The Consolidated White Wing Gun Control Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh, on guerilla forces & Castro. OK, Fidel did it. But could he have against carpet bombing, defoilation and chemical/biological warfare? Could he have if Batista did as the British did in the Boer War - round up all combatants and herd them into concentration camps; thereby denying them the support of sympathetic civilians? We overran Iraq but we've got the guerillas to contend with. They can't beat us, but they can try our patience.
Click to expand...

Do you really think that America or any other civilized country will resort to carpet bombing their own land, or that the American people would stand for chemicals or concentration camps. That would create more sympatetic civilians. The guerillas in Iraq are a rather small ragtag disorganized and largely uneducated group fighting an army that is also unwilling to resort to those extremes.
 
What Rock points out is that the only means of getting the murder rates down, is by making it harder to kill
Click to expand...

I think Chris Rock is a funny comedian, but I don't think that qualifies him to solve the problem of people killing each other.

What makes you think that the lowering of murder rates is dependent on making killing a person harder? You are approaching the problem according to the means, not the end.

We had a man in the U.S. some years ago named Ted Bundy, who beat quite a few women to death and strangled others. While it's true he exerted more physical effort to do it than if he had just shot them, his victims ended up just as dead. If one of the women he stalked had been armed with a handgun, she could very possibly have saved her own life and that of many others.

Again, guns are NOT the problem. Bad people are. Your argument essentially states that most murder would be prevented because the effort a killer had to expend would be higher, and there's plenty of evidence to the contrary.
 
It has been pointed out that banning firearms did not eliminate violent crime in Britain. It has also been pointed out that man has been murdering other humans since there were two men to start an arguement. Quite a few years before gunpowder was invented.

Guns are not the root of all evil. Human nature may be, although I would not wish to be quoted on that.

Can you ban that? Can you even hope to change human nature?

What you really want to do is remold the Human race.
 
The answer to the crime problem is not gun control. Gun control amounts to holding law abiding citizens responsible for the actions of criminals. We're not going to settle the topic of what causes crime here on an internet forum.

So how do we cut down on crime? Here's a few suggestions.

1. The war on drugs is a failure, fueling systemic violence, empowering organized crime and siphoning off police resources. We need some form of legalization, perhaps like some European countries have. At the least, we need a "harm reduction" strategy.

2. Some people are quite simply unreformable psychopathic predators and should be locked up until they die.

3. Poverty is the mother of crime. We should do what we can for the underprivileged.

Bottom line: There are cultural reasons for the rate of violence in the U.S. that are probably beyond any short term solution.
 
I am here for debate.
Click to expand...
Well, once the referees critique your style, form and expository quality maybe you will hang around for the post-debate discussion. Who knows, you might learn something or better yet teach us something? :D

I view this board more often in the light of collaborative effort toward the collective goal of self education than a debating forum. Some of my own interests are ethical and moral systems theory, the psychology of belief, memetics and attribution theory. So with that in mind I'd love to hear how you construct your beliefs. :)
 
Well, white wing, welcome to the High Road.

I must admit, I don't feel that you're being very forthcoming with your reasons for your stances, but I hope you'll enlighten us soon.

Let me tell you about myself. I am 19, and I am a senior in college (or will be, when I return). I have a headache all the time -- I literally mean 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. On top of that, I frequently get debilitating migraines. This makes it quite difficult and inordinately painful to exercise, since heartrate has a lot to do with how much your head throbs.

I'm in fair shape, but even having "practical experience" with some fighting, it is not something I want to do, ever. No matter what movies you watch, taking a punch is never fun, and never feels good. Using your bare hands for defense of bodily integrity takes enormous amounts of energy and some of the repercussions will be permanent, even if it's "just a scar," etc. So, this makes "unarmed" defense close to the end of my list of resorts. You can definitely discount fighting more than one person your size.

I don't know if you've ever been physically injured to a point that caused a lot of pain or a lot of recuperation time, but it is not what one would equate with "enjoyable quiet time." What if you were in a position that you were positive that you would recieve considerable physical damage, or maybe end up crippled, or maybe end up dead? What (regardless of your gender) if someone insisted upon raping, torturing, or mutilating you? Are you aware that all of these acts are quite commonly followed by death?

Did you do anything to deserve such an action? No, you didn't. He violated the "social contract" when he decided to attack you. So if he is going to disobey his end of the promise, why should you obey? YOU ARE IN THE RIGHT, DID NOTHING WRONG, AND SHOULD THEREFORE NOT BE THE ONE TO BEAR THE CONSEQUENCES.

--------

So let's say that our hypothetical place, Utopia, bans all firearms. So, a criminal, who by definition does not obey laws, attacks you with/without a firearm; the difference doesn't matter. What do you do? Call 911? What do you do while the police assemble and travel? What if you're not alive when they arrive? What if you're permanently damaged?

What is the Utopian Government going to do for you? Can they restore your lifeforce? Can they remove your pain? Can they repair your wounded emotions?



Now, if there's one thing that I want you to think about, it's this: Good has a MORAL OBLIGATION to fight Evil. If you lay there and let evil attack you, evil has won. If you call the police, but die before they arrive -- regardless of whether the perp is caught and tried -- evil has still won. If you greet your violent attacker with 00 Buckshot to the face, good has won, and the world has become a better place.

That's what it's all about: Good vs. Evil.

Again, welcome to the High Road. ;)

Wes
 
Guncontrol was one thing...

Kaylee.. I want to debate with you... Good, valid stuff...

The "pointlessness treatment" is a term used for when others get mad over not being able of convincing someone. "This is pointless", and they leave or egnite the debate... It's the bane of the debate forum... :(

At this point though, and I do not wish to leave like "I've had enugh of you!!!" looking arrogant... You've all made solid points, and I will be thinking about all of this...

It actually was fun... Until Mrs Toro arrived... Well, the only thing I can say is that I for one; possibly the most radical leftist you will meet for a long time, does not hate america in this way... I am genuinly sad about the U.S, and I am enangered often by the choices that the government makes. I feel futility sometimes, but there's nothing in me that can hate the random american... Every man is different, and the U.S is one of the most diverse cultures on the planet. There's no way to say "I hate america and americans"... I'll at least give all of you a pointer, in agreeing on radical anti-americans being fools of closed minds...
The united states is often a proud people. I have no real taste for pride, but it keeps up morale...

Allthough most people of my politican position loathes Bruce Willis for his patriotic act in Iraq... I hand honor and admire it. He is the first artist who actually came in favor of the soldiers... All they have had to deal with is the risk of being killed, and protest songs back home...
Willis gave inspiration and morale back to the soldiers. Pride is one of the deadly sins, as it's written... But morale is the core in a societie's wellbeing....

I do not as many here think, see black and white... I came here to study and learn, and I did... But I am leaving now...
Mrs Toro... The opinions where you mess God into the direction of a government and a global agenda is the most dangerous thing alive in the human mind... Guns is no match for religion... "God leads the way for our people" was said also by Osama Bin Laden... NEVER use your interpretation of the book as your agenda! Especially when it involves power. And it does not matter how right or wrong your agenda is...
-The only thing you accomplish is the Irani regime... Students there are crying for the ability to say to the world "We are not like them!!!"... Sadly, no one believes that... We think they are all one and the same...
There should be no wonder on why some people look at the united states with hate driven anti-americanims. Statements like this one makes it all fall into place... We frown at these statements, and it is enugh for me to turn my back on this and leave... I would do so also if I was debating in a mosqe, and a muslim made the same statement...

"God leads our people." Many people of many religions say this. "Our country is the true country and ours is the true God!" Well, you are sadly comletely mistaken... No person on earth has the right, or ability of stating that...

I'm sorry that this had to happen. Take care people! Good night...
 
Well, don't feel like you have to turn and go because one person responded with "God Is On Our Side" for an argument. Mrs. Toro is entitled to her beliefs (one of the many great things about being an American), but you can disagree with her and still hang around. It takes all kinds and I think we've got most of them at The High Road. :D
 
WW,

First welcome. I'm glad that you seem willing to respond to the various points being brought up in a polite manner (that is not always the case on both sides of the issue).

The biggest problem as I see it is that the genie is out of the bottle. You can't unmake knowledge. The fact is that a pistol/rifle/shotgun is a very simple tool that is relatively easy to make from everyday items. Most anyone with a general understanding of the workings of a firearm could go into any hardware store and buy what they needed to make one (I've even seen plans for a one shot shotgun made out of a nail, rubber band, a section of newspaper, and a shotgun shell). Granted what you could make with those items wouldn't be very good, but they would work well enough to attempt to aquire a real one from those in authority who would still have theirs (you do realize that the government will exempt themselves from this magical gun disappearance don't you). The Liberator is an example of this on a massive scale.

The most likely reason that most people don't make their own firearms is that the cost/benefit ratio (both in legal terms and in physical safety in that the improvised ones tend to blow up on a fairly regular basis) isn't close enough to justify it. If you somehow manage to change the equation enough to justify the risk, many of us will chose that option. To paraphrase PVT John Winger, America was settled by people that were kicked out of every respectable country in Europe. You don't want to piss us off or tell us that we can't do something. Chances are good that we will do just the opposite just to spite you and prove that it can be done.

Anyway, once again welcome to THR. I hope that you stick around for a while and join in some of the other discussions.

Greg
 
Semf - I really don't think any President will order nor any serviceman or woman will obey an order to carpet bomb our own. An order like that will probably result in a coup against the government. They are our boys & girls in our Armed Forces and we are their mothers, fathers, uncles, aunts, grandparents, cousins, nephews & nieces, sons & daughters, neighbors, friends & community. You're absolutely right about the tactics of the Boer War whip-lashing.
 
If everybody is familiar with guns, have them in their home, and it is a usual means of self defence; what also becomes natural is to carry one for a crime.
Click to expand...

You say this means that legal ownership of guns makes it more likely that a criminal will use a gun in thier crimes?

Legal self defense is not possible against a criminal unless they are a threat to others. Doesn't that sound to you like a better reason for a criminal not not to carry a gun?
 
Hi, WW, and thank you for sticking around.

If you want to bring T.V. stars into it, have you ever seen Archie Bunker? His daughter, Gloria asks "Daddy, don't you know how many thousands of people are killed by guns each year?"

He replies "Would you rather, little girl, that they were all pushed out of windows?"
 
Not to beat a dead horse and I'm not trying to start a fight with you. But the militia side of gun ownership in America is too easily given up due to the superior weaponry of the govt

But could he have against carpet bombing, defoilation and chemical/biological warfare? Could he have if Batista did as the British did in the Boer War - round up all combatants and herd them into concentration camps; thereby denying them the support of sympathetic civilians? We overran Iraq but we've got the
Click to expand...

A few years ago a group of farmers, students, poets and other common folk went up against a far far superior military force. For about 20 years they stood up against carpet bombing, napalm, and imprisonment of anybody suspected of being sympathetic to the cause. Not to mention indoctrination by the govt in charge of the school children. All they had going for them was a willingness to win. Today they are in charge of the country and display our superior war machines in their town squares.
 
"... I only wanted to point out how little purpose the gun sometimes can have..."


Hmmmmmm....... kinda like panyhose and lipstick and house plants and music and...............


I own guns because I have the God given right to do so, and part of that right is the right to defend my family against two legged animals.

It is easy to live in a make believe world where everyone is happy and getts along with others. But that world is not is nothing but a dream world.

Abenaki
 
If you could get everyone to agree to give up all their guns...

Then why can't you just get them to agree to never use them unsafely or for criminal purposes instead?

We see the flaw in the argument then. It is impossible to convince everyone to get rid of their guns just as it is to convince everyone to use them safely and legally--some people can not or will not be convinced.

But what if you FORCE everyone to get rid of their guns.

It follows that some of the people were unwilling to comply and still desire to have guns.

When the supply of a desired item becomes very small, the price becomes very high. When the price becomes very high, there will be people willing to make guns and sell them.

Guns are not hard to make. With a home machine shop (available for less than $1000) it would be quite easy to make a very effective submachine gun. Ammunition is also reasonably simple to make. Even if you could not make brass cased ammunition and were forced to make your gun a muzzle loader, a cap and ball revolver is still a very effective multi-shot weapon.

So we see that even if the world is rid of firearms they will not be eliminated because they can be made quite easily.

Which brings us back to the main problem. It's foolish to discuss the possibility of eliminating firearms because it's quite obvious that it's impossible.

People who want guns and have the money to buy them will always be able to buy them.

With one exception. If you make it illegal to own guns then those people who value the concept of obedience to the law (the will of society, in effect) will not buy guns even if they want them and have the money.

So, after all our efforts we now have a group of people with guns (those that care nothing for the law) and a group with no guns (those that value the law.)

Do you believe that this is a better solution than the one we have now where both groups can be armed?
 
Having been out of the loop for several, I'll take a quick stab at this knowing absolutely nothing of its context/thread history. Take it for what it's worth.

Please don't judge Americans by the actions of their government. Many disagree with its stance/s. Some due to lack of knowledge - some because of "too much."

"We" don't have the "one true God." Some do, some don't & some don't seem to care one way or the other. It's a big mix.

& truely? I'd betcha America's time is coming for a very rude awakening.
 
It actually was fun... Until Mrs Toro arrived
Click to expand...

Why is her point of view less valid than yours. they both rely on faith, her's in an unseen god with an ancient book to back it up.

And yours in some notion that if criminals were not forced to be armed they would not want to harm you as long as you let them rape or rob you. Which you have nothing to back up.

You keep saying that you want to debate. And you stated that you were known as a good debater. When are you going to start debating. There have been numerous fscts and examples thrown at you and make no effort to refute those facts and real life recounts.You only spout feel good liberal socialist mantras with no substance and nothing to back them up. It's time to put up or shut up you're boring the hell outta me.
 
WW

I live in Lima , Peru and my goverment's ideal is not far from your utopia...guns are extremely high priced and gun licenses are very hard to getunless you can bribe some of the people working in the goverment...

Down here violent crimes have gone up so high that our own defense minister has addressed the people to "take crime in their own hands" HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO IT??? By asking the ill minded to leave us alone?????:cuss: I can rely on any of my guns for such means, but over 70% of the peruvian population earns under 460 Soles (3.45 Soles= 1USD) and the cheapest gun around costs 321.89 USD.

I carry because I value the life of my loved ones highly enough to face trial for self defense (yes, here in Peru there is no legal justification for shooting someone and you can get 5 years IF you can actually proove that it was self defense). Ilegal??YES, but it is my moal obligation to fight for my loved one's safety no matter the penalty I will be getting.

I am actually planning to build a fully automatic gun because criminals here get AK's and FAL's as easy as they can get a piece of candy...the pay multi thousand dollars for those and I DESERVE the rights to fight them with equal power...

So please take in consideration that maybe in your safe little condo in the US you can be relatively safe, but back here in Peru there is not one single place where you can walk aroun not caryying

Rogelio
 
1. kindly leave of the name-calling everyone.

2. WW -- some of us at THR are theists of just about every stripe, some of us decidedly aren't. Some of us would agree with you that mixing religion with the powers of the state is a dangerously bad idea, while others would insist that only a government made up of the religious (Christian) could possibly maintain a free and ethical society. That is a side topic, and one unfortunately not suitable for discussion at THR.

3. (taking off the mod hat here) Flattered as I am you mention me by name, I must admit to some puzzlement at this post. Are you leaving the debate over one member whose religious beliefs differ from your own? And if so, is that not the very "pointless treatment" you were asking us to refrain from? :confused:

-K
 
Hey Quartus,
If we can't use guns, does that mean we get to use Swords?

__________________
Veni, Vidi, Vivisecti
Click to expand...


:D



Holly, I think I like you!


BTW, a small correction if I may?



I am grateful that the Constitution gives me the right to bear arms
Click to expand...

The Constitution does not give you that right. It simply RECOGNIZES a right you already had. The right of self defense existed prior to the Constituion, and the Second Amendment was written to prevent the gummit from interfering with that right.
 
White Wing why do you keep starting new threads? is this a new form of running away to be able to taunt again?

(Why don't the moderators merge these anyway?)

Did I miss something? I only recall seeing one post from Mrs Toro. Of course I have only found three threads started by you so far, are there more? What made you run away from her after only one post?
:scrutiny:

As to the time you spent in Chicago, where you stated that your father considered getting a gun...
Chicago has one of the longest standing anti-handgun stances of any US city yet crime there is out of control. Your fatrher woukd have had no problen in gettuing a handgun though, all he mneeded was a few friends on the CPD, there are many there who would be glad to sell him one of their "extras".
:rolleyes:

New York also has strict laws against handguns and we all know just how safe the streets of NYC are. That's why the thugs on 9/11 used airplanes, they knew they'd never last on the streets with the REAL bada$$es.

Oh and don't forget the estemed Capital of our nation, Washington DC., where handguns are out-and-out outlawed to the civilian population yet in 8 of the past 9 years D.C. has had the highest murder rate in the nation.

it will be impossible to remove all guns from society, they are just too easy to make. Guns & Ammo magazine has a story some 30 years ago showing the firearms confiscated from PRISONS.
:what:

One inmate even managed to make a functioning semi auto in the prison machine shop, including making cartridges on a lathe using ground up match heads for propellant. As I recall they test fired the thing and it fed and functioned just fine.

You can't change human nature.

And yes, there is a "liberating" feeling shooting a firearm. Some of us even have that same feeling just by owning and handling a fine firearm. But I can tell you from experience, an experience that I hope most of my fellow THRers never experience, is the truely liberating feeling you have when your personal firearm is directly responsible for your ability to experience the next sunrise.

So go ahead, play your little word games (because we all know that that's all this really is to you), for us it is a very personal issue, after all it is OUR freedoms we're discussing here. Are you trying to be a drama queen? For you this is all armchair quarterbacking but this is real life for us.

Have you considered changing your name from White Wing to Wheft Wing. (or would that be West Wing? :neener: )

Just my tuppence.



edited for a) spelling, b) grammar and c) to clarify intent.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
Any good debaters in the house?
Replies
15
Views
977
Foreign Devil
F
W
  • Locked
"Find Compromise in Gun Debate"
2 3
Replies
57
Views
3K
txgolfer45
T
2ifbyC
  • Locked
Obama suggests Republicans unwilling to compromise in gun control debate
2 3 4 5
Replies
107
Views
5K
Blakenzy
B
O
  • Locked
Winning hearts and minds: effective debating techniques
Replies
20
Views
3K
swingset
S
2
  • Locked
Clinton, Dole Agree to Debate in TV Series
Replies
7
Views
471
cuchulainn
C
Back
Top