By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Pittsburg Shooting Killed 11 People. Gun control?

 

What should be done about guns in the US?

Nothing 9 13.43%
 
Strict background checks 35 52.24%
 
Ban guns 18 26.87%
 
other- comment down below. 5 7.46%
 
Total:67
Snoopy said:
CosmicSex said:
We are gonna have to go for the lesser of two evils. This means gun control because the ultimate question is how many others are there out there sick like this dude. I would prefer gun control to rolling the dice on innocent lives.

Yeah because when Hitler or other dictators banned guns, everything was just peachy.

The fact that "Gun Control" Translates to its most extreme variant of "Banning all guns" in your mind shows that you're not mature enough to be having this conversation. 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

Top 6 this generation: 
Bloodborne, Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, God of War, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Dark Souls III, Red Dead Redemption II, Rock Band 4

Around the Network
Runa216 said:
Snoopy said:

Yeah because when Hitler or other dictators banned guns, everything was just peachy.

The fact that "Gun Control" Translates to its most extreme variant of "Banning all guns" in your mind shows that you're not mature enough to be having this conversation. 

The government will keep pushing for more "Gun Control" when they find out their last attempt fail like always. Eventually, resulting in banning guns. Look how Chicago has some of the strictest gun control and yet a higher than normal gun-related deaths and politicians are still trying to push for more gun control in Chicago. The end goal of gun control is banning, let no one fool you otherwise.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IULSD8VwXEs

Last edited by Snoopy - on 29 October 2018

sc94597 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

1/2. Canada is not another country?  As “other countries” implies, more than one nation has a system historically proven successful that West Korea could look to.  You didn’t want to look at small, and/or island countries.  Fortunately, West Korea has a nation right next door that is exempt from your arbitrary, disqualifying criteria.  But don’t let that stop you from moving the goal posts enough to convince yourself that the continued strategy of sitting with your thumb up your ass is a viable alternative.

3. Of course not.  Best refrain from replying to a possibly nonexistent comment from a bygone era, then. So much easier it is to find something that is actually relevant to say to the present subject matter instead.

4. And yet you were the one who brought it up all on your own.  To me.  What are the odds?

Here you go, SuaveFauxcialist.

 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8736146

Awesome.  I cannot wait to read this!

.........

Unsurprisingly, I see nothing in that link resembling what you told me.  But looking through that thread, I do see you have a long-standing pattern of reading things that were not written, though.  

if you read this: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8735922 you will note that I never argued for disarmament in the first place, quickly clarifying that in point of fact, nor did I say anything of that silliness about “the proletariat” or the “bourgeois state”. Thank you for turning my attention to this; your “evidence” wound up absolving me of your accusation, and it also vindicated my observations of your illogic/questionable literacy.

I can see why you didn’t want to talk to me, I gave you quite the spanking in that exchange. For it to have haunted you for so long...I wish you a speedy psychological recovery.

User is warned - Aura7541

Last edited by Aura7541 - on 29 October 2018

Snoopy said:
Runa216 said:

The fact that "Gun Control" Translates to its most extreme variant of "Banning all guns" in your mind shows that you're not mature enough to be having this conversation. 

The government will keep pushing for more "Gun Control" when they find out their last attempt fail like always. Eventually, resulting in banning guns. Look how Chicago has some of the strictest gun control and yet a higher than normal gun-related deaths and politicians are still trying to push for more gun control in Chicago. The end goal of gun control is banning, let no one fool you otherwise.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IULSD8VwXEs

So, so much wrong here. 

Strawman fallacy followed by a slippery slope fallacy and a false equivalency/Confirmation bias. 

Chicago having higher than average gun crime does not disprove the concept of having stricter laws resulting in better management of the gun problem. Look at virtually every other developed nation in the world for my counterpoint/counter argument. 

Strawman fallacy because you're using the most extreme version of your opponent's argument to make your point; also known as argumentum ad absurdium. (or something like that. The exact spelling is too Latin for my English sensibilities.) 

Slippery slope fallacy is illustrated by the fact that you think that stricter laws will automatically default to that strawman fallacy. This is false, and there is virtually no proof to back up your claim, hence your confirmation bias wherein you find one example (Chicago) that supports your claim while strategically ignoring the overwhelming mountain of evidence to the contrary. 

I repeat: you are clearly not mature enough to be having these discussions if you employ so many fallacious arguments and can't see beyond your own bias. 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

Top 6 this generation: 
Bloodborne, Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, God of War, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Dark Souls III, Red Dead Redemption II, Rock Band 4

SuaveSocialist said:

I can see why you didn’t want to talk to me, I gave you quite the spanking in that exchange. For it to have haunted you for so long...I wish you a speedy psychological recovery.

Hey, whatever you say, SuaveStateCapitalist. With "advocates" of the working class like you, who needs capitalists? 

But for some reason you think I "accused" you of something. I merely said that I don't want to have the same discussion again (which is where it would've lead.) But of course being the anti-social personality that you are you kept pressing. Now kindly leave me alone and go roleplay elsewhere please. Thank you. 



Around the Network
sc94597 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

I can see why you didn’t want to talk to me, I gave you quite the spanking in that exchange. For it to have haunted you for so long...I wish you a speedy psychological recovery.

 

But for some reason you think I "accused" you of something. 

The reason being that I understand what words mean, and I can read them as they are written.

You...not so sure.  Too much evidence to the contrary.



SuaveSocialist said:
sc94597 said:

 

But for some reason you think I "accused" you of something. 

The reason being that I understand what words mean, and I can read them as they are written.

You...not so sure.  Too much evidence to the contrary.

It seems to me as if you want me to limit my reasoning capabilities to induction with no capacity to make  other types of inferences. 

That would be silly. But of course you are here to debate, that is why you use the insincere and intellectually dishonest tactic of omitting entire strings of inferred logic and numbering single sentences out of context. 

Then when called out on the oversimplification of it all, you say "that isn't what I wrote, read what I wrote." Well when what you write is general all that is left is deduction. 

Possibly the problem isn't my literacy, but rather your capacity to express what you mean with specifics and without using simplistic propaganda techniques.

Or possibly the frustration is that you don't address even a third of what was written? But continue self-congratulating yourself on knowjng what words mean, when you seem to lack higher-order skills like the ability to form inferences, or to address trains of reasoning rather than sentences pulled out of context.

Last edited by sc94597 - on 29 October 2018

SpokenTruth said:
KLAMarine said:

"The guy shot 4 cops and gets taken alive.  My first thought....I bet he's white."

What makes you say this?

Because if he were dark, he'd be dead.

How'd Willie Cory Godbolt make it out alive then?



The government can implement all the gun law controls that they want but the bad guys and criminals will get the guns to carry out crimes. The guy that carried out the Pittsburgh mass shooting was another bad man, an extreme racist and antisemite. Criminals and criminal gangs will find a way to get their guns. Criminals stealing guns from law abiding gun owners bypasses the gun law controls.



There are over 1 billion guns in the USA, USA has a population over 300 million people. There are around 3 guns for every man, woman and child in the USA. That is a lot of guns that can not be tracked down. Gun laws will not work in a large country like the USA. Only in small countries can gun laws work but criminals and bad guys will find ways to get their guns.