ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 2nd December 2018, 12:19 PM   #41
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 11,184
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
The correct point at which to seize guns would be in case of death of the owner: there could be an automatic buyback scheme in place, that the rightful inheritor would have to apply for an exception of (together with a background check, of course).
This would dramatically reduce the number of (possibly ill-maintained and therefore dangerous to handle) firearms in the US.
Who would monitor such a scheme and how would they do it? Would you employ thousands of people to contact the family and or friends of every single person who dies, to ask if they had a gun?
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2018, 12:34 PM   #42
Norman Alexander
Illuminator
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,506
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
The author is correct, it would be impossible to do any sort of meaningful seizure of guns in the USA.

It is one of the various reasons why the USA cannot solve its gun problem.
Indeed. WAY past the point of meaningful control of guns by seizure. It would need a literal army and take years just to find and process them, not even thinking of the political kickback.

But a more important reason is the attitude. Changing the mindset of a country imbued with the love of weapons is a much much bigger problem still.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2018, 02:48 PM   #43
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,084
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
The author is correct, it would be impossible to do any sort of meaningful seizure of guns in the USA.

It is one of the various reasons why the USA cannot solve its gun problem.
Nobody is talking about confiscating guns. But if some guns, magazines and accessories were made illegal, most citizens would get rid of them them because, in general, most people are law-abiding and don't want to risk getting arrested. An amnesty and a voluntary buy-back program would encourage them to do the right thing. If someone kept illegal firearms, he wouldn't be able to use them. If he hunted with them, or was caught with them in his car or on his person, or somebody saw them in his house and reported him, or even if he used them in self-defense, he would be subject to prosecution. Guns would be treated like illegal drugs; they're around, and some people have them, but when they get caught they're in trouble.

And sure, maybe guerilla bands could cause damage. That's all the more reason to enforce tough gun control. I would trust my elected government, even the one we have now, over any gang of "sovereign citizens."
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2018, 03:59 PM   #44
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,285
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Yes, but unless the people were armed, the problem of taking up arms against them is diminished to nil. They armed forces would simply be acting on orders peacefully, against an unresisting populace. Its the shoot-'em-up showdown scenario that would cause insurrection in the military ranks, I would think
I am not sure I get this. Are you suggesting that unarmed people remain peaceful and don't resist?
You are right, of course, that the moment of truth comes when the troops have to shoot at citizens. But I would think that the troops would find the decision easy if the citizens start shooting.
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2018, 04:37 PM   #45
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,578
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
I am not sure I get this. Are you suggesting that unarmed people remain peaceful and don't resist?
It would depend on the nature of the conflict, I suppose. Whether a rebellion, creeping totalitarianism, sudden junta or whatever. I'm sure there would be resistance no matter what, but soldiers would likely be convinced that what they were doing was right/just till they had to actually engage citizens in a widespread manner (as opposed to a Waco type conflict).

Quote:
You are right, of course, that the moment of truth comes when the troops have to shoot at citizens. But I would think that the troops would find the decision easy if the citizens start shooting.
I'm not so sure. It might depend on who shot first. Military personnel would surely return fire as a defense. But if they were ordered to atrack American civilians, I'd bet that would be the point of mass mutiny.
__________________
Yes, I've been Bobbed. No, it was not the kind I was hoping for.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2018, 04:50 PM   #46
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 11,994
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I gave a hard time taking someone seriously who classifies protests as "political violence".
As if Donald Trump, aka Dear Leader, has not repeatedly advocated political violence against citizens behaving lawfully.

As if this didn't happen -- in dramatic fashion -- as recently as a few days ago. Threatening innocent people with imprisonment is a threat of violence, by definition.

As if the cultists don't lap up Trump's violent threats.

As if a reporter didn't actually get assaulted by a GOP official -- an assault praised by Trump.

As if official hate crime statistics didn't skew right.

As if named Rip Van Winkle.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.

Last edited by varwoche; 2nd December 2018 at 04:51 PM.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2018, 05:15 PM   #47
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 11,994
If we count protests as violence, and if we don't count full on postal, and if we ignore the POTUS, and ignore his crazy supporters, and if we ignore the fact that not one Democratic leader has supported Antifa in any way, and if we ignore hate crime statistics, and if we only count those incidents that land on the first Thursday after a full moon ... lefties are the violent ones!
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.

Last edited by varwoche; 2nd December 2018 at 06:01 PM.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2018, 06:24 PM   #48
Delvo
الشيطان الأبيض
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 7,555
So, it parrots the myth of the plucky underdog defeating the massively superior army, makes up a distinction to claim exists between some Americans and others in their mentality about violence with no evidence for it, perpetuates the lie that there's any substantial movement toward gun confiscation to even bother analyzing & responding to in the first place, and, even on that subject, addresses it only in the form of a sudden all-at-once sweep instead gradual and cumulative over years even though the latter is obviously how it would be done even if it were to be done?

No, not really interesting
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2018, 11:52 PM   #49
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,403
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
How's that working out for you?

13,000-plus deaths this year so far. You must be VERY free!

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
It's so easy to turn the gun grabbers' propaganda against them. You can add clarity to the debate by simply renaming the Y-axis "freedom."


__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 01:13 AM   #50
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 6,189
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
Who would monitor such a scheme and how would they do it? Would you employ thousands of people to contact the family and or friends of every single person who dies, to ask if they had a gun?
In most states, you can't take an unlicensed gun out of the house - so it would be in the interest of new owners to get a license. And by making it a bit of a hassle to get one, but a financial incentive not to, many people would prefer the easy solution.
People usually go with the default option.
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 02:49 AM   #51
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,285
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
It would depend on the nature of the conflict, I suppose. Whether a rebellion, creeping totalitarianism, sudden junta or whatever. I'm sure there would be resistance no matter what, but soldiers would likely be convinced that what they were doing was right/just till they had to actually engage citizens in a widespread manner (as opposed to a Waco type conflict).



I'm not so sure. It might depend on who shot first. Military personnel would surely return fire as a defense. But if they were ordered to atrack American civilians, I'd bet that would be the point of mass mutiny.
Basically, it sounds like you are saying that armed resistance would make soldiers more likely to mutiny. Is that right? I don't get the reasoning. I can't think of any historical precedent either.
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 05:40 AM   #52
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,533
Originally Posted by autumn1971 View Post
This is hysterical.

Thank you for the laugh.
Likewise
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 06:46 AM   #53
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,578
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
Basically, it sounds like you are saying that armed resistance would make soldiers more likely to mutiny. Is that right? I don't get the reasoning. I can't think of any historical precedent either.
Not quite. I think an armed citizenry would be more likely to resist, and being ordered to engage the citizenry (widespread) would cause the mutinies.

A soldier serving his country believes he is in the right, and protecting their countrymen. When ordered to kill his fellow citizens, I think many would conclude they were not serving the people, and things would get unstable quickly. If the people were not resisting, the soldier might continue to obey orders, still believing that martial law or whatever was temporarily necessary. It would likely be the attack order that caused the theorized turncoating.

I can't think of an analogous historical situation either. Citizenry, historically, has not been armed and had a tyrannical government rise against them. Also, Americans history of rebellion feeds into a revolutionary mindset that would have few parallels in world history.
__________________
Yes, I've been Bobbed. No, it was not the kind I was hoping for.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 10:46 AM   #54
Tormac
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 521
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
In most states, you can't take an unlicensed gun out of the house - so it would be in the interest of new owners to get a license. And by making it a bit of a hassle to get one, but a financial incentive not to, many people would prefer the easy solution.
People usually go with the default option.
Actually most states in the USA do not have a gun license requirement for either a hand gun or long gun. (a few have a requirement for either one or both, but that is a minority of states).

I would also think that it would be likely that if the parents were into hunting/shooting, that the kids would be more likely to be as well. edit (Meaning that they would be likely to already have the license).
__________________
Anything is possible when you don't know what you are talking about.

Last edited by Tormac; 3rd December 2018 at 11:24 AM. Reason: Sometimes I don't make much sense.
Tormac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 11:56 AM   #55
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,084
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
In most states, you can't take an unlicensed gun out of the house - so it would be in the interest of new owners to get a license. And by making it a bit of a hassle to get one, but a financial incentive not to, many people would prefer the easy solution.
People usually go with the default option.

You're confusing possession with concealed carry. Most states issue and require licenses to carry a handgun concealed on your person. With a few exceptions like D.C., you don't need a license to buy or own handguns or long guns, or to transport them under specified conditions (unloaded, locked case, etc.). Many states also allow unlicensed open carry, where the firearm is in plain view.

Licensing all firearms would be a big -- and extremely unlikely -- step toward effective gun control.

Last edited by Bob001; 3rd December 2018 at 12:02 PM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 12:00 PM   #56
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 11,184
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Nobody is talking about confiscating guns. But if some guns, magazines and accessories were made illegal, most citizens would get rid of them them because, in general, most people are law-abiding and don't want to risk getting arrested. An amnesty and a voluntary buy-back program would encourage them to do the right thing. If someone kept illegal firearms, he wouldn't be able to use them. If he hunted with them, or was caught with them in his car or on his person, or somebody saw them in his house and reported him, or even if he used them in self-defense, he would be subject to prosecution. Guns would be treated like illegal drugs; they're around, and some people have them, but when they get caught they're in trouble.

And sure, maybe guerilla bands could cause damage. That's all the more reason to enforce tough gun control. I would trust my elected government, even the one we have now, over any gang of "sovereign citizens."
Say a type of gun or magazine was made illegal, since no one has any idea how many there are or who has them and the problem is with the criminals, gangs and nutters who would not cooperate, nothing of note would happen.

Just like drugs, making them illegal has not stopped the problem.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 12:03 PM   #57
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 11,184
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
In most states, you can't take an unlicensed gun out of the house - so it would be in the interest of new owners to get a license. And by making it a bit of a hassle to get one, but a financial incentive not to, many people would prefer the easy solution.
People usually go with the default option.
Most states are awash with tons of guns have no idea who has what and there are lots of people who would not cooperate with any form of confiscation.

At most, a confiscation scheme would tinker with the issue without solving it.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 12:28 PM   #58
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 3,497
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
It's so easy to turn the gun grabbers' propaganda against them. You can add clarity to the debate by simply renaming the Y-axis "freedom."
That's because the murder rate is so high in the black community. Or does it make me a white supremacist and literally Hitler for pointing that out?
__________________
I drink to the general joy o' th' whole table. --William Shakespeare
sir drinks-a-lot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 01:21 PM   #59
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,285
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Not quite. I think an armed citizenry would be more likely to resist, and being ordered to engage the citizenry (widespread) would cause the mutinies.

A soldier serving his country believes he is in the right, and protecting their countrymen. When ordered to kill his fellow citizens, I think many would conclude they were not serving the people, and things would get unstable quickly. If the people were not resisting, the soldier might continue to obey orders, still believing that martial law or whatever was temporarily necessary. It would likely be the attack order that caused the theorized turncoating.

I can't think of an analogous historical situation either. Citizenry, historically, has not been armed and had a tyrannical government rise against them.
I know of a number of such situations where armed forces faced armed or unarmed protesters.
What I am not seeing is a situation where having an armed population helped making the army mutinous.

Let me digress. A fear that the founding fathers had was that someone, commanding the loyalty of a standing army, could use this force to rule tyrannically. This fear probably had a lot to do with their experiences with the British army. It also reflected their knowledge of ancient roman history.

They reasoned that economic constraints would limit the max size of a central standing army and that the state militia should be able to overpower it. This reasoning was proved to be essentially correct, a few years later in Europe.
The professional armies of the european monarchs attempted to put down the french revolution. France raised a vast army of conscripts in response and emerged victorious.

And with that the 2nd amendment became obsolete. Governments began forcing their citizens to bear arms. To bear arms became an onerous and oppressive duty. It never occurred to anyone else that bearing arms was a right that needed to be safeguarded. Later "bill of rights"-equivalents make clear that the government may demand military service; something which greatly infringes on indivdual liberty. Some enshrine the right to refuse to bear arms (ie conscientious objection).

The 2nd amendment is unique but armed populations are not.

Quote:
Also, Americans history of rebellion feeds into a revolutionary mindset that would have few parallels in world history.
Dubious. US history is remarkably stable and peaceful. The very few violent uprisings were put down easily; with the sole exception of the civil war over 150 years ago. But that rebellion, too, was put down.
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 02:21 PM   #60
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,754
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
That's because the murder rate is so high in the black community. Or does it make me a white supremacist and literally Hitler for pointing that out?
Why are you pointing it out?

Do you think those murders don't count? Why wouldn't they count?
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 02:45 PM   #61
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 3,497
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Why are you pointing it out?

Do you think those murders don't count? Why wouldn't they count?
Why are you (and Cain) so uninterested in that fact?
__________________
I drink to the general joy o' th' whole table. --William Shakespeare
sir drinks-a-lot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 02:58 PM   #62
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 41,834
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I gave a hard time taking someone seriously who classifies protests as "political violence".
Some are,some are not.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 03:07 PM   #63
AJM8125
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
 
AJM8125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 20,246
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
That's because the murder rate is so high in the black community. Or does it make me a white supremacist and literally Hitler for pointing that out?
On this board it does. As per the article in the OP, we are made out to be the most despicable monsters possible. So bringing up violence in the black community means you’re burning crosses by default.

Already been down that road with these critical thinkers.
__________________
AJM8125 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 03:09 PM   #64
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,754
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Why are you (and Cain) so uninterested in that fact?
What are you talking about? You brought it up, you must find it's important somehow. So I asked you. How is asking you about what you think that 'fact' does (I haven't looked into how much a factor it actually is) displaying disinterest?

If you don't want to say why you think it matters, you can hardly blame others for not taking it into account. How do you think it should be taken into account? What does it change? How does it matter?

EDIT: So AJM8125 seems to think it matters too, so how?

I'll also note that yes, you could be called a 'racist' or a 'monster' after saying those things, but that could be correlation. Saying, 'You're going to call me racist for saying this', doesn't mean an accusation of racism is wrong. If the statement 'You'll call anything racist even (insert racist thing)' is followed by accusations of racism, that does nothing to undermine accusations of racism in general. Obviously.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong

Last edited by tyr_13; 3rd December 2018 at 03:12 PM. Reason: To add
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 03:23 PM   #65
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 3,497
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
What are you talking about? You brought it up, you must find it's important somehow. So I asked you. How is asking you about what you think that 'fact' does (I haven't looked into how much a factor it actually is) displaying disinterest?

If you don't want to say why you think it matters, you can hardly blame others for not taking it into account. How do you think it should be taken into account? What does it change? How does it matter?
The single greatest cause of death for young black men between the ages of 18 and 35 is homicide. I shouldn't have to tell you why I think it matters. This goes a long way toward explaining the chart Cain provided.

Yet everyone wants to talk about a white woman calling police on black people barbecuing.
__________________
I drink to the general joy o' th' whole table. --William Shakespeare
sir drinks-a-lot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 04:27 PM   #66
bignickel
Mad Mod Poet God
 
bignickel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 3,136
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Yet everyone wants to talk about a white woman calling police on black people barbecuing.
Yes, as long as the number of white folks calling police on black folks minding their business is less than the number of black on black homicides, we don’t have to be concerned. Because. Reasons.
(Never mind that homicode victims generally know their attacker, and that would mean that black folk would have a black attacker, and white folk would have a white attacker, but sure, whatever; it must mean something is a cosmic way)
__________________
"You can find that book everywhere and the risk is that many people who read it believe that those fairy tales are real. I think I have the responsibility to clear things up to unmask the cheap lies contained in books like that."
- Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone
bignickel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 04:35 PM   #67
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,754
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
The single greatest cause of death for young black men between the ages of 18 and 35 is homicide. I shouldn't have to tell you why I think it matters. This goes a long way toward explaining the chart Cain provided.
You definitely should support your arguments.

How does that 'explain' the chart? What do you mean by 'explain' the chart? How does black deaths change the US's comparatively huge homicide by firearm stats?

Quote:
Yet everyone wants to talk about a white woman calling police on black people barbecuing.
See, this is why you have to explain what you mean. If I had speculated that your reason would be a false dichotomy, you would have called me a 'typical lib' or whatever. But you offered it yourself, so I don't have to worry that my bias was creating that position for you.

Yes, over-policing of black people is a problem even if they have a high homicide by gun rate. Ironically your argument, if that is your argument, there ties into the op in a way; gun confiscation laws would likely disproportionately lead to the incarceration of black people.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 05:19 PM   #68
Norman Alexander
Illuminator
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,506
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
It's so easy to turn the gun grabbers' propaganda against them. You can add clarity to the debate by simply renaming the Y-axis "freedom."
You can also rename the Y-axis "pirates" or "bigly muffins". Doesn't alter the facts on the ground about the outcomes. Also, calling anyone who simply report the facts about the results of your current policies on firearms "gun grabbers" is a childish and counter-productive tactic indeed.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015

Last edited by Norman Alexander; 3rd December 2018 at 05:28 PM.
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2018, 09:29 PM   #69
This is The End
 
This is The End's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,485
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
That Antifa has the support of most leftists, who approve of them turning up the dial on political violence; and that the Nazis lack the support of most rightists, who disapprove of them turning up the dial on political violence.

I would call that absolute nonsense if it wasn't, in fact, the opposite of reality. Therefore it is merely bad propaganda and bad subterfuge.

Absolute nonsense would require something interesting, perhaps random. The bollocks posted is merely "durrr, I'm going to type the opposite of reality, durrr".
__________________
________________________
This is The End is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2018, 12:02 AM   #70
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,403
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
That's because the murder rate is so high in the black community. Or does it make me a white supremacist and literally Hitler for pointing that out?
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Why are you (and Cain) so uninterested in that fact?
It doesn't make you Hitler, just kind of ignorant.

I discussed "the 13%" in this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...ighlight=south

Here's one of the more relevant exchanges:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baylor View Post
the number of guns or gun ownership doesn't seem to increase the murder rate in white populations.
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
So what are the numbers when you compare white homicide rates in gun-restrictive New England versus white homicide rates in the firearm-friendly South?
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2018, 03:02 PM   #71
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 17,501
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
That's because the murder rate is so high in the black community. Or does it make me a white supremacist and literally Hitler for pointing that out?
That's a bit like pointing out that most gun violence is committed by men. It is true, but how does it help us craft solutions in a society that typically doesn't like to engage in sex based discrimination. I mean we could make it much harder for men to own guns, but do you think that would really be fair to men?

And I don't think it makes you Hitler any more than me pointing out that most gun violence is perpetrated by men makes me an SJW.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2018, 10:01 AM   #72
Arcade22
Illuminator
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 4,744
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
The single greatest cause of death for young black men between the ages of 18 and 35 is homicide. I shouldn't have to tell you why I think it matters. This goes a long way toward explaining the chart Cain provided.

Yet everyone wants to talk about a white woman calling police on black people barbecuing.
It's almost like there might be a correlation between subjecting people to widespread racist discrimination over hundreds upon hundreds of years and said people being over-represented in crime. Or do you think it makes people behave better? That being indifferent towards racism, or even condoning it, somehow will make it more likely that black people behave better?

You can either defend the status quo with your racist thought ending cliche (hurr blacks are responsible for the violence so i don't have to do anything cuz it's their fault durr) or you can try to think up a solution. Try to have a little foresight and plan ahead for the future.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner

Last edited by Arcade22; 5th December 2018 at 10:07 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2018, 12:37 PM   #73
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,533
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
It's almost like there might be a correlation between subjecting people to widespread racist discrimination over hundreds upon hundreds of years and said people being over-represented in crime. Or do you think it makes people behave better? That being indifferent towards racism, or even condoning it, somehow will make it more likely that black people behave better?

You can either defend the status quo with your racist thought ending cliche (hurr blacks are responsible for the violence so i don't have to do anything cuz it's their fault durr) or you can try to think up a solution. Try to have a little foresight and plan ahead for the future.

__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2018, 01:19 PM   #74
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 8,544
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
The single greatest cause of death for young black men between the ages of 18 and 35 is homicide. I shouldn't have to tell you why I think it matters. This goes a long way toward explaining the chart Cain provided.
No it doesn't - it "explains" maybe a quarter of it.

Last edited by Information Analyst; 5th December 2018 at 01:21 PM.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2018, 01:40 PM   #75
SuburbanTurkey
Muse
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 858
I find the article's discussion of a giant army of insurgents pretty laughable.

Sure, there are tons of gun and lots of gun owners in the US. Some of them might not comply with any registration or confiscation scheme. Many would. Some percentage, small I suspect, would refuse to surrender their guns and hide them. Of that small percentage, a very small percentage may be willing to engage in organized, violent resistance.

If you think John Everyman is going to become the Mujahideen because he has to turn in his hunting shotgun, I think you're crazy. I could see widespread noncompliance (guns buried in flower beds), but active armed resistance would require many additional aggravating factors.

A guy with a life to live isn't going to grab his SKS and run off into the woods Red Dawn style at the drop of hat.

In regards to right vs left political violence. I will say that the radical right has a fetishized the idea of going out in a blaze of glory against the government. We saw it at the Bundy standoffs. What a disappointment it must have been that the tactics of the feds have changed a lot since Ruby Ridge and Waco.

I don't really see the radical right's preference for lethal violence as a good thing like the article. Sure, there may be less people out in the streets breaking windows and cracking skulls (citation needed, but let's just grant that for argument), but when the right goes bad, they go very bad. Like, shooting up abortion clinics and bombing federal buildings bad. I think a thump on the noggin from some black-bloc try-hard is preferable to picking up pieces of children in OKC or bagging up Jews in a synagogue.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 5th December 2018 at 02:10 PM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2018, 02:24 PM   #76
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,754
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
It doesn't make you Hitler, just kind of ignorant.

I discussed "the 13%" in this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...ighlight=south

Here's one of the more relevant exchanges:
That thread was...quite educational. I mean, the breaking down of the actual numbers was very useful, but it also showed the position of some posters here to be...well...what they really are.

It is surprising that the fact that black people are nine times more likely to be falsely convicted of murder didn't come up.

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
That's a bit like pointing out that most gun violence is committed by men. It is true, but how does it help us craft solutions in a society that typically doesn't like to engage in sex based discrimination. I mean we could make it much harder for men to own guns, but do you think that would really be fair to men?

And I don't think it makes you Hitler any more than me pointing out that most gun violence is perpetrated by men makes me an SJW.
Yeah, that's just it. I can't see how it actually means anything. Why don't those deaths 'count'? Nothing I come up with is...nice. Are black people not 'really Americans', or are they not 'really people'?
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th December 2018, 11:40 AM   #77
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,883
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Aren't they just thinly veiled death threats?
Not even veiled. Full on naked.
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th December 2018, 11:42 AM   #78
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,883
Originally Posted by Tormac View Post
Hello Horatius

I am pretty sure that the author would not consider burning crosses or firebombing churches “right wing” violence any more people on the left who would like to seriously limit gun ownership in the USA are willing to claim that they seriously endorse Representative Swalwell’s statement about the government nuking gun owners in an imagined civil war (I am assuming this is the statement that the essay talks about). While it may be fair to say most KKK members lean right, I don’t think it is accurate to say that most people who learn right support the KKK. This is like claiming that Liberals have to take ownership of the violence that Antifa perpetuates.

I think both the statement that of Representative Swalwell and Monster Hunter Nation’s statements are meant for the home team, but can easily be horriblized by the other side. The statement about violence for the right being a binary on-off thing was kind of weird though. Of course a Representative talking about the American military ending a civial war with nuclear weapons is also off. The way I read the statement of the switch by Monster Hunter, it sounds like a response by someone who feels threatened, a promise to escalate to violence if a line is crossed.

I wish both sides could pull back from talking about civil wars and nuking people, or speculating on who the Special Ops will come for when the trouble starts. We are all Americans (well at least those of us who are, and everyone is a citizen of the same little blue globe). Until the government actually starts trying to do away with the Bill of Rights it is too early to fantasize about how we will get the other side.
I think you mean lean re: the bolded.
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th December 2018, 06:09 AM   #79
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 11,420
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Yeah, that's just it. I can't see how it actually means anything. Why don't those deaths 'count'? Nothing I come up with is...nice. Are black people not 'really Americans', or are they not 'really people'?
I think he is trying to say that the homocide by firearms rate among the rest of the population isn't particularly high (Information Analyist points out that this isn't true, though), but they are of course living in the same country with the same gun control laws (or lack thereof). So it can't be the lack of gun control laws that leads to the high homocide rate, otherwise it would be high for all populations and not just among a particular population.

So, if it is high only among a particular population, if we want to understand why it is high, we should look for something that is specific to that population.

The problem here is that, unless Information Analyist is wrong, it's just not true that the homocide rate in the US in only high among black people. In which case we still have some part of the discrepancy (between the US and other developed countries) that is explainable as a consequence of lax gun control laws.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:30 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.