Reply to What does it take to get a little gun control

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "What does it take to get a little gun control "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]We sacrifice 40,000 people to the automobile a year, and driving isn't even mentioned in the Constitution. So probably some multiple of that. [/quote]

That’s a false equivalency though.  Driving has multiple prosocial purposes.  Guns have one purpose: killing.

Mass shootings aren’t an accidental byproduct of some other activity, they [i]are[/i] the activity.[/quote]

I wouldn't call driving a prosocial activity though. Not on an individual or social level. The car has led to the destruction of the American landscape, the isolation of people from their communities and a crushing financial burden. The car kills people, cities and nations. Guns only kill people. [/quote]

Let’s not conflate metaphorical killing of cities with literal killing of people.  That’s irrelevant.

Guns are designed to murder, and marketed as such.  Cars are not advertised based on how many pedestrians they can mow down.[/quote]

Guns are no more "designed to murder" than cars are designed to kill other drivers and pedestrians.  Both can be used for legal and valid purposes, or abused.  The variable is the operator, and that's where the focus should be, not on the instrument they use improperly.  [/quote]

Of course guns are designed to murder.  I guess you could use one as a paperweight, but that isn’t its primary function.[/quote]

Does a hunter murder or kill a deer?[/quote]

Doesn’t make any difference from the deer’s point of view [/quote]

It does from a human point of view.

Killing and murder isn't the same thing.[/quote]

Who cares? The end result is the same.[/quote]

Not at all true.

Murder involves evil intent.  Killing doesn't always  involve evil intent.

For example you can kill the deer to put meat on the table allowing a family to survive a harsh winter.

You can have an accidental discharge that kills someone unintentionally.

You can kill justifyably:

You can be a member of the military who kills someone to defend your nation.

You can kill someone in self defense and save your kid/wife.[/quote]

Who cares? The end result is the same.[/quote]

No, the end result is not at all the same.

If a hunter kills a deer and has a deer permit, they have a trophy, or a story, or a freezer full of food and they don't go to jail.

If a human murders another human because they had evil intent, they may go to jail.

If a human kills another human while following the rules of war, they don't go to jail.

Don't be delibrately obtuse.[/quote]

The end result is death.  Dead deer. Dead human. Both are dead.  Caused by the gun, which is designed to make them dead.  You’re the one being deliberately obtuse by claiming that they are not in fact both dead.
[/quote]

You won't engage on the point in question which means you are either intellectually dishonest or a fool. The end result is NOT death for all parties involved.

I ask again, are murder and killing the same thing?

Yes or no answer please.[/quote]

The end result FOR THE LIVING ENTITY THAT IS SHOT is death.

I don’t have enough crayons to explain that to you.  You keep trying to move the goalposts (speaking of intellectual dishonesty) and make it about the person using the gun, and not the gun itself.  I could use a fork to short out an electrical outlet, but that doesn’t change the fact that it was designed for eating.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics