This guy destroys the "Intellectual Elite"

[zeke]

Hey Karmac Why shouldn't gang members have the same right to protect themselves with the weapon of their choice? Doesn't the 2nd Amendment apply to them? You know, if they aren't felons already. They are just "standing their ground". Which you gun nutters love that idea.

 

[NightFox]

So are you saying that Americans are just more homicidal?

I didn't even imply anything of the sort. If you asked the question "Are Americans more "homicidal" than the Swiss?" .. the answer IMHO would be yes but the comparison would be essentially worthless (because Switzerland with it's tiny, relatively homogeneous and neutrality oriented culture bears little resemblance to the realities of U.S. society).

Whats the difference?

Difference as compared to what/whom? I already pointed out the relevant criteria; scale, development, culture, cultural diversity..... those criteria are all going to influence the statistics heavily and determine whether any given comparison is valid.

 

[dilloduck]

As always, being wrong is a regular occurrence for you. If gun control made us safer, we would indeed be the safest nation on Earth. By far, we do have the most guns on the plane no doubt, but if gun control were all it was cracked up to be, then you can explain why hundred upon hundreds of people die in Chicago, which has the strictest gun control laws in the country. Chicago is a shining example of why gun control is a dangerous proposition.

Us supporters of the 2nd Amendment believe guns ensure freedom and safety.

"The only thing better than a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun."

If gun control made us safer, we would be the safest country on earth?
You realize there are many countries with stricter gun laws than even Chicago? And actually have fewer gun deaths, right?
I guess being wrong is a regular occurrence for you.

You're going to get a "culture" argument now as if those in Norway don't have access to Amazon.com to read the same books, see the same shows, watch the same movies, etc...

And have thousands of black thugs living there----oh wait--they don't have that do they ?

 

[dilloduck]

Hey Karmac Why shouldn't gang members have the same right to protect themselves with the weapon of their choice? Doesn't the 2nd Amendment apply to them? You know, if they aren't felons already. They are just "standing their ground". Which you gun nutters love that idea.

They do have the same rights. What are you talking about ?

 

[asaratis]

Just guessing, but it looks like the poster of this post is a 2nd Amendment adherent. That would mean that the attached You Tube is a 52 minute apology and support of the 2nd Amendment? I don't think so. America has a gun problem. Period. It is caused by proliferation of handguns on American streets. It is accompanied by too many unresolved societal problems that are rendering the US less and less of a free nation. Nothing that any academic can say is going to change that, no matter how well written. America's most intelligent and respected writer could speak for 52 minutes in favour of slavery and that still would not make slavery acceptable. Some things cannot be rationalized.

This very video is directed at you.

If so it was wasted. I don't have 50+ minutes to spare on an interview of an author pumping his merchandise. Nor do I have that much time to spare for a partisan monologue on a subject that so many of us have already spent so much time thinking and writing about. The post is introduced as a criticism of intellectual elitism attacking the second amendment argument. There is really only so much sensible that can be said about the basic 2nd Amendment argument, and the rest quickly gets into polemics (name calling and flaming). I don't have 50 minutes to spend listening to name calling. At its root the 2nd Amendment argument is simple. Either you agree or disagree. I have been a shooter for 50+ years and I disagree with where the current 2nd Amendment adherents have gone. IMO it is all about corporate greed and gun sales now. Freedom and decency are the last thing the NRA and the industry are interested in. In my opinion.

So, you don't have time to watch it and listen to his words? How intellectually starved you must be.

Is that good or bad?

It's a lesson. See if you can learn from it.

One thing it teaches is that when a nation cannot meet the needs of its people through its unlegislated culture the law can be used to fill necessary gaps. To the uneducated such laws often invite criticism. Study reveals that without laws to intervene an economy will regulate itself into feudalism or its equivalent, where people who are not born wealthy literally can never become anything but what they were born as. America's right wing is trying to go there now - the middle class has shrunk by 40% since Reagan.

Not having watched it, you now can tell us what it teaches?

BTW, There are people here that were not born wealthy but became so by their own hard labor and determination. Methinks your suffer from wealth envy. Likely nobody in your family has amassed wealth for you to inherit.

 

[zeke]

Hey Karmac Why shouldn't gang members have the same right to protect themselves with the weapon of their choice? Doesn't the 2nd Amendment apply to them? You know, if they aren't felons already. They are just "standing their ground". Which you gun nutters love that idea.

They do have the same rights. What are you talking about ?

OK, Then why does the gun nutters keep bringing up Chicago as some sort of indictment of something or other. I mean every day some gun nutter gets all incensed because some gang banger shot another gang banger and hit some kid in the crossfire.

Hell kids shoot themselves everyday with their parents or other caretakers gun and the right wing gun nuts say not a word.

SO what's with bringing up Chicago all the time. Those gang bangers have a right to self defense and to stand their ground (says you) . Unless they have a felony.

What is the problem in Chicago? According to you, there is none. Is that correct?

 

[candycorn]

So are you saying that Americans are just more homicidal?

I didn't even imply anything of the sort. If you asked the question "Are Americans more "homicidal" than the Swiss?" .. the answer IMHO would be yes but the comparison would be essentially worthless (because Switzerland with it's tiny, relatively homogeneous and neutrality oriented culture bears little resemblance to the realities of U.S. society).

You're picking out the Swiss to suit your own purposes there pal...

Certainly the Chinese are not "neutrally" oriented nor are they homogeneous speaking several different languages and dialects.

Why aren't they murdering each other by the bus load? Does the availability of guns have anything to do with it?

Whats the difference?

Difference as compared to what/whom? I already pointed out the relevant criteria; scale, development, culture, cultural diversity..... those criteria are all going to influence the statistics heavily and determine whether any given comparison is valid.

Chinese cities are more populous, crowded, developed and under-developed blocks over, agrarian cultures clashing with urban culutres etc... Again, it seems like the availability of guns is the differentiation between slaughter v. non slaughter. The average person on the street in Hong Kong is safer from gun violence than the average person on the street in Miami, Phoenix, Chicago, Charleston, Seattle etc...

 

[candycorn]

If gun control made us safer, we would be the safest country on earth?
You realize there are many countries with stricter gun laws than even Chicago? And actually have fewer gun deaths, right?
I guess being wrong is a regular occurrence for you.

You're going to get a "culture" argument now as if those in Norway don't have access to Amazon.com to read the same books, see the same shows, watch the same movies, etc...

And have thousands of black thugs living there----oh wait--they don't have that do they ?

Ahh, the race card makes an appearnace. At least you were brave/stupid enough to come out and say it. Congrats.

 

[NightFox]

You're picking out the Swiss to suit your own purposes there pal...

No, I picked out the Swiss to illustrate to you what an INVALID comparison looks like and I specifically pointed that out.

Certainly the Chinese are not "neutrally" oriented nor are they homogeneous speaking several different languages and dialects.

The Chinese culture is fairly homogeneous (especially compared to U.S. culture) not to mention they live under a one party rule, police state with little to no political, economic or civil liberties. Do you really think Chinese society bears any significant resemblance to U.S. society?

 

[candycorn]

You're picking out the Swiss to suit your own purposes there pal...

No, I picked out the Swiss to illustrate to you what an INVALID comparison looks like and I specifically pointed that out.

Oh..okay.

Certainly the Chinese are not "neutrally" oriented nor are they homogeneous speaking several different languages and dialects.

The Chinese culture is fairly homogeneous (especially compared to U.S. culture) not to mention they live under a one party rule, police state with little to no political, economic or civil liberties. Do you really think Chinese society bears any significant resemblance to U.S. society?

Faily homogeneous...so there are some differences. Yet they're not murdering each other like we are?

One party rule? If we got rid of a political party, people would stop slaughtering each other with cheap guns? Really?

Okay, China...backburner.

India is a Democracy (as is Hong Kong pretty much with)....over-crowded cities with slums and ghettos...have a Caste system unofficially in place...not murdering each other at all.

There are ghettos in nearly every major city in Europe as well. Berlin has ghettos although they're apparently not called that. Warsaw has ghettos where you could actually buy human organs at one time. Moscow has ghettos to be sure. London has ghettos. From what I'm told, Mardrid IS a ghetto.

Still, they're not slaughtering each other with guns. Why?

 

[NightFox]

One party rule? If we got rid of a political party, people would stop slaughtering each other with cheap guns? Really?

Are you attempting to be vapid on purpose or do you really not understand what "police state" means?

India is a Democracy (as is Hong Kong pretty much with)....over-crowded cities with slums and ghettos...have a Caste system unofficially in place...

Ummmm...and India and the U.S. share comparable culture, culture diversity and development? You're also missing the fact that India has a far more authoritarian system of governance than the U.S. does.

not murdering each other at all.

False (U.S. 4.8 , India 3.5 homicide rate per 100K UNODC)

There are ghettos in nearly every major city in Europe as well. Berlin has ghettos although they're apparently not called that. Warsaw has ghettos where you could actually buy human organs at one time. Moscow has ghettos to be sure. London has ghettos. From what I'm told, Mardrid IS a ghetto.

Again with the apples and oranges comparisons, if we want to get into comparing cities to cities I'll take you on trip down Chicago Lane but allow me to save you some head scratching, You're not going to find an apples to apples comparison between U.S. society and any other country on this one.

Still, they're not slaughtering each other with guns. Why?

You're asking the wrong question, if you're REALLY interested in tackling the issue of gun violence then what you should be asking is why do some Americans shoot other Americans and gun ownership isn't the answer (10 of millions of Americans own guns and only a tiny fraction ever harm anybody with 'em (accidentally or on purpose)). There's been discussion about mental health treatment related to this issue and that's a step toward the root causes but we need go further, for example much of the gun violence in the U.S. revolves around the distribution & sale of illicit, right? what sorts of things could be done to mitigate that situation? If we actually care about this issue then we need to at least be honest enough to acknowledge that the answers are not easy one-liners like "gun control" because that's just a lazy way out and is nonsense, people intent on giving other people lead injections are never going to bat an eye at obtaining guns on the black market, so our objective must be to reduce the number of people intent on shooting other people.

I'm all for solutions that will actually reduce gun violence which means that I do not accept that pat politician, easy to sound byte answer of "gun control" which will not only be ineffective but will invariably punish the law abiding people that want to pursue their right to own a firearm.

On the other hand if what you're interested in doing is regurgitating talking points that will not accomplish anything positive then "gun control" is as good a pointless platitude as any I suppose.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If gun control made us safer, we would be the safest country on earth?
You realize there are many countries with stricter gun laws than even Chicago? And actually have fewer gun deaths, right?
I guess being wrong is a regular occurrence for you.

You're going to get a "culture" argument now as if those in Norway don't have access to Amazon.com to read the same books, see the same shows, watch the same movies, etc...

And have thousands of black thugs living there----oh wait--they don't have that do they ?

So you want more Americans to have more and more guns, as long as they're white Americans?

lol, the true face of the gunbaggers.

 

[Luissa]

As always, being wrong is a regular occurrence for you. If gun control made us safer, we would indeed be the safest nation on Earth. By far, we do have the most guns on the plane no doubt, but if gun control were all it was cracked up to be, then you can explain why hundred upon hundreds of people die in Chicago, which has the strictest gun control laws in the country. Chicago is a shining example of why gun control is a dangerous proposition.

Us supporters of the 2nd Amendment believe guns ensure freedom and safety.

"The only thing better than a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun."

If gun control made us safer, we would be the safest country on earth?
You realize there are many countries with stricter gun laws than even Chicago? And actually have fewer gun deaths, right?
I guess being wrong is a regular occurrence for you.

All you can do is parrot someone else's crap. You can't explain Chicago, can you? You can't stay on topic, can you? Who gives a shit about other countries, Luissa? Why does Chicago fly in the face of your contentions?

I guess being stupid is a regular occurrence for you.

[MENTION=43268]TemplarKormac[/MENTION]

Stay on topic? I think I responded to exactly what you posted. Were you on topic?
Of course instead of responding you play the victim.

You made the claim that with our gun laws including Chicago we should be the safest country in the world. I just pointed out that countries have stricter gun laws than even Chicago and less gun violence.
And you must give a shit about other countries, because you made the claim. I figure someone who makes that type of claim can back it up.

Or were you just trolling?

 

[candycorn]

One party rule? If we got rid of a political party, people would stop slaughtering each other with cheap guns? Really?

Are you attempting to be vapid on purpose or do you really not understand what "police state" means?

You mentioned one party rule; not me.

India is a Democracy (as is Hong Kong pretty much with)....over-crowded cities with slums and ghettos...have a Caste system unofficially in place...

Ummmm...and India and the U.S. share comparable culture, culture diversity and development? You're also missing the fact that India has a far more authoritarian system of governance than the U.S. does.

Sure we have compatible cultures...what is different besides the eating of beef?
Development? They are graduating tons more engineers than we are.
Diversity...oh so the color of skin matters in pulling a trigger?

False (U.S. 4.8 , India 3.5 homicide rate per 100K UNODC)

So their murder rate should be aggregately higher since they have more people then right?

There are ghettos in nearly every major city in Europe as well. Berlin has ghettos although they're apparently not called that. Warsaw has ghettos where you could actually buy human organs at one time. Moscow has ghettos to be sure. London has ghettos. From what I'm told, Mardrid IS a ghetto.

Again with the apples and oranges comparisons, if we want to get into comparing cities to cities I'll take you on trip down Chicago Lane but allow me to save you some head scratching, You're not going to find an apples to apples comparison between U.S. society and any other country on this one.

What is different about those ghettos and our ghettos?

Still, they're not slaughtering each other with guns. Why?

You're asking the wrong question, if you're REALLY interested in tackling the issue of gun violence then what you should be asking is why do some Americans shoot other Americans and gun ownership isn't the answer (10 of millions of Americans own guns and only a tiny fraction ever harm anybody with 'em (accidentally or on purpose)). There's been discussion about mental health treatment related to this issue and that's a step toward the root causes but we need go further, for example much of the gun violence in the U.S. revolves around the distribution & sale of illicit, right? what sorts of things could be done to mitigate that situation? If we actually care about this issue then we need to at least be honest enough to acknowledge that the answers are not easy one-liners like "gun control" because that's just a lazy way out and is nonsense, people intent on giving other people lead injections are never going to bat an eye at obtaining guns on the black market, so our objective must be to reduce the number of people intent on shooting other people.

I'm all for solutions that will actually reduce gun violence which means that I do not accept that pat politician, easy to sound byte answer of "gun control" which will not only be ineffective but will invariably punish the law abiding people that want to pursue their right to own a firearm.

On the other hand if what you're interested in doing is regurgitating talking points that will not accomplish anything positive then "gun control" is as good a pointless platitude as any I suppose.

I'm all for making any gun crime a federal crime where there is no parole. One and done, 20 years in the hole; no parole.

Would that work?

 

[candycorn]

If gun control made us safer, we would be the safest country on earth?
You realize there are many countries with stricter gun laws than even Chicago? And actually have fewer gun deaths, right?
I guess being wrong is a regular occurrence for you.

All you can do is parrot someone else's crap. You can't explain Chicago, can you? You can't stay on topic, can you? Who gives a shit about other countries, Luissa? Why does Chicago fly in the face of your contentions?

I guess being stupid is a regular occurrence for you.

[MENTION=43268]TemplarKormac[/MENTION]

Stay on topic? I think I responded to exactly what you posted. Were you on topic?
Of course instead of responding you play the victim.

You made the claim that with our gun laws including Chicago we should be the safest country in the world. I just pointed out that countries have stricter gun laws than even Chicago and less gun violence.
And you must give a shit about other countries, because you made the claim. I figure someone who makes that type of claim can back it up.

Or were you just trolling?

He follows you around looking to pick a fight. Usually I just ignore him.

 

[Murhy]

Hot damn!

Thomas Sowell on the second edition of Intellectuals and Society - YouTube

Just guessing, but it looks like the poster of this post is a 2nd Amendment adherent. That would mean that the attached You Tube is a 52 minute apology and support of the 2nd Amendment? I don't think so. America has a gun problem. Period. It is caused by proliferation of handguns on American streets. It is accompanied by too many unresolved societal problems that are rendering the US less and less of a free nation. Nothing that any academic can say is going to change that, no matter how well written. America's most intelligent and respected writer could speak for 52 minutes in favour of slavery and that still would not make slavery acceptable. Some things cannot be rationalized.

No.

The world's gun problem is that people suck.

Good luck fixing that.

Dont take the guns away. Shitty people shoot people.

Take the guns away. Shitty people shoot people.

Good luck.

 

[NightFox]

You mentioned one party rule; not me.

Yes I "mentioned" it followed immediately by "Police State" which you conveniently left out, a bit disingenuous on your part, no?

Sure we have compatible cultures...what is different besides the eating of beef?
Development?

You do of course understand that India is a Hindu culture with a caste system and how that might lead one to the conclusion that our cultures are dissimilar, right ?

They are graduating tons more engineers than we are.

That's true, however it doesn't change the fact that economically India is still emerging from third world status.......

Diversity...oh so the color of skin matters in pulling a trigger?

CULTURAL DIVERSITY as in a multi-cultural society as in it has a tendency to create societal conflict, why you would choose to bring up skin color is a mystery....... culture != skin color.

So their murder rate should be aggregately higher since they have more people then right?

All other factors being equal yes however as has already been demonstrated all other factors are NOT equal, that's why a valid comparison isn't possible.

What is different about those ghettos and our ghettos?

Do I really need to go over it AGAIN? scroll up and review the criteria for apples to apples comparisons.

I'm all for making any gun crime a federal crime where there is no parole. One and done, 20 years in the hole; no parole.

Would that work?

I can't say whether or not it would be an effective strategy, however incarceration hasn't proven all that effective a deterrent up to this point, that being said it's a better strategy than impeding the right to gun ownership of law abiding citizens.

 

[TemplarKormac]

All you can do is parrot someone else's crap. You can't explain Chicago, can you? You can't stay on topic, can you? Who gives a shit about other countries, Luissa? Why does Chicago fly in the face of your contentions?

I guess being stupid is a regular occurrence for you.

[MENTION=43268]TemplarKormac[/MENTION]

Stay on topic? I think I responded to exactly what you posted. Were you on topic?
Of course instead of responding you play the victim.

You made the claim that with our gun laws including Chicago we should be the safest country in the world. I just pointed out that countries have stricter gun laws than even Chicago and less gun violence.
And you must give a shit about other countries, because you made the claim. I figure someone who makes that type of claim can back it up.

Or were you just trolling?

He follows you around looking to pick a fight. Usually I just ignore him.

And how do I follow anyone around? Luissa made the mistake of tagging me in her comment. Are you two paranoid? Damn. I must be more influential than I thought. You two must be scared of me. I don't make a habit of following anyone anywhere. If you can't take a good debate, don't say stupid shit that can be easily countered.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And [MENTION=11865]Luissa[/MENTION]: calls me a troll. The rest of her argument (if she had one) is invalidated by her need to call people names and ad hom them into oblivion. I shall not waste my time.

 

[Luissa]

[MENTION=43268]TemplarKormac[/MENTION]

Stay on topic? I think I responded to exactly what you posted. Were you on topic?
Of course instead of responding you play the victim.

You made the claim that with our gun laws including Chicago we should be the safest country in the world. I just pointed out that countries have stricter gun laws than even Chicago and less gun violence.
And you must give a shit about other countries, because you made the claim. I figure someone who makes that type of claim can back it up.

Or were you just trolling?

He follows you around looking to pick a fight. Usually I just ignore him.

And how do I follow anyone around? Luissa made the mistake of tagging me in her comment. Are you two paranoid? Damn. I must be more influential than I thought. You two must be scared of me. I don't make a habit of following anyone anywhere. If you can't take a good debate, don't say stupid shit that can be easily countered.

Tagging you in a comment where I was responding to a post where you addressed me is proof of what?

And how do you respond to me when you have me on ignore? And I never made the claim you were following me, and Candy didn't tag you.