Armed America

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

Because arbitrarily abrogating people's right to defend themselves isn't "civilized", and to call it that is begging the question.

Willingly becoming peaceful IS being civilized. Resolving conflict non-violently IS civilized.

[xoxoxoBruce]

civilization, culture with a relatively high degree of elaboration and technical development. The term civilization also designates that complex of cultural elements that first appeared in human history between 8,000 and 6,000 years ago. At that time, on the basis of agriculture, stock-raising, and metallurgy, intensive occupational specialization began to appear in the river valleys of SW Asia. Writing appeared, as well as urban centers that accommodated administrators, traders, and other specialists. The specific characteristics of civilization are: food production (plant and animal domestication), metallurgy, a high degree of occupational specialization, writing, and the growth of cities. Such characteristics originally emerged in several different parts of the prehistoric world: Mesopotamia, Egypt, China, India, the central Andes, and Mesoamerica. However, some civilizations did not have all of these characteristics (e.g., the Classic Maya had no metallurgy, and true writing apparently never emerged in central Mexico or the central Andes). Many anthropologists now focus on a political factor—the development of hierarchical administrative bureaucracies—as the critical characteristic of all civilizations.

Don't see anything about peace or lack of conflict. While you may find it desirable, it's not a part of being civilized.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Don't see anything about peace or lack of conflict. While you may find it desirable, it's not a part of being civilized.

2. Showing evidence of moral and intellectual advancement; humane, ethical, and reasonable: terrorist acts that shocked the civilized world.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

2. Showing evidence of moral and intellectual advancement; humane, ethical, and reasonable: terrorist acts that shocked the civilized world.

Tell me what part of the World is not civilized? Then tell me how they found out about 9-11?
What was the first civilized nation? When was that?
Does that hyperbole sentence, that sounds like a newspaper headline, prove that the "civilized world" contains no violence? That the "civilized world" never goes to war? The civilized world never approves of executions? Get real.

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Have you ever "protected" someone with your gun,

Have you ever used your life insurance?

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Tell me what part of the World is not civilized? Then tell me how they found out about 9-11?
What was the first civilized nation? When was that?
Does that hyperbole sentence, that sounds like a newspaper headline, prove that the "civilized world" contains no violence? That the "civilized world" never goes to war? The civilized world never approves of executions? Get real.

Have you ever used your life insurance?

Would you please explain this? I don't understand what you're getting at.

[xoxoxoBruce]

OK, I'll spell it out for you.
W-H-A-T P-A-R-T O-F T-H-E W-O-R-L-D I-S N-O-T C-I-V-I-L-I-Z-E-D-?

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

OK, I'll spell it out for you.
W-H-A-T P-A-R-T O-F T-H-E W-O-R-L-D I-S N-O-T C-I-V-I-L-I-Z-E-D-?

T-H-E P-A-R-T O-F T-H-E W-O-R-L-D T-H-A-T D-O-E-S N-O-T

1. Have a highly developed society and culture.
2. Show evidence of moral and intellectual advancement; humane, ethical, and reasonable

IMHO, people who use violence to resolve conflict do not meet the second part of this definition.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Willingly becoming peaceful IS being civilized. Resolving conflict non-violently IS civilized.

Your postiton is that it is uncivilized to defend yourself? I think that's nonsense. Me, I'm completely peaceful...except if attacked.

I'd like to see you "resolve conflict non-violently" with a mugger or a rapist. How quickly your facile platitudes would dissolve...

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

...I'd like to see you "resolve conflict non-violently" with a mugger or a rapist. How quickly your facile platitudes would dissolve...

Having never been mugged or raped, I can only surmise that I've done a very good job of non-violently resolving the conflict by not putting myself in that position in the first place. Carrying a gun and shooting someone who you think is going to mug or rape you (because it's too late if they've already started the act, isn't it?) is not the only method you can use to not be mugged or raped.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Having never been mugged or raped, I can only surmise that I've done a very good job of non-violently resolving the conflict by not putting myself in that position in the first place.

Congratulations. So, obviously if someone finds themselves being mugged or raped, they must have "placed themselevs in that position", and it must be *their* fault. Pretty classic case of "blaming the victim".

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Carrying a gun and shooting someone who you think is going to mug or rape you (because it's too late if they've already started the act, isn't it?)

If it's "too late", might as well let them finish, eh?

The actual legal standard that you're blowing off as "think they're going to" is in that law on Justification that you keep refusing to read.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

Congratulations. So, obviously if someone finds themselves being mugged or raped, they must have "placed themselevs in that position", and it must be *their* fault. Pretty classic case of "blaming the victim".
...

No, a classic case of "blaming the victim" is trying to put an end to welfare, after all, welfare recipients are just a lazy drain on society, right MaggieL? And when you kill somebody that you *thought* was going to *mug* you or *rape* you, but actually wasn't going to, would it then be the *victim's* (the dead person) fault?

Carrying a gun does *not* *ensure* that you won't be raped or mugged, *does* *it*? Avoiding *trouble* is a more *civilized* way of living than putting yourself in *harm's* way packing a gun, *hoping* that you won't *have* to kill somebody, or *actually* killing someone. Then again, I *suppose* there are some people who *look* for trouble.

[lisa]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Having never been mugged or raped, I can only surmise that I've done a very good job of non-violently resolving the conflict by not putting myself in that position in the first place.

1. Easy comment to make if you're a male... if not, I apologize
2. I'll bet many rape/mugging victims thought that... right up until the time they were raped/mugged.
3. Perhaps you live a life where you don't HAVE to travel in areas where muggings and rapes are more common. Not all of us are so lucky.

Carrying a gun and shooting someone who you think is going to mug or rape you (because it's too late if they've already started the act, isn't it?) is not the only method you can use to not be mugged or raped.

From everything I have read, guns are more often used in self-defense by simply being seen. If someone is approaching you and you see them coming, the sensible thing is to run. If they chase, then you draw the weapon and, as I understand it, more often than not, they then flee. Even if they have a gun, they usually don't want to get into a gunfight anymore than the potential victim.

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Willingly becoming peaceful IS being civilized. Resolving conflict non-violently IS civilized.

Removing arms by legislation is force... you will have to do it at gunpoint. You will be the gun toting fanatic saying you want to have the guns, via the cops, just not anyone else... sound familiar?
You want a police state... there are plenty you can move to.
There is NOTHING civilized about a police state.

BTW, it bothers me that you have continued to use that quote as long as you have for your sig.
It was a bad, and way out of character, moment for me.
I abhor name calling and it is extremely rare for me to do so... I think you will agree with that.
I have said nothing until now because I definitely deserved for you to use it, as it was uncalled for, regardless of how far you pushed.
However, you have had it as a sig beyond what I feel is tactful.

Why can't I spell definitely without spell check getting it... it is not a difficult word to spell?

There was nothing in my last post worth discussing?

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Willingly becoming peaceful IS being civilized. Resolving conflict non-violently IS civilized.

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

Removing arms by legislation is force... you will have to do it at gunpoint. You will be the gun toting fanatic saying you want to have the guns, via the cops, just not anyone else... sound familiar?
You want a police state... there are plenty you can move to.
There is NOTHING civilized about a police state.

(blue emphasis mine)
I would never force you to give up your guns. I appeal to you to voluntarily give them up. Please do not presume to tell me what I want.

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

BTW, it bothers me that you have continued to use that quote as long as you have for your sig.
It was a bad, and way out of character, moment for me.
I abhor name calling and it is extremely rare for me to do so... I think you will agree with that.
I have said nothing until now because I definitely deserved for you to use it, as it was uncalled for, regardless of how far you pushed.
However, you have had it as a sig beyond what I feel is tactful.
...

Say please and I'll gladly change it.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

(blue emphasis mine)
I would never force you to give up your guns. I appeal to you to voluntarily give them up.

Excellent. My reply is molon labe. Now we can move on.