BBO Discussion Forums: Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 1031 Pages +
  • « First
  • 993
  • 994
  • 995
  • 996
  • 997
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped? Bernie Sanders wants to know who owns America?

#19881 User is offline   y66 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,496
  • Joined: 2006-February-24

Posted 2022-June-06, 17:49

Kim Phuc Phan Thi said:

https://www.nytimes....photograph.html

I cannot speak for the families in Uvalde, Texas, but I think that showing the world what the aftermath of a gun rampage truly looks like can deliver the awful reality. We must face this violence head-on, and the first step is to look at it.

I have carried the results of war on my body. You don’t grow out of the scars, physically or mentally. I am grateful now for the power of that photograph of me as a 9-year-old, as I am of the journey I have taken as a person. My horror — which I barely remember — became universal. I’m proud that, in time, I have become a symbol of peace. It took me a long time to embrace that as a person. I can say, 50 years later, that I’m glad Nick captured that moment, even with all the difficulties that image created for me.

That picture will always serve as a reminder of the unspeakable evil of which humanity is capable. Still, I believe that peace, love, hope and forgiveness will always be more powerful than any kind of weapon.

If you lose all hope, you can always find it again -- Richard Ford in The Sportswriter
0

#19882 User is online   mikeh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,174
  • Joined: 2005-June-15
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.

Posted 2022-June-06, 19:20

View PostChas_P, on 2022-June-06, 17:32, said:

And the question remains, "What is inherently wrong with any of that?"

If you think that way, you and I have very different views. Pigs are sentient animals. They are amongst the most intelligent non-primates. They feel pain and fear.

If they’re pests, and can’t be kept away from crops, etc by non-violent means, get Ken’s professionals to kill them

If someone hunts them for food, rather than for the (to me) sick pleasure of killing a sentient animal, and if their populations are not at risk, then I’m okay with that. I wouldn’t do it, but I’m financially comfortable so don’t need to kill my food personally…I’m happy to eat the products of abattoirs.

But I once listened to an American boast about hunting from a helicopter in Alaska. So I’m pretty sure that these ‘sportsmen’ don’t give one good damn about the value of the pigs as food (as far as I know they don’t land and gather in the slain pigs) or the possibility that they’re pests. Nor do they give a damn about the pigs they shoot but which don’t die right away. They glory in inflicting death and pain, thinking it makes them ‘sportsmen’

In my eyes it makes them thugs.

And to do it with an assault rifle? From the air? What wonderful ‘sport’. What true exposition of hunting skill that must be.

I’m not a rabid animal rights activist (no matter which noun the word rabid qualifies in that sentence). I eat meat. I’ve eaten venison and other game animals killed by friends who hunt with hunting rifles, on foot, tracking prey through the forest, and with licences the numbers of which are governed by the population of the prey species in the area.

I know at least one of them is appalled at the idea of indiscriminate killing for the sake of killing, since I’ve discussed the American thug who shot animals in Alaska.I suspect that reaction would be near universal amongst most ‘hunters’ who track their prey on foot and use rifles rather than assault weapons.

As for your concern that one should only ban certain firearms and regulate others if somehow all such weapons could first be removed from and made impossible to obtain by ‘evil’ people?

Most mass shooters, from what I’ve read, were not ‘evil’ people. They were, especially in the days or weeks leading up to the killings, damaged. They may have had, in some cases, identifiable mental disorders but many were some combination of angry, depressed or under the influence of substances such as (legal) alcohol and/or (illegal) drugs.

Most of them acted in a manner similar to millions of people who never shoot anyone…right up until the end,

Does anyone think that Ramos is the only 18 year old who bought an assault weapon and a lot of ammunition right after his birthday? Take a look at ads run by republican political candidates showing their young, often very young, children holding guns. Take a look at some of those same candidates firing off weapons as part of their campaign ads.

Most of those who buy these weapons will never kill another human. But how is the seller to identify which will?

You can’t make it the responsibility of the seller. You can’t make it the responsibility of the parents of the killers. You can’t make it the responsibility of the health care system, especially in such a brutal health care system as you have in the US where many of the most vulnerable have no meaningful access to health care, especially preventative health care.

I was involved some years ago in the aftermath of a murder-suicide where the killer was estranged from his wife. He broke into the home where she was staying with her parents and her son. He knifed them to death (grandmother called 911 and those of us who had to listen to the recording heard her getting stabbed and dying) then stabbed him self in the heart.

Now that has nothing to do with guns and indeed is evidence that many murders are committed without the use of guns. But I learned during the inquest that in marriage breakdowns a very large number of men threaten to kill their partner should she leave. The problem is that only about one tenth of one percent do (the problem being how to identify and stop the ones who do). And there is no way of identifying who would be the one in a thousand. I suspect that this is similar to people like Ramos. For every kid who acts out, I’m sure there are scores, if not hundreds or thousands, who behave in similar ways but don’t do anything. Thus ‘keeping the guns out of the hands of evil people’ is meaningless drivel.

So the equation is actually pretty simple.

You either do your utmost to reduce access to such weapons by anyone who has not demonstrated both a proper need for such weapons and training in how to use and store them safely, or you keep as you are and accept that tens of thousands of innocent people will die every year.

Would rational regulation end mass killings? No.

But if you stopped the supply of new weapons, enacted compulsory buy-backs, maybe permitted those with a demonstrated need (?) and demonstrated competency and stability to own them under strict storage rules, and destroyed every weapon if seized, eventually you’d get rid of most of them.

We have mass killings in Canada. However, we have FAR fewer per capita than does the US and that statement is true of every developed nation.

But it’s idiotic to argue that ‘we can only support gun restrictions if they will reduce mass killings to zero’

If you reduce mass killings to say one a month, thats still grotesque but you’ll have saved tens of thousands of lives each year.

So, you tell me, Chas……is the right of some gun fondler to play with his penis substitute more important to you than the lives of thousands of your fellow citizens?

If so, why?

If not, why do you support the right of gun manufacturers to sell assault rifles?

As for not making them liable…that’s a sick joke.

Does tobacco kill every smoker? No.

Does it kill everyone exposed to second hand smoke?

No.

Yet cigarette manufacturers have been sued by virtually every State In the Union. Why?

Because they knowingly manufactured and profited from selling a product that was known to kill and severely harm many people. Can anyone argue with a straight face that those who make and sell assault weapons are being constantly astounded that some people use these weapons for the only purpose for which they were in fact designed?

The AR 15 is based on an actual military assault weapon. As such, it’s design philosophy was expressly to kill people as effectively as possible. So, sure some sick puppies like to prove their manhood by shooting animals from a helicopter, but that’s not what the military ordered when they sought the weapons.

So the manufacturers sell these weapons because the killings are a foreseeable and acceptable cost of doing business,, especially when those killings don’t in fact come at any cost to them. The cost is to the victims, their families, their friends, their employers and co-workers, the police and other first responders who have to deal with the carnage, and the health care system who have to try to put back together the merely wounded.

In fact, I’d not be surprised to learn that those who run companies who make assault weapons for sale to the public are very happy with the mass killings. How many of us would even know what an AR 15 was were it not for these killings? Don’t you think that maybe the Ramos’s of the world choose to buy these weapons precisely because they’re the weapon of choice for mass mass killers? And of course the gun fondlers loudly proclaim after every mass killing that the only answer is for everyone to buy more guns!

Why? Because of a twisted reading of a sentence written by politicians over 300 years ago who wanted to ensure that ‘properly regulated militias’ were able to be formed. At a time when militias were an important aspect of the armed forces of the nascent nation. What that has to do with the right to manufacture and sell weapons that the manufacturers known beyonfpd doubt will be used to slaughter people…..with no accountability…is beyond me


Make the manufacturers pay out a million dollars or more for every person killed by their weapons…..how long do you think they’d keep selling them?
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
2

#19883 User is offline   Chas_P 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,499
  • Joined: 2008-September-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gainesville, GA USA

Posted 2022-June-06, 19:40

View Postmikeh, on 2022-June-06, 19:20, said:

If you think that way, you and I have very different views.

Fine with me. As I have said here, more than once, we don't all see things the same way. You're entitled to your opinion; I'm entitled to mine.
0

#19884 User is online   mikeh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,174
  • Joined: 2005-June-15
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.

Posted 2022-June-06, 20:31

View PostChas_P, on 2022-June-06, 19:40, said:

Fine with me. As I have said here, more than once, we don't all see things the same way. You're entitled to your opinion; I'm entitled to mine.

Ok. You think killing sentient animals for ‘sport’ by using assault weapons from helicopters is a morally acceptable pastime. Care to elaborate on why you hold to that view?

By the way, I’m aware of the arguable inconsistency between my views on this and my enjoyment of a nicely barbecued side of ribs. But we’re animals and we evolved as omnivores. Pigs and other animals raised to serve as food wouldn’t exist otherwise, plus these days, in developed countries, the slaughter, if still brutal, is not done for the sake for enjoying the killing as an end in itself, unlike the helicopter flying ‘sportsmen’.

You are of course under no obligation to justify your views but I’m wondering if you have ever tried to do so and, if so, how. Sometimes we inherit attitudes and beliefs and only change them when challenged to explain them. I’m not so naive as to think that’s you, btw.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
0

#19885 User is offline   pilowsky 

  • pilowsky
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,129
  • Joined: 2019-October-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 2022-June-06, 21:14

Chas_P is useful in the sense that his justification for everything is "well that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it".
This makes him and his ilk interesting only in the sense that their weltschauung only permits them to agree with statements that terminate with conclusions such as "greed is good".

Rational thinking and clarity of thought has no meaning in the universe for people that "know the difference between right and wrong".
Entire millenia of philosophical thought from Christ's "do unto others ..." and Kant's golden rule mean absolutely nothing to people for whom the intellectual effort of getting out of bed in the morning is a struggle.

I don't think there's any point in discussing morals with such people; if he has any he stole them from someone else (I think I stole that line from "Paper Moon").

What the Chas's of the world don't understand is that harming others is not a matter of opinion. His rambling here suggests that he has no conception of the 'harm principle'.
With people like Chas running Bridge clubs it's no surprise that the game is dying.
It amazes me that someone with such little grasp of basic societal norms has any success in a game that has as one of its core features respect for others.
I was even more baffled to discover that BBO thinks so highly of his judgement and the stagnant cesspit of his opinions that he is a "yellow-jacket".

He is a case-study in moral vacuums.
An intellectual black hole that sucks the life out the universe.

The proverbial shark in the pool; interesting to observe but don't go for a swim.
non est deus ex machina; även maskiner behöver lite kärlek; les règles sont le jeu même.
1

#19886 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,947
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2022-June-06, 23:32

I think it is helpful to understand that "that's my opinion" is a subset of whataboutism, another method of deflection from the task of actually thinking, and if successfully employed temporarily beats back the cognitive dissonance that such minds must endure. Such people work backwards from critical thinkers in that they begin with the conclusion and justify or deflect to retain the illusion that what they wish for is valid.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Black Lives Matter. / "I need ammunition, not a ride." Zelensky
1

#19887 User is offline   PeterAlan 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 587
  • Joined: 2010-May-03
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2022-June-07, 03:30

y66 said:

Kim Phuc Phan Thi said:


https://www.nytimes....photograph.html

I cannot speak for the families in Uvalde, Texas, but I think that showing the world what the aftermath of a gun rampage truly looks like can deliver the awful reality. We must face this violence head-on, and the first step is to look at it.

I have carried the results of war on my body. You don’t grow out of the scars, physically or mentally. I am grateful now for the power of that photograph of me as a 9-year-old, as I am of the journey I have taken as a person. My horror — which I barely remember — became universal. I’m proud that, in time, I have become a symbol of peace. It took me a long time to embrace that as a person. I can say, 50 years later, that I’m glad Nick captured that moment, even with all the difficulties that image created for me.

That picture will always serve as a reminder of the unspeakable evil of which humanity is capable. Still, I believe that peace, love, hope and forgiveness will always be more powerful than any kind of weapon.


The photographer has a corresponding recent Opinion piece in the Washington Post here.
0

#19888 User is offline   PeterAlan 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 587
  • Joined: 2010-May-03
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2022-June-07, 03:58

View PostChas_P, on 2022-June-06, 19:40, said:

Fine with me. As I have said here, more than once, we don't all see things the same way. You're entitled to your opinion; I'm entitled to mine.

That's as may be. But this started as your justification for leaving assault rifles in circulation, on the basis of "the pursuit of Happiness", and it doesn't really stand up, does it? Is that the best you've got?

Even "Life" and "Liberty" are not absolute rights, being subject to the legal / penal code, and they have specific protections in the Constitution, unlike "the pursuit of Happiness". Moreover, even the majority judgment in 'Heller' was clear that the Second Amendment allowed for gun restrictions under that code. So why do you think that the "pursuit of Happiness" with assault rifles should be unfettered?
0

#19889 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,306
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2022-June-07, 06:32

View Postmikeh, on 2022-June-06, 20:31, said:

Ok. You think killing sentient animals for ‘sport’ by using assault weapons from helicopters is a morally acceptable pastime. Care to elaborate on why you hold to that view?


here is a slightly different take on matters

Feral hogs are actually starting to become a problem in the United States.
They're smart and they are capable of doing a whole bunch of property damage.

I can believe that

1. An AR-15 is an appropriate weapon for a hog cull
2. Hunting feral hogs using a helicopter might be cost effective

I suspect that the big difference here is the question of "sport"
I don't consider a hog cull to be "sport", rather it might be a necessity (and, if so, the cull should be conducted by Fish and Wildlife or some such)

FWIW, I used to go hunting
(Bow hunting, not with rifles)

And, back in the weird old days, some friends and I even went on a (successful) boar hunt where we took down two Russian boards armed only with spears.
Alderaan delenda est
0

#19890 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,947
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2022-June-07, 08:15

View PostPeterAlan, on 2022-June-07, 03:58, said:

That's as may be. But this started as your justification for leaving assault rifles in circulation, on the basis of "the pursuit of Happiness", and it doesn't really stand up, does it? Is that the best you've got?

Even "Life" and "Liberty" are not absolute rights, being subject to the legal / penal code, and they have specific protections in the Constitution, unlike "the pursuit of Happiness". Moreover, even the majority judgment in 'Heller' was clear that the Second Amendment allowed for gun restrictions under that code. So why do you think that the "pursuit of Happiness" with assault rifles should be unfettered?


Neither the Declaration of Independence (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness) nor the preamble of the Constitution (we the people) have any legal weight, I.e., neither is a legal document in support of a legal argument.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Black Lives Matter. / "I need ammunition, not a ride." Zelensky
1

#19891 User is offline   y66 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,496
  • Joined: 2006-February-24

Posted 2022-June-07, 08:27

Laurence Tribe, Harvard Law Prof said:

Seditious conspiracy is huge. No more serious federal crime short of treason. Only several times in the past century have such charges been brought by DOJ.

https://www.nytimes....tol-attack.html

If you lose all hope, you can always find it again -- Richard Ford in The Sportswriter
0

#19892 User is offline   PeterAlan 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 587
  • Joined: 2010-May-03
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2022-June-07, 08:45

View PostWinstonm, on 2022-June-07, 08:15, said:

Neither the Declaration of Independence (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness) nor the preamble of the Constitution (we the people) have any legal weight, I.e., neither is a legal document in support of an argument.

I am aware of this. But my point was that whilst life, liberty and property are protected under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, there is nothing of the sort for the pursuit of happiness; moreover those rights are are limited by being subject to the "due process of law".
0

#19893 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,947
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2022-June-07, 08:48

View PostPeterAlan, on 2022-June-07, 08:45, said:

I am aware of this. But my point was that whilst life, liberty and property are protected under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, there is nothing of the sort for the pursuit of happiness; moreover those rights are are limited by being subject to the "due process of law".


+1 for “whilst”.
I was only trying to be helpful, btw.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Black Lives Matter. / "I need ammunition, not a ride." Zelensky
0

#19894 User is offline   PeterAlan 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 587
  • Joined: 2010-May-03
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2022-June-07, 08:52

View PostWinstonm, on 2022-June-07, 08:48, said:

+1 for “whilst”.
I was only trying to be helpful, btw.

Thank you.
0

#19895 User is offline   kenberg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,884
  • Joined: 2004-September-22
  • Location:Northern Maryland

Posted 2022-June-07, 09:31

View Posthrothgar, on 2022-June-07, 06:32, said:

here is a slightly different take on matters

Feral hogs are actually starting to become a problem in the United States.
They're smart and they are capable of doing a whole bunch of property damage.

I can believe that

1. An AR-15 is an appropriate weapon for a hog cull
2. Hunting feral hogs using a helicopter might be cost effective

I suspect that the big difference here is the question of "sport"
I don't consider a hog cull to be "sport", rather it might be a necessity (and, if so, the cull should be conducted by Fish and Wildlife or some such)

FWIW, I used to go hunting
(Bow hunting, not with rifles)

And, back in the weird old days, some friends and I even went on a (successful) boar hunt where we took down two Russian boards armed only with spears.


I have a fwiw inspired by your "FWIW, I used to go hunting(Bow hunting, not with rifles)". I had a close call with that.

Highland Park is a park in St. Paul that, at least in the 1940s, had an open park area with picnic tables and, if you crossed a bridge over Ford Parkway, a woodsy area that further on opened onto another open area. Friends and I biked out there to run in the woods. I was about to run out into the open area, but a friend grabbed me by my shirt and yanked me back as an arrow flew past. Of course I don't know if I would have been hit if he had not seen what was happening and yanked me back but I can confidently say I am glad I did not find out.

This way of thinking was involved in my decision to stop hunting when I was in my 20s. We were pheasant hunting, a pheasant flew up and headed for the woods, flying about five feet off the ground. I leveled the shotgun and then? Well, I pulled the trigger. I missed the pheasant, and there was no one in the wood to either hit or miss, but I thought about that for a bit and that was the end of hunting for me.

Do these personal experiences and personal choices have anything to do with the discussion? I think so. Mostly I have little or no interest in telling others how to live. Guns are different. The results are not something that can be dealt with by "Gee, I am really sorry about that". In 1950s Minnesota, it was common that when deer hunting season started there would be an article in the paper about some farmer writing COW on the side of his cows. Very funny. But cows got shot and people got shot. I am still cautious about walking in the woods during deer hunting season.

Gun regulations are not just "You say to-may-to, I say to-mah-to". It is completely obvious that we have this all screwed up, that we have to do something about it, and that this something includes a substantial increase in gun regulation. Other people have a right to their opinions? Ok. They can believe in witches. But we still make it illegal to burn women at the stake. Those who think we should burn women at the stake who are thought to be witches have a right to their opinion, sort of, I guess. We have, as a society, overridden that opinion. There is more work to do.
Ken
0

#19896 User is offline   johnu 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,631
  • Joined: 2008-September-10
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2022-June-07, 16:46

View PostChas_NoDignityNoIntegrityNoHonesty, on 2022-June-06, 05:17, said:

Actually the helicopter in that video (N65AL) is registered to a guy in Lanesboro, MN.....hardly a "red" state.

As you have already noted, the business is located in Texas, the shooting is being done in Texas, and the customers are travelling to Texas. Hardly a "blue" state.
0

#19897 User is offline   Chas_P 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,499
  • Joined: 2008-September-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gainesville, GA USA

Posted 2022-June-07, 18:09

View Postmikeh, on 2022-June-06, 20:31, said:

Ok. You think killing sentient animals for ‘sport’ by using assault weapons from helicopters is a morally acceptable pastime. Care to elaborate on why you hold to that view?

By the way, I’m aware of the arguable inconsistency between my views on this and my enjoyment of a nicely barbecued side of ribs. But we’re animals and we evolved as omnivores. Pigs and other animals raised to serve as food wouldn’t exist otherwise, plus these days, in developed countries, the slaughter, if still brutal, is not done for the sake for enjoying the killing as an end in itself, unlike the helicopter flying ‘sportsmen’.

You are of course under no obligation to justify your views but I’m wondering if you have ever tried to do so and, if so, how. Sometimes we inherit attitudes and beliefs and only change them when challenged to explain them. I’m not so naive as to think that’s you, btw.

I will leave this conversation with the following thoughts:
1. If you don't want to shoot feral hogs that's OK. That's your choice.
2. Neither do I and that's OK also. That's my choice.
3. There are those who do. That's their choice which is also OK and I seriously doubt they will be deterred by your opinion of them as "thugs".
4. I wish you well on your quest for Utopia. May the Schwartz be with you.
0

#19898 User is offline   Gerardo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 2,467
  • Joined: 2003-February-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dartmouth, NS, Canada

Posted 2022-June-07, 18:27

View PostChas_P, on 2022-June-07, 18:09, said:

I will leave this conversation


Cheers!
Until next time, of course.

#19899 User is offline   Gilithin 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 570
  • Joined: 2014-November-13
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2022-June-07, 19:05

View PostChas_P, on 2022-June-07, 18:09, said:

1. If you don't want to shoot feral hogs that's OK. That's your choice.

Feral hogs are a nice attempt at a distraction. Some conservatives will obviously try anything to distract. The simple reality is that a lot of Americans are being shot. A lot of American children are being shot. In around half the states it is easier to buy a gun than a car or even a Bible. And it is much easier to buy a gun and shoot someone than to get an abortion, a divorce or even to vote. Let's not lose sight of the farm for the pigs. Any politician who thinks that fighting <0.1% voter fraud is more important than taking simple and easy steps to save lives does not deserve your vote. If enough Americans are consequential on this, eventually it will result in something changing.
2

#19900 User is online   mikeh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,174
  • Joined: 2005-June-15
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.

Posted 2022-June-07, 19:43

View PostChas_P, on 2022-June-07, 18:09, said:

I will leave this conversation with the following thoughts:
1. If you don't want to shoot feral hogs that's OK. That's your choice.
2. Neither do I and that's OK also. That's my choice.
3. There are those who do. That's their choice which is also OK and I seriously doubt they will be deterred by your opinion of them as "thugs".
4. I wish you well on your quest for Utopia. May the Schwartz be with you.

Am I surprised that you ‘reply’ to a post of mine without answering my question?

No.

I suspect you think ‘that’s my choice’ is actually an argument. It isn’t, as anyone with a shred of intellectual honesty well knows.

Why, in your view, is it morally acceptable to slaughter sentient animals with assault weapons fired from a helicopter and to do it for ‘sport’?

Answer that with a reasoned response about your thinking, and I’ll treat you with the respect you’ve so far forfeited (while I doubt you care, it’s pretty obvious that you’re in a small minority on this forum….are you at all curious as to why? Of course not, lol. I doubt you’re even capable of reasoned discussion)

As for utopia, you reveal the depths of your ignorance. Do you really think that wanting to ban military style weapons is a quest for utopia? Do you have any idea how aberrant the US is, in terms of developed countries, in terms of firearm ownership and use? Switzerland is actually not too far off in terms of per capita gun ownership, but have virtually no actual gun violence, and the rest of the developed world has extensive regulation of firearm ownership. Yet few, if any, of the citizens of such countries would see themselves as living in a utopia.

My guess? You’ll read this but won’t respond, at least not by answering the question. I think you’re probably intellectually incapable of articulating anything other than the equivalent of ‘because I say so’. Lol.

Btw, I agree that the discussion of shooting pigs or hogs or boars may be a distraction. However, I see a correlation between thinking doing that is ‘fun’ and ‘sporting’ and the ability to place the ‘right’ to own such weapons as outweighing the safety of innocents. Both attitudes seem to reflect an inherent selfishness and the lack of even a trace of empathy.

So tens of thousands die each year. Why should that in any way interfere with my right to fetishize my gun(s)?
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
1

  • 1031 Pages +
  • « First
  • 993
  • 994
  • 995
  • 996
  • 997
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

22 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 22 guests, 0 anonymous users

  1. Facebook,
  2. Google