Sheriff calls for guns on campus - Page 4

piercehawkeye45 · 06-15-2007, 05:12 PM

When you get guns allowed in the white house or an elementry school maybe I'll try to see your point.

You don't know the conditions of my college campus and what if guns prove to be more hurtful than helpful? But that doesn't matter does it?

Urbane Guerrilla · 06-17-2007, 02:41 AM

Well, pierce, I cannot teach you not to take counsel of your fears -- but I'd suggest that you not.

Meanwhile, I see no valid reason for me to take counsel of your fears either. I know how I'd behave, and how well I'd behave.

wolf · 06-17-2007, 11:02 AM

Police, including campus police, have no legal obligation to actually protect you, no matter what is says on the side of their cars.

Urbane Guerrilla · 06-17-2007, 07:48 PM

Jebediah, do you happen to recall my ever mentioning a martial-arts background? What does the sensei tell his pupils about starting fights, provocations, and so on?

He tells 'em "Don't."

Your difficulty here, not so atypical of the 17-21y.o. set, is that you're mistaking me for an asshole when I'm merely stern and occasionally impatient. And on occasion, military, which has its effect too and grates upon the new and tender ego. This is yet well beyond what you've done.

So, being possessed of mature patience, I just laugh at the boomcar boys. They never get invited over for supper. I laugh louder when the boomcar also rattles and buzzes from poor equipment or blown speakers or the speakers loose in their mounts. I'm with you, though, on that those boys don't show any musical taste.

And if I should really require to serve up a cold dish of revenge, I can always find out for sure if they don't like bagpipes... :p

...or make new friends if they do.

WabUfvot5 · 06-17-2007, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Jebediah, do you happen to recall my ever mentioning a martial-arts background? What does the sensei tell his pupils about starting fights, provocations, and so on?

No, sorry to dissapoint but I'm not printing out your every post and framing them on my wall - let alone reading all of them.

Quote:

Your difficulty here, not so atypical of the 17-21y.o. set, is that you're mistaking me for an asshole when I'm merely stern and occasionally impatient. And on occasion, military, which has its effect too and grates upon the new and tender ego. This is yet well beyond what you've done.

I'm not in the 17-21 year old range. Why would you think so? I never considered you an asshole; rigid and disregarding of others in disagreement sure, but never an asshole.

Quote:

So, being possessed of mature patience, I just laugh at the boomcar boys. They never get invited over for supper. I laugh louder when the boomcar also rattles and buzzes from poor equipment or blown speakers or the speakers loose in their mounts. I'm with you, though, on that those boys don't show any musical taste.

We're in agreement on their musical taste. What I was getting at is if you actually felt like it, would you tell them to knock it off? I've thought about it plenty of times and the thing that holds me back is you don't know who has a gun. Granted they could have a baseball bat instead, but it takes moderate effort to club somebody to death. My roundabout way of getting to to the point: suppose guns are on campus, will a similar oppression occur? How many people will bite their tongue about this or that because they MIGHT have a gun? Sure, they might have a gun anyway but currently you can be reasonably certain they don't.

piercehawkeye45 · 06-17-2007, 06:13 PM

I wasn't talking about campus police. I've never really seen them doing anything useful.

06-17-2007, 08:08 PM

Quote:

I can agree for the social right of self-preservation but not to hold guns

S-a good thing my rights are none of your business.

Urbane Guerrilla · 06-17-2007, 10:24 PM

I wasn't beating on you about that martial-arts question -- I simply had no idea whether this was something you knew about me or not.

In my personal experience, backed up by absolutely every time I go to a gun range, is that it's a psychological truth that when everyone is armed, everyone is also polite. They are, in fact, downright kindly to each other. This is really very pleasant. If I am any measure of average human psychology, this is not from fear of the other armed guys, but of the desire to keep them reassured.

It strikes me, as it has other philosophers, that the reasonable certainty the other fellow doesn't have a gun allows rudeness to crop up. A reasonable certainty that yes, he does, suppresses any urge to be rude, for the cost might be considerably too high, mightn't it?

Got to admit, I prefer good manners over bad. I'm willing to go to some lengths to get them.

WabUfvot5 · 06-18-2007, 11:28 AM

The gun range is a subset of people who like to fire guns for sport or safety. No violent intentions there. I have the odd feeling your average thug doesn't go to the shooting range, though I could be wrong.

I'm imagining a return to the Wild West where things are settled by who draws their gun the quickest. Maybe it would create politeness but how much dissent would be squashed along with that? It's a balance and I don't like either extreme.

06-18-2007, 02:10 PM

Quote:

The idea of the right to own guns was to satisfy our biological need of self-preservation.

Really?
Cite.

Quote:

Everyone has equal rights so it is my business. The idea of the right to own guns was to satisfy our biological need of self-preservation. If you can effectively satisfy your biological need of self-preservation without guns, then you do not need guns for self-preservation.

Again and again, it is not your place to decide for others what they need.
Man, you are a nosy busybody tyrant.

piercehawkeye45 · 06-18-2007, 06:56 PM

You seem to fail to realize that guns are a double edged sword. It can hurt society just as much as it can help. No one is trying to take away your need to stay alive, it just happens because their can be bigger consequences. It is like the Iran nuclear issue. They have every right to make nuclear energy because they will need it in 8 or so years but we are taking away their right to do it. Why, because we feel that they don’t have the right to make the best available energy source? No, because it is a double edged sword as well. They could possibly use the nuclear technology to make nuclear weapons, which we find unacceptable. The same concept applies to guns.

Guns are not like heroine, I can not just avoid guns like I can heroine. If someone takes heroine, I will never be killed from it. That is the point of the whole debate, what may be worse for the individual may be best for the community.

The idea that we made rights to satisfy our need of self-preservation is the only idea that makes sense. To say we were born with infinite rights not only does not make sense or backed by nature, can be taken out with Occam's razor. The universe is a nihilistic cage, nothing more; it does not give us anything. It is much easier to say that everyone has no rights but just survives than it is to say that everyone has infinite rights. If you get in a street fight to the death there is no one telling you that you can do anything, you just survive. Nature supports the theory of just surviving as well since we don’t see animals doing whatever they want.

Then once society was more or less created, rights came with it to explain our biological feelings and to keep order. That is the only option that makes sense, the idea of a nihilistic cage gives us infinite rights does not.

xoxoxoBruce · 06-18-2007, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Nature supports the theory of just surviving as well since we don’t see animals doing whatever they want.

They don't? They do unless something interferes with their right to do that.

wolf · 06-19-2007, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Guns are not like heroine*, I can not just avoid guns like I can heroine. If someone takes heroine, I will never be killed from it. That is the point of the whole debate, what may be worse for the individual may be best for the community.

If you do not attempt to assault, rape, or murder me, you won't be harmed by my gun.

Just as in your heroin example, you make the choice not to engage in the risk-taking behavior. Actually, it goes beyond that. You are ultimately harmed by the guy doing heroin. It's your money that's going to send him to rehab, and your stuff that he's stealing (even if indirectly by an increase in your taxes to pay for the police to deal with the crime related to his drug use).

_____
* Note: There is no "e" in heroin. Putting one there makes me nuts.

xoxoxoBruce · 06-19-2007, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf

* Note: There is no "e" in heroin. Putting one there makes me nuts.

Methinks heroine is more dangerous than heroin.

piercehawkeye45 · 06-19-2007, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf

If you do not attempt to assault, rape, or murder me, you won't be harmed by my gun.

Yes, but you do not speak for everyone that owns a gun. Other people use to enforce their lust for power.

xoxoxobruce - I think you are misunderstanding my analogy. Of course no one has to tell you what you can and can not do, but you do not need rights to do whatever you want. Rights are just superfluous, why I say it is more complicated, and the only thing I can see them being there is for justification.

rkzenrage - Would you still want guns on campus if 20 people were dying a year from them but only 1 person a year was being saved from them? This is assuming we had definite proof.

06-17-2007, 02:41 AM	#2
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	Well, pierce, I cannot teach you not to take counsel of your fears -- but I'd suggest that you not. Meanwhile, I see no valid reason for me to take counsel of your fears either. I know how I'd behave, and how well I'd behave. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.

06-17-2007, 11:02 AM	#3
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	Police, including campus police, have no legal obligation to actually protect you, no matter what is says on the side of their cars. __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

06-17-2007, 07:48 PM	#4
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	Oh, gracious... Jebediah, do you happen to recall my ever mentioning a martial-arts background? What does the sensei tell his pupils about starting fights, provocations, and so on? He tells 'em "Don't." Your difficulty here, not so atypical of the 17-21y.o. set, is that you're mistaking me for an asshole when I'm merely stern and occasionally impatient. And on occasion, military, which has its effect too and grates upon the new and tender ego. This is yet well beyond what you've done. So, being possessed of mature patience, I just laugh at the boomcar boys. They never get invited over for supper. I laugh louder when the boomcar also rattles and buzzes from poor equipment or blown speakers or the speakers loose in their mounts. I'm with you, though, on that those boys don't show any musical taste. And if I should really require to serve up a cold dish of revenge, I can always find out for sure if they don't like bagpipes... :p ...or make new friends if they do. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course. Last edited by Urbane Guerrilla; 06-17-2007 at 08:14 PM. Reason: Onnnnne more point...

06-17-2007, 10:24 PM	#8
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	I wasn't beating on you about that martial-arts question -- I simply had no idea whether this was something you knew about me or not. In my personal experience, backed up by absolutely every time I go to a gun range, is that it's a psychological truth that when everyone is armed, everyone is also polite. They are, in fact, downright kindly to each other. This is really very pleasant. If I am any measure of average human psychology, this is not from fear of the other armed guys, but of the desire to keep them reassured. It strikes me, as it has other philosophers, that the reasonable certainty the other fellow doesn't have a gun allows rudeness to crop up. A reasonable certainty that yes, he does, suppresses any urge to be rude, for the cost might be considerably too high, mightn't it? Got to admit, I prefer good manners over bad. I'm willing to go to some lengths to get them. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.

06-15-2007, 05:12 PM	#1
piercehawkeye45 Franklin Pierce Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,695	When you get guns allowed in the white house or an elementry school maybe I'll try to see your point. You don't know the conditions of my college campus and what if guns prove to be more hurtful than helpful? But that doesn't matter does it?

06-17-2007, 06:13 PM	#6
piercehawkeye45 Franklin Pierce Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,695	I wasn't talking about campus police. I've never really seen them doing anything useful.

06-18-2007, 11:28 AM	#9
WabUfvot5 Operations Operative Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 634	The gun range is a subset of people who like to fire guns for sport or safety. No violent intentions there. I have the odd feeling your average thug doesn't go to the shooting range, though I could be wrong. I'm imagining a return to the Wild West where things are settled by who draws their gun the quickest. Maybe it would create politeness but how much dissent would be squashed along with that? It's a balance and I don't like either extreme.

06-18-2007, 06:56 PM	#11
piercehawkeye45 Franklin Pierce Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,695	You seem to fail to realize that guns are a double edged sword. It can hurt society just as much as it can help. No one is trying to take away your need to stay alive, it just happens because their can be bigger consequences. It is like the Iran nuclear issue. They have every right to make nuclear energy because they will need it in 8 or so years but we are taking away their right to do it. Why, because we feel that they don’t have the right to make the best available energy source? No, because it is a double edged sword as well. They could possibly use the nuclear technology to make nuclear weapons, which we find unacceptable. The same concept applies to guns. Guns are not like heroine, I can not just avoid guns like I can heroine. If someone takes heroine, I will never be killed from it. That is the point of the whole debate, what may be worse for the individual may be best for the community. The idea that we made rights to satisfy our need of self-preservation is the only idea that makes sense. To say we were born with infinite rights not only does not make sense or backed by nature, can be taken out with Occam's razor. The universe is a nihilistic cage, nothing more; it does not give us anything. It is much easier to say that everyone has no rights but just survives than it is to say that everyone has infinite rights. If you get in a street fight to the death there is no one telling you that you can do anything, you just survive. Nature supports the theory of just surviving as well since we don’t see animals doing whatever they want. Then once society was more or less created, rights came with it to explain our biological feelings and to keep order. That is the only option that makes sense, the idea of a nihilistic cage gives us infinite rights does not.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)