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.

 

5-year-old Kentucky boy fatally shoots 2-year-old sister with gift rifle

page: 21
22
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy

Yep, that's right.
It all comes down to this...
I shouldn't have guns because they are dangerous....
But you can have other dangerous things because you want to.


It doesn't, actually. Where have I said you shouldn't have guns?

I'm saying that you should acknowledge that your freedom comes at a cost. And one part of that cost is that in some cases tragedies like this will happen. That's true of guns and cars.

Naturally I'm also asking you to consider the relative utility of objects with their risks, something you seem unable or unwilling to do. Perhaps you don't understand the terms I'm using or maybe you find this too frightening. Certainly your squeamishness at acknowledging the collateral cost of car usage suggests you do.

Or perhaps you just think anyone should be allowed anything they like, regardless of how useful/dangerous it is. In which case you are presumably fine with me owning my own nuclear warhead.




posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

I'm saying that you should acknowledge that your freedom comes at a cost. And one part of that cost is that in some cases tragedies like this will happen. That's true of guns and cars.


All freedom comes with that cost. A cost which is never high enough to reduce freedom. We've all lost too much already.

Life ends in death. What short life we have should be lived in liberty.]

If you can afford it go ahead and buy a warhead.
edit on 3-5-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

My "Marine mindset" provided the so-called "real world" and freedom you enjoy today. You're welcome!



By getting your arses kicked all over the world? Korea - that one's going well. Vietnam... oops, Afghanistan, oh dear, just given that one back. Iraq... not exactly a shining victory.

Have you guys and your 'mindset' ever actually won anything?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

I'm saying that you should acknowledge that your freedom comes at a cost. And one part of that cost is that in some cases tragedies like this will happen. That's true of guns and cars.


All freedom comes with that cost. A cost which is never high enough to reduce freedom. We've all lost too much already.

Life ends in death. What short life we have should be lived in liberty.


So I should be free to own anything I want, regardless of the cost?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Yes. Own whatever the hell you want.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 




Naturally I'm also asking you to consider the relative utility of objects with their risks, something you seem unable or unwilling to do.

Actually, you are the one that is unwilling to consider the utility of guns.

Their use is laid out in the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
But, we have seen what you think of the US Constitution.



"Sorry, but like 90 per cent of the world I don't really care about the US Constitution." JuniorDisco, 5-3-13



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Yes. Own whatever the hell you want.


Cool. Can my brother own whatever he wants too? I mean, he's in jail currently, but I guess that should be no barrier to him having a firearm?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Yes. Own whatever the hell you want.


Cool. Can my brother own whatever he wants too? I mean, he's in jail currently, but I guess that should be no barrier to him having a firearm?


Once he's out his debt is paid. I see no reason to prohibit ownership once the debt has been paid.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by eriktheawful


The only reason that there are a number of dead children due to gun ownership is because there are a number of idiots that cause that situation by being stupid and irresponsible.

Just as there are an even bigger number of idiots that cause a even bigger number of children to be dead because of cars for the same reason.


Yes, I know. I say this above. But the idiots aren't going to disappear and so we have to make a decision about an object's utility vs its risks and then legislate. You may disagree with me about the usefulness of guns but I doubt you disagree with notion of acting that way.

Put it another way, if you don't entertain this system then that's an argument for legalising anything. We do not allow people to have their own nuclear warheads, and yet they are simply neutral objects and only idiots and the insane would damage themselves and others with them.


You know, every time I see the gun control crowed bring out the nuke argument, I have to start wondering about their over all education and intelligence.

Only idiots bring out that argument, mainly because they have no argument that works other than that.

I am firmly against any government telling me what I can or can not own. This country has been slowly lowering itself into a very deep, very smelly cesspool for a long time now. Ever since the government decided to start getting into the business of telling people in this once great nation of ours on how to live.

People used to flock to this country once upon a time, because it was a place that you could truly be free. You could truly take a dream and build on it. Without government involvement. Without government dictating to you how you are suppose to live.

This used to be a nation of mature, RESPONSIBLE adults, who could live free and not have any government playing nanny and wiping their butts for them.

But slowly over time, a large portion of these mature, responsible adults have gone away, and in their place are a people who depend on the government for just about everything.

Please Mr. Government! I need to be told what to do! I need to be told what I can or can not have! I need to have everything taken from me because I can't act like a mature, responsible adult! I need you to tell me what I can or can not eat or drink! I need you to tell me what I can or can not put in my body!

I need to to give me money, so please, please, please tax the crap out of everyone so you can....but I want all my taxes back, plus extra!

Please Mr. Government, I don't know how to educate my children, or provide for their education, so please shove them all in public schools where you can dictate and indoctronate (instead of teaching) my children to believe in what ever you want to make them believe in!

We need you to do this Mr. Government, for the children! For ourselves! Because we're no good on our own anymore........we need you to control and regulate every single second of our lives, because....well somewhere down the line we started breeding people who just don't agree with that nasty piece of paper called the Bill Of Rights. Please tear it up.........we just can't handle freedom anymore. We're just no good at self governing like we used to for all that very, very long time ago.

We got stupid somewhere down the line, so we need you to round us up and put us in day care.

/sarcasm

And that is what's wrong with the country, and has been for many decades now.
edit on 3-5-2013 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy

Actually, you are the one that is unwilling to consider the utility of guns.


Do you think that if you keep saying this it might come true?


Their use is laid out in the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
But, we have seen what you think of the US Constitution.


Oh right, it says it on a bit of paper. Oookay, I didn't realise.

That means you can't amend that bit of paper right? Like, if circumstances change?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Yes. Own whatever the hell you want.


Cool. Can my brother own whatever he wants too? I mean, he's in jail currently, but I guess that should be no barrier to him having a firearm?


Once he's out his debt is paid. I see no reason to prohibit ownership once the debt has been paid.


Okay. I just spoke to him. He wants a suitcase bomb. Is that okay too?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 




Do you think that if you keep saying this it might come true?

You heard me say it here recently?



That means you can't amend that bit of paper right? Like, if circumstances change?

That's what amendment means, doesn't it? I referenced the 2nd Amendment, there have been a lot more.
You should get on that, you know, nullifying the 2nd. The Democratic controlled Senate can't pass a bill to straighten out loopholes at gunshows... when it the compromise was co-sponsored by a Republican.......... dream much?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Sure.

You're not going to trap me into some prohibitionist corner.

He can have a warehouse full of suitcase bombs for all I care.

The problem arises in use. Not potential use but actual use.

If he gets his jollies blowing up suitcase bombs on his back fifty to no harm of person or property that is not his own then by all means lets have a cookout and blow up some suitcase bombs.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by eriktheawful
 


Right. so instead of try to refute a perfectly reasonable argument that explores the limits of what a free people should be allowed to own, you prefer to produce an embarrassing rant about... sort of not much. I agree some people are often irresponsible nowadays. But they always have been. And they've always been stupid. If you think there was a golden era where there weren't any idiots then you're wrong.

But anyway that has nothing to do with what I wrote. It isn't stupid to suggest that one acknowledge the risk vs the utility of private ownership of an object. Whether you like it or not we do this every day, and you do it too, I imagine. Unless you think there are no objects people should not be allowed to own?

And I'm not even against gun ownership, you're wrong about that as well.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy

You heard me say it here recently?


You continuously imply that I am against gun ownership. I am not. I am simply in favour of a mature discussion about it without all this bull# waving of the bill of rights, nonsense about a US golden age and From My COld Dead Hands grandstanding.

I also like it when adults take responsibility for their beliefs and actions. And in this case a belief in wide gun ownership (and wide car ownership) makes you in a tiny way responsible for the needless deaths of children. Apparently you can't face up to this. Which is not, as I say, a responsible or adult reaction.




That's what amendment means, doesn't it? I referenced the 2nd Amendment, there have been a lot more.
You should get on that, you know, nullifying the 2nd. The Democratic controlled Senate can't pass a bill to straighten out loopholes at gunshows... when it the compromise was co-sponsored by a Republican.......... dream much?


I don't really care what you do in America. I don't have to live there or send my kids to your shooting ranges, sorry, schools. Or eat your dreadful food. Or participate in what you amusingly call your 'culture'. So you can do what you like.

Having said that, I do find it odd that you would hold up a piece of paper as immutable god-given law, and then admit that it's been changed. A lot.

Why do you think they changed it? Might it have been because circumstances changed?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Sure.

You're not going to trap me into some prohibitionist corner.

He can have a warehouse full of suitcase bombs for all I care.

The problem arises in use. Not potential use but actual use.

If he gets his jollies blowing up suitcase bombs on his back fifty to no harm of person or property that is not his own then by all means lets have a cookout and blow up some suitcase bombs.


Cool, he says that's all he's doing so I guess it's fine.

He is in prison for blowing up a school, though.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful

Only idiots bring out that argument, mainly because they have no argument that works other than that.


Just noticed this.

So you're saying that argument does work. Not surprising that you therefore fail to challenge it!



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Why he's there doesnt change my opinion.

You can tell him what I say all you want. Unfortunately manufacturing and detonating explosive devices without proper stamps is still illegal despite how I feel.

You and your brother can thank the 90% of the population who are frightened slaves crying for more laws, more regulations, more prohibitions day and night.

People who want liberty are a minority. A disenfranchised, mocked and simultaneously feared minority.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Fair enough, brave position.

I can kind of see why you're in a minority if you would give a suitcase bomb to a guy who'd just served time for blowing up a school though.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by JuniorDisco
reply to post by eriktheawful
 


Right. so instead of try to refute a perfectly reasonable argument that explores the limits of what a free people should be allowed to own, you prefer to produce an embarrassing rant about... sort of not much. I agree some people are often irresponsible nowadays. But they always have been. And they've always been stupid. If you think there was a golden era where there weren't any idiots then you're wrong.

But anyway that has nothing to do with what I wrote. It isn't stupid to suggest that one acknowledge the risk vs the utility of private ownership of an object. Whether you like it or not we do this every day, and you do it too, I imagine. Unless you think there are no objects people should not be allowed to own?

And I'm not even against gun ownership, you're wrong about that as well.


That's because your argument is a strawman one. And is used by gun control advocates quite a bit.

Whether they do this because they think it's cute, or because they think it's some death blow to an argument over what people can or can not own, does not mater, because the argument itself is quite stupid.

Trotting out the argument of "Guns" vs "Nuclear Weapons" does not make you or anyone else look smart, cute, or is any kind of 'checkmate' move.

It makes people that bring it out look: desperate.

Since you insist on going on and on about the "usefulness" of guns (which are quite useful to me because I don't live next door to a police station, and it would take them over 20 minutes to get here if they were in the car, ready, and floored the gas. I also use them to hunt and provide food, which helps lower the cost of my food bill. Bows are much harder to use, and many times your game will only be wounded and run off), let us take a look at how "useful" a nuclear weapon is:

Name one useful thing that a nuclear weapon would do for a family.

Just one. That makes sense, and helps people.

And I never said that there were no "idiots" during our golden age. I know there were idiots. Had to be.

Else where did the ones that are now in power and the people that voted for them come from?



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join