings, and at least one grade-school shooting was cut short by armed faculty/students.
A shooter can just as easily spray a classroom from the outside, before a teacher even sees them.
Possible, but that would still result in fewer casualties than walking into a classroom and having a monopoly of deadly force.
Unless you are going to put up bullet proof glass in all schools, or concrete walls. At which point schools have become prisons.
That's mighty white of you. Have you ever seen an inner city school? High concrete walls, choke points with security guards. There's a reason why the shooting there happen outside of the school.
They could be targeted by anti-gun zealots. It's like publishing a map which pinpoints where the jews are. Maybe they should put a star on their houses.
You're really going to compare antisemitism to anti-gun sentiment? Show me one case of an anti-gun zealot doing anything wrong against a pro-gun owner. Just one is all I ask, never mind a Holocaust.
So, you follow the NRA line that we should arm all the teachers and students so they can defend themselves against Obama's stormtroopers? How long do you think they'd last?
You don't seriously think that you'd be the first person who had to go through having a gun taken under United States law. It happens every day, and be assured that the people whose weapons are confiscated are not paid for them.
[CITATION NEEDED]
Mr. Perens, anyone who legally owns a firearm but is later disqualified from owning one is given time (the amount of time varies by state) to "dispose of" the firearm, in other words to sell it or give it away. If that person doesn't properly dispose of the firearm in the time frame given, it will then be seized and government also seizes firearms that are used in crimes.
I, on the other hand, would like to volunteer for the study that seeks to prove that receiving oral sex to completion from large breasted women is pleasurable.
Somehow I suspect that people who exhibit ASD symptoms but are otherwise high functioning will still continue to self-identify with the term Asperger's.
Natural selection is still at work. It's always at work. What has changed is that it's now favoring a higher group intelligence. Because we now are able to correct or compensate for so many other problems with medical technology, people who would otherwise have died and been removed from the gene pool are still around and contributing.
I have terrible eyesight. If it were not for the ability of humanity to create spectacles and build cities, I'd have long ago been eaten by a large predator or fallen over something and died from the infection. We are not changing too fast for natural selection to keep up. That is natural selection at work.
Slashdot Mirror
Exaggerated hyperbolic analogies won't accomplish much, at least try to keep the discussion based around things that are really happening.
It's neither hyperbolic nor exaggerated. Either your rights are yours or they're not. I changed the context to illustrate the absurdity of the idea that individual rights are subject to the whims of the thinnest of majorities.
And yes, to many pro-gun owners, any discussion of controlling guns does come across that way, when in reality, it's often the same prostate exam the doctor was trying to conduct.
Yet, you can decline the prostate exam and your doctor will give you something along the lines of "OK, it's your prostate." for a response.
LK
Same thing as the "Right to bear arms" --- you think with your pissy little semi-automatic assault rifles you can fight the army?
There is no such thing as a "semi-automatic assault rifle".
LK
There is a misconception that you can just put whatever shit into the Founding Fathers mouths and have it accepted as truth. Guys were progressives, much more progressive than the people of the time let them be. If they were around today they would ask why health care having advanced to a stage where it is both effective and plentiful, isn't as available as books in libraries.
And they'd be mystified that negroes and women are free to own property.
I have long since grown weary of the canonization of the founders.
They were human beings, just like the rest of us, they were flawed and imperfect.
LK
They don't even recognize their fanatical zealotry, they just seem to be determined to keep their guns regardless, and have shut themselves off to any discussion by creating a false image that anybody who wants to control the use of firearms is somehow mindlessly calling for their banning.
Are you fanatically zealous in your defense of your anus? Would you be willing to engage in a discussion, ANY discussion about what items will be placed into it by strangers? Would you accuse someone who wants to open a dialog with you about what will be placed into your anus and when of mindlessly calling for your butt-rape or will you be reasonable and have a discussion?
LK
The problem with letting random citizens own guns is that most people are too careless, too random, too emotional to be predictable and safe.
You're just making shit up now.
Let's run some quick numbers.
There are roughly 30,000 "firearm related" murders each year in the US. There are roughly 85,000,000 gun owners in the US.
Now, let's make one assumption. Every murder victim is killed by a different shooter. This isn't the case, but since the numbers would skew in favor of your argument, I don't think I'll argue the point.
So, each year 30,000 out of 85,000,000 are unsafe/unstable.
That means that 0.03529% of gun owners shouldn't be trusted in any given year.
No matter how you slice it, that's far from "most".
So these people are harboring fantasies of hiding in the bushes fighting their own government! Hardly what I could call a patriotic attitude...
George Washington...
Only people who have a job that requires guns should have guns.
I hope they send you to take mine.
LK
I honestly don't know a person with guns who wants to ban them.
I know people like that. They have a "Well, I just own a revolver or a hunting rifle/shotgun, but I want to ban YOUR guns. You know, those semi-automatics" mindset.
When my neighbor has a gun, it means the people robbing houses in the neighborhood may feel they need to carry guns too, or they may acquire one when they rob my neighbor, putting me at greater risk.
Your neighbor should put this sign in his front yard.
LK
Or ... perhaps if the average IQ of weapons owners didnt match the gauge they are shooting
Yeah. Like Joe Biden. Yes, he's a gun owner. Stupid ass that HE is.
LK
There's a good chance they already did.
I believe that they've only published two or three counties' permit holders. Who knows where their guards are from.
LK
I can't tell. Are you being serious or sarcastic?
LK
Stop using the NRA's, manufacturer's and their lobbyists' terminology and start using your brain.
The manufacturers and the buyers are the ones who get to choose the terminology. If I make Widget-X and my customers want to buy Widget-X, there's nothing wrong with us coming to an agreement about the terminology used to refer to Widget-X.
This "assault weapons" bullshit would be akin to someone unilaterally choosing to call all cargo vans "rape mobiles". Call it a "rape mobile" all you want, but the makers and buyers of cargo vans aren't going to take you seriously.
LK
Crime is up in New York, because Mayor Bloomberg's city is a toilet.
LK
at the end of that diatribe: "Fix your f*cking "compliance tool", because it is obviously broken. And fix your approach to kernel programming"
is:
"How about you go and fix your f*cking social skills. When you can carry on a conversation without resorting to childish profanity, I'll come back and donate my free time to your project. Until then, go f*ck yourself."
Linus is fast becoming another RMS but without the benefit of a cohesive set of values.
I was just thinking that Linus is showing himself to be the bastard child of ESR and Theo.
LK
Your "combatu jui jitsu" instructor was quite lucky that he didn't pick a fight with someone who happened to be carrying a .45
LK
Remember a few years ago, Neal Horsley published the home addresses and telephone numbers of abortion providers?
This is kind of like that.
LK
This will probably go in one ear and out the other, but I'll do this anyway for the sake of observers who might not understand.
A trained soldier with an assault weapon who has no fear of hitting innocent bystanders would mow down teacher with guns easily enough.
No. Soldiers are not issued "assault weapon"s. "Assault weapon" is a neologism that was crafted to describe civilian firearms that look like military firearms, the intent of the word is to cause confusion between the two and it appears to have been effective in your case. Soldiers are issued M4s and M16s. Civilians, at best, can get their hands on AR-15s, which look quite similar to the M16, but on the inside are vastly different.
But arming teachers is just a silly idea.
It's silly to arm every teacher. But it's a good idea to have at least some form of armed resistance. Several school shootings, and at least one grade-school shooting was cut short by armed faculty/students.
A shooter can just as easily spray a classroom from the outside, before a teacher even sees them.
Possible, but that would still result in fewer casualties than walking into a classroom and having a monopoly of deadly force.
Unless you are going to put up bullet proof glass in all schools, or concrete walls. At which point schools have become prisons.
That's mighty white of you. Have you ever seen an inner city school? High concrete walls, choke points with security guards. There's a reason why the shooting there happen outside of the school.
LK
They could be targeted by anti-gun zealots.
It's like publishing a map which pinpoints where the jews are. Maybe they should put a star on their houses.
You're really going to compare antisemitism to anti-gun sentiment? Show me one case of an anti-gun zealot doing anything wrong against a pro-gun owner. Just one is all I ask, never mind a Holocaust.
I think that this counts and and so does this
LK
So, you follow the NRA line that we should arm all the teachers and students so they can defend themselves against Obama's stormtroopers? How long do you think they'd last?
Longer than they would if they were unarmed.
LK
You don't seriously think that you'd be the first person who had to go through having a gun taken under United States law. It happens every day, and be assured that the people whose weapons are confiscated are not paid for them.
[CITATION NEEDED]
Mr. Perens, anyone who legally owns a firearm but is later disqualified from owning one is given time (the amount of time varies by state) to "dispose of" the firearm, in other words to sell it or give it away. If that person doesn't properly dispose of the firearm in the time frame given, it will then be seized and government also seizes firearms that are used in crimes.
LK
Surrender your rights or we'll make you a slave?
Mr. Perens, people like you are precisely the reason that I own firearms.
LK
The Federal Reserve bank is.
LK
Sorry sir, but I have video evidence to the contrary.
LK
Then you are not thinking this through properly.
I, on the other hand, would like to volunteer for the study that seeks to prove that receiving oral sex to completion from large breasted women is pleasurable.
LK
Somehow I suspect that people who exhibit ASD symptoms but are otherwise high functioning will still continue to self-identify with the term Asperger's.
LK
Have you ever heard a farmer speak about how many head of beef cattle he has?
I have.
LK
Natural selection is still at work. It's always at work. What has changed is that it's now favoring a higher group intelligence. Because we now are able to correct or compensate for so many other problems with medical technology, people who would otherwise have died and been removed from the gene pool are still around and contributing.
I have terrible eyesight. If it were not for the ability of humanity to create spectacles and build cities, I'd have long ago been eaten by a large predator or fallen over something and died from the infection. We are not changing too fast for natural selection to keep up. That is natural selection at work.
LK