It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gun owners - Have you apologised for a spree killing recently?

page: 26
60
<< 23  24  25    27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 03:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: MayanWarrior

originally posted by: neformore
As far as guns go, I live in a country that doesn't have a gun culture. I don't share the fascination with them that some people do


If you live in Britain, then you live in a country where defensive weapons have always been banned from commoners. I bet ya'll used to have sword bans too. And peasants didn't share the fascination with swords others had.

Ever considered that ya'll have been conditioned against firearms?
Dr.Who didn't have a high opinion of them either.


Not banned apart from handguns.
I have a gunsmith down my town.
Just have to get a licence and a strongbow to get a shotgun or rifle.
But like nerf said most just don't need them.
www.aaronwheelergunsmith.co.uk... funny though I just checked his site and he has a .44 revolver for sale.




posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 04:45 AM
link   
a reply to: MayanWarrior

Nothing to do with this thread....



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 04:48 AM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

You're overthinking the thread.

It's about blaming the many for the few. The basis of the analogy is irrelevant. People are just obfuscating the general point with side issues.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 05:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: neformore
You're overthinking the thread.

It's about blaming the many for the few. The basis of the analogy is irrelevant. People are just obfuscating the general point with side issues.


Over-thinking, or reasonably critiquing the merits of the opening post?

The basis of the analogy is relevant in this case.

It's not hard to create a thread using a weak analogy, defend the faulty premise using poor arguments and then hide behind the "it's satire, you just don't get it!" card.

What is hard is to admit that you made a mistake and were wrong.


edit on 14/1/2015 by Dark Ghost because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost

How can nef have been "wrong" when a large number of respondents in the thread recognise and agree with the point made?

Maybe it just works from the perspective of a civilised country where people aren't armed? But no, Americans have responded positively too, so hat can't be it. Maybe it's just because it makes some gun owners feel uncomfortable?



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 07:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dark Ghost

What is hard is to admit that you made a mistake and were wrong.



You just highlighted why there are still gun nuts arguing about guns in this thread. Y'all can't admit when you were wrong and are trying to rationalize why you can't let it go.
edit on 14-1-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost

what, pray tell, am I wrong about?

It's a satirical analogy. Sorry you can't comprehend it.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 07:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: Dark Ghost

what, pray tell, am I wrong about?

It's a satirical analogy. Sorry you can't comprehend it.


You were wrong in believing your analogy was a fitting one, nothing more, nothing less.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 07:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
You just highlighted why there are still gun nuts arguing about guns in this thread. Y'all can't admit when you were wrong and are trying to rationalize why you can't let it go.


Your ignorance, it stings...

1. I have never owned - and don't plan to - own a gun.
2. I am Australian and deem our gun laws satisfactory.
3. I believe the author of this thread made a very weak analogy, that is all I am arguing.
4. You and others are stereotyping those who disagree with the OP as "gun nuts arguing about guns" when it is only a few doing so.
5. What am I trying to let go of?



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost

Well, that's your viewpoint, and you are welcome to it.

Have a nice day



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 08:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: waynos
And now a new question. Should anyone dim enough to post a reply like the one immediately above this post have their gun taken away due to lack of faculty?

A sort of back door suitability test.
Discuss.



From page 22 of this thread.

Back door suitability tests of a whole group of people....you mean like this one????



"They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."


Has this particular group in leadership positions tried to stereotype..even in satire...whole groups of people in this nation for political reasons??? And then proceeded to act upon it..to the detriment and at the expense of some ..for political reasons???? Robbing Peter to pay Paul. Banking on stereotypes to look "Enlightened , Educated, and Illuminated?" Dividing and not uniting???? And all for political power??

People who can see this trend line in satire and stereotyping by leadership...have long ago lost their enthusiasm for satire and politics in such a dead and inert system...playing/preying on the beliefs of some to benefit others....gratis.

They are looking for real leadership and finding politics and social engineering to be lacking...ie..satire is not it.


Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost

1. Ok
2. That's a shame. Gun laws in Australia are too restrictive.
3. The majority of the thread disagrees with you. Since this is a subjective topic, then we have to default to the majority's opinion.
4. The few that do are the loudest, as usual.
5. That you may have been wrong.

Though, if you are truly arguing over the effectiveness of an analogy then that is an opinion and therefore no one is wrong, unless you want to do what I suggested previously and take the majority's opinion on the matter.
edit on 14-1-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: neformore

I apologize for small minded people who seem to believe that guns, not people, are the source of evil and violence. I apologize for their lack of insight into the fact that man's inhumanity to man existed long before guns were ever made. I apologize for those who believe being a sheep, awaiting slaughter is better than sharpening your claws in order to defend yourself and your family.

After all, if guns are outlawed, then only outlaws (criminals) will own them. Want to depend on the police to protect yourself and your family?

Would you really want to trust the govt to be the only legal gun owners in the country? I do not trust our govt at all....let alone allow them even more of an advantage. Sooner or later the tree of liberty will need to be watered, once again.

No gun zones result in one individual conducting mass chaos and murder with impunity for a significant period. Consider the murders of children in Newtown (Newton?) .... had one or 2 teachers been armed that would have ended much sooner than it did. How many children would still be alive today?


edit on 14-1-2015 by bbracken677 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: bbracken677

Hi.

Please read the OP again.

Thanks.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 02:50 PM
link   
This thread has taught me a few things.

1. People understand satire selectively. There must be a psychological reason for that?
2. Some people do not know what an analogy is.
3. Some people don't read past the first four lines of a post, or its title.
4. People definitely don't read the whole thread.
5. The standard of reading comprehension taught in schools has declined considerably over the past 30 years.
6. People overthink things.

Food for thought for sure.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: neformore

7. Some folks try to place too many restrictions on threads in an effort to ensure arguments they don't wish to entertain can be dismissed as not falling within the pigeonholed train of thought required to keep shakey analogies functional.

The existence of an entirely unique basis of justification for the actions of the few makes any analogy ridiculous. That is not me "overthinking," it is me stating a fact. We could just as productively sit here and make the argument "Why castigate the Nazis when it was only a minority percentage of them that were directly involved in the Holocaust?" While the majority of Nazi Germany consisted of citizens who were too afraid to decry those committing atrocities, history has declared that all were guilty by silent approval because the tenants of the party dictated the abhorent behavior witnessed there.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: neformore

Hi!

I did, and even a 2nd time (just now).

My reading comprehension is quite high. Much higher than average, actually. I was an early member of a University's Honors Program.

Perhaps you did not understand my post. PM me and I will be happy to explain.

Just to clarify: I do not believe in restrictions that are not limited to criminal background checks. I do not have a problem with people who have documented mental health issues being restricted either.

Most importantly, however, I believe that the thought police have no right to restrict Constitutionally guranteed rights.

edit on 14-1-2015 by bbracken677 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 03:29 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I get that you don't like it or agree with it - and thats fine.

Its your perogative.

But I sense you - and others - are trying to invent some kind of sinister motive behind the post other than a simple analogy. The problem with that is that its not there.

The OP is an attempt to make people think for a while by using satire, instead of knee jerk react - and thats all.

Sorry you don't get that. Nothing I can do about it.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 03:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I get that you don't like it or agree with it - and thats fine.

Its your perogative.

But I sense you - and others - are trying to invent some kind of sinister motive behind the post other than a simple analogy. The problem with that is that its not there.

The OP is an attempt to make people think for a while by using satire, instead of knee jerk react - and thats all.

Sorry you don't get that. Nothing I can do about it.


Actually, how someone phrases a question or a commentary actually tells us more about that person and his agenda more than the actual question or commentary.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc

Tell me more?

Whats the agenda?



new topics




 
60
<< 23  24  25    27 >>

log in

join