Pages:
Author

Topic: Gun free zone - page 6. (Read 21968 times)

hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
December 22, 2012, 12:36:49 PM
Quote

Honestly unless you know what you are doing with statistics ( you love math) better to use your personal opinion and experiences with a dash of some expert dude who used statistics said this. Most who collect and analyze then publish the data fuck it up somehow. 8 times out 10 at least.

+100000

Many statistics are pushed by propaganda and not presented properly or people outright lie using them, so for instance, they'll present you with a poll from about 5000 people or something and then claim because 5000 people said this that automatically represents the majority of the people when that's barely going to be even a small portion of the actual country they are in. Bitcoinbitcoin113 you don't even need to understand math particularly well to understand bogus statistics when you see them, usually it's just a matter of reading through the fine print rather than just believing the simple percentages these dick heads come up with to fool people who don't know better.

It's much worse than even that. Really I got my data and actually tried to understand how to analyze it,(apparently this is rare amongst scientists these days) then found out pretty much no scientist knows what they are doing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_hypothesis_testing#Controversy

It gets even worse when John Lott is the one analyzing the data.
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 2267
1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k
December 22, 2012, 12:06:23 PM
Teacher shoots the offender.

Academics are not known for their fighting ability.

School teachers also are not known for they shooting skills.

Some are:

http://www2.tbo.com/news/news/2012/jun/12/memeto1-teacher-sets-sights-on-olympic-medal-ar-414880/

The difference is that many teachers are not physically equipped to be able to fight well. Women in particular typically have much reduced upper-body strength compared to men (despite Hollywood's depictions to the contrary). Shooting, however, is a skill which can be rather quickly brought up to an acceptable level by all but the inept (And I don't think there are many who wouldn't accept a requirement for teachers to have to qualify).
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
December 22, 2012, 10:10:39 AM
By the way, self-defense is a right or a duty?

It appears you cannot even understand the difference of both definitions.
It appears you cannot understand the fact that it is both.

So I read the lyrics instead, and they scared the shit out of me. This really happens in the US? Or is it hyperbole? I can't tell, and that scares me too. It's not about a real event, is it?

No, it is hyperbole. The last line, however, is simple honest truth: As long as there's one gun in the world, you'd best have you a gun too. Because sure as the sun rises in the east, someone like AugustoCroppo will get a hold of it eventually, and then we're all fucked.

So safety is a relative thing.
vip
Activity: 756
Merit: 504
December 22, 2012, 07:50:00 AM
If it was not safe, I'm afraid it would be my nature to attempt to show them the error of their ways - which is exactly what I am doing in this thread. The society in the US is not safe, and it is precisely the refusal to honor people's right to self-defense (among other things) that is the cause.

This majority of users in this forum are not only from USA. From what I read, few proposals were made to CONTROL the access to guns, not to BAN the access to guns.

By the way, self-defense is a right or a duty?

It appears you cannot even understand the difference of both definitions.
vip
Activity: 756
Merit: 504
December 22, 2012, 07:40:16 AM
Quote
If we're going to talk statistics, then some citations for your allegations would be handy.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18559_162-525965.html

Quote
Shawn struggled with learning disabilities and significant emotional problems.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-arizona-shooting-gabbie-giffords-20121108,0,4209374.story

Quote
After the shooting, he was diagnosed with schizophrenia and underwent forcible psychotropic drug treatments.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/seung-hui-chos-mental-health-records-released/story?id=8278195#.UNV0NjkU-Uk

Quote
Cho had been admitted overnight to the hospital after his roommate became concerned when Cho threatened to take his own life.

Statistics and science are wrong, but the news must be right...

Oh dear... What a bunch of delusional users in this thread.

Tell me, what make you to trust in the above news to determine the shooters were affected by a mental disorder?
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 22, 2012, 05:02:25 AM
So, even if there was absolutely no chance that there would ever be the need for a gun in a given society (unrealistic, yes, but that's not the point) and that society did look down on you for gun ownership, you'd relocate somewhere gun ownership is not an issue?

So for you, the gun control issue is a problem because you like guns (that's understandable - everyone should have a hobby) more than it is about your political views?

..... if there were truly no need, ever, for the gun, I would simply leave the damn thing at home, and eat my dinner in peace. But in the real world (Which is where I like to do my living, flawed as it is.) that's not the case.

My thought experiment was about a society where guns were not needed - that's what I meant by "safe". It's unrealistic and perhaps impossible, but what I wanted to understand was the importance you attached to guns rather than self defense. Your initial response is quite different to your subsequent one, so I mustn't have made my point clear.

Like Holliday, your preference for a society allowing gun control appears a utilitarian preference - if guns are not necessary, you wouldn't have one.



I don't know much about the reasons people want to own guns, but I'm getting a feel for it now.

Might I suggest a song by a lady named Leslie Fish, called "They Were Having a Sale at the Gun Store"? Outlines the reasons quite well, if you ask me.


Funny thing, I don't listen to music anymore. It's like a drug for me and I could waste a whole days enjoying music. So I stay away from any music I could possibly enjoy. My tastes are quite eclectic, so it's a bit of a problem.

So I read the lyrics instead, and they scared the shit out of me. This really happens in the US? Or is it hyperbole? I can't tell, and that scares me too. It's not about a real event, is it?

hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
December 22, 2012, 04:45:02 AM
So, even if there was absolutely no chance that there would ever be the need for a gun in a given society (unrealistic, yes, but that's not the point) and that society did look down on you for gun ownership, you'd relocate somewhere gun ownership is not an issue?

So for you, the gun control issue is a problem because you like guns (that's understandable - everyone should have a hobby) more than it is about your political views?

If gun ownership were merely a hobby, or if there were truly no need, ever, for the gun, I would simply leave the damn thing at home, and eat my dinner in peace. But in the real world (Which is where I like to do my living, flawed as it is.) that's not the case. As I explained earlier, gun (to be more precise, weapon) ownership is a right, and both depends upon and supports the right to life. If I feel that right is being infringed upon, even with mere societal pressure, then I will not desire to be in that situation. Honestly, it depends on the severity of the pressure. if it's just a few jabs for being "that crazy gun nut," then I'd probably just go ahead and own it, and be proud of my iconoclasm. If it's active ostracism  - ie, I find it hard to find not only a date, but dinner - then I would most likely leave the foul stench behind me, and good riddance.

I don't know much about the reasons people want to own guns, but I'm getting a feel for it now.

Might I suggest a song by a lady named Leslie Fish, called "They Were Having a Sale at the Gun Store"? Outlines the reasons quite well, if you ask me.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 22, 2012, 04:38:08 AM
So, even if there was absolutely no chance that there would ever be the need for a gun in a given society (unrealistic, yes, but that's not the point) and that society did look down on you for gun ownership, you'd relocate somewhere gun ownership is not an issue?

I would not relocate.

I wasn't asking if myrkul (or anyone) would move to a society in which they had fewer freedoms. I was asking if guns were so important to you that you'd move to obtain those freedoms, or if you'd bow to societal pressure and give the guns up. It's a question about how much you value gun ownership.

I see. I value gun ownership as long as I feel it serves a purpose.



I'm glad you answered. I don't know much about the reasons people want to own guns, but I'm getting a feel for it now.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 22, 2012, 04:27:17 AM
Even if that society ostracised you for gun ownership (assuming you have one, and wear it in public)? Your feelings could be hurt significantly. More to the point though, you'd probably find it difficult to have sex with other people.

Would you give up guns if a) you lived in a safe society and b) gun ownership meant that your options for having coital experiences were reduced? Or would you move to a society where the norms included mandatory gun ownership, or something similar?

I just want to see how you'd be influenced by your society - would you change your mind, or change your environment?

If the society I lived in was both safe, and looked down upon gun ownership, I would most likely seek another society that accepted - "accepted" would be first choice, "preferred" second, and "required" a distant third - gun ownership. I have very little desire to be where I am not welcome. If it was not safe, I'm afraid it would be my nature to attempt to show them the error of their ways - which is exactly what I am doing in this thread. The society in the US is not safe, and it is precisely the refusal to honor people's right to self-defense (among other things) that is the cause.

Thankfully, I have no need to fear loss of coital experiences for my views, as I am lucky enough to have found a woman who shares them.

So, even if there was absolutely no chance that there would ever be the need for a gun in a given society (unrealistic, yes, but that's not the point) and that society did look down on you for gun ownership, you'd relocate somewhere gun ownership is not an issue?

So for you, the gun control issue is a problem because you like guns (that's understandable - everyone should have a hobby) more than it is about your political views?

I hope I'm not putting words in your mouth, that's not my intention. Please correct me if I'm wrong.


I know that wasn't directed at me, but I would like to answer.

I have a gun (several actually). I wear one in public (and private).

Some things outweigh others. Proving "a" would have much more influence over my decisions than "b" being a reality. In fact, I doubt "b" would have any influence at all.

I would never move from a society where I have a choice to a society where I don't, unless there were very strong reasons for doing so (like, my kid needs medical treatment every day and this is the only place in the world which offers that specific treatment). Quite the opposite is true. I'm more likely to relocate to a place where I have more freedom in my choices.

I wasn't asking if myrkul (or anyone) would move to a society in which they had fewer freedoms. I was asking if guns were so important to you that you'd move to obtain those freedoms, or if you'd bow to societal pressure and give the guns up. It's a question about how much you value gun ownership.

hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
December 22, 2012, 04:14:27 AM
Even if that society ostracised you for gun ownership (assuming you have one, and wear it in public)? Your feelings could be hurt significantly. More to the point though, you'd probably find it difficult to have sex with other people.

Would you give up guns if a) you lived in a safe society and b) gun ownership meant that your options for having coital experiences were reduced? Or would you move to a society where the norms included mandatory gun ownership, or something similar?

I just want to see how you'd be influenced by your society - would you change your mind, or change your environment?

If the society I lived in was both safe, and looked down upon gun ownership, I would most likely seek another safe society that accepted - "accepted" would be first choice, "preferred" second, and "required" a very distant third - gun ownership. I have very little desire to be where I am not welcome. If it was not safe, I'm afraid it would be my nature to attempt to show them the error of their ways - which is exactly what I am doing in this thread. The society in the US is not safe, and it is precisely the refusal to honor people's right to self-defense (among other things) that is the cause.

Thankfully, I have no need to fear loss of coital experiences for my views, as I am lucky enough to have found a woman who shares them.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 22, 2012, 04:05:42 AM
I'll have to do some digging around to find stuff like that but right now I need another coffee Cheesy

Dammit! I was fine until then. Now I need a coffee too. *Yawn*

(I hope I just made you yawn too, bastard)
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
December 22, 2012, 04:04:19 AM
I'll have to do some digging around to find stuff like that but right now I need another coffee Cheesy
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 22, 2012, 04:03:09 AM
Quote
If we're going to talk statistics, then some citations for your allegations would be handy.



http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18559_162-525965.html

Quote
Shawn struggled with learning disabilities and significant emotional problems.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-arizona-shooting-gabbie-giffords-20121108,0,4209374.story

Quote
After the shooting, he was diagnosed with schizophrenia and underwent forcible psychotropic drug treatments.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/seung-hui-chos-mental-health-records-released/story?id=8278195#.UNV0NjkU-Uk

Quote
Cho had been admitted overnight to the hospital after his roommate became concerned when Cho threatened to take his own life.
....


Ah, I see what you mean.

No, I don't mean citing journalists. I mean citing (for example) bureau of statistics data, or a peer reviewed journal article or similar. I'm leery of believing sensationalist mass media reports, especially those from the US.

legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
December 22, 2012, 04:03:02 AM
It could be either way but unfortunately we may never know because everyones too focused on inanimate objects to care, I know I'd go psychotic and start shooting at people if psychiatrists forced drugs into me.
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
December 22, 2012, 04:01:02 AM
Is it that they had mental health problems beforehand that led to the shootings? Or is it that they got treated for mental health problems. I have seen too many people fucked up by psychiatrists not to suspect this. If others have opposing anecdotes I would love to be dissuaded from this theory.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 22, 2012, 03:59:05 AM
I wouldn't force anyone to do anything. I don't think single person should.
Do I correctly read this to mean that if you get more people together, they can?
As soon as I post I knew you were going to pick that. An anarchists and his spots, huh? Wink

It depends on what you mean by "force" and in which circumstance. In my preferred social structure (which does not exist and probably never will) if a majority of a society thinks it's abhorrent (or necessary) to carry guns, then a person violating that societal tenet would be subject to non-violent social ostracism.

Edit: And so that is what I would do. Non-violently ostracise someone who had a belief in extreme opposition to mine.


I approve. I'll keep working on getting that ideal society (or at least as close as possible) into practice.

Even if that society ostracised you for gun ownership (assuming you have one, and wear it in public)? Your feelings could be hurt significantly. More to the point though, you'd probably find it difficult to have sex with other people.

Would you give up guns if a) you lived in a safe society and b) gun ownership meant that your options for having coital experiences were reduced? Or would you move to a society where the norms included mandatory gun ownership, or something similar?

I just want to see how you'd be influenced by your society - would you change your mind, or change your environment?

legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
December 22, 2012, 03:54:21 AM
Quote
If we're going to talk statistics, then some citations for your allegations would be handy.



http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18559_162-525965.html

Quote
Shawn struggled with learning disabilities and significant emotional problems.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-arizona-shooting-gabbie-giffords-20121108,0,4209374.story

Quote
After the shooting, he was diagnosed with schizophrenia and underwent forcible psychotropic drug treatments.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/seung-hui-chos-mental-health-records-released/story?id=8278195#.UNV0NjkU-Uk

Quote
Cho had been admitted overnight to the hospital after his roommate became concerned when Cho threatened to take his own life.


I'll find more if you like, but these are of the most memorable shootings and in all cases they were clearly having severe problems with their mental health before the shootings happened, when the media reports on the shootings I've noticed they barely talk about the fact these people very often have mental health problems and the people who do point it out ( I saw this on CNBC news ) are often given small segments where they are pretty much ignored.

Sensationalist and over-charged arguments about gun control get more people riled up and watching the news channels than rational talk about the fact these people all had serious mental problems and were often having people taking care of them before they decided to go on a rampage, you can even see in the news articles for the current times that the mainstream news barely talks about the mental problems they had and prefer to just scare the living shit out of people instead.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
December 22, 2012, 03:47:09 AM
I wouldn't force anyone to do anything. I don't think single person should.
Do I correctly read this to mean that if you get more people together, they can?
As soon as I post I knew you were going to pick that. An anarchists and his spots, huh? Wink

It depends on what you mean by "force" and in which circumstance. In my preferred social structure (which does not exist and probably never will) if a majority of a society thinks it's abhorrent (or necessary) to carry guns, then a person violating that societal tenet would be subject to non-violent social ostracism.

Edit: And so that is what I would do. Non-violently ostracise someone who had a belief in extreme opposition to mine.


I approve. I'll keep working on getting that ideal society (or at least as close as possible) into practice.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
December 22, 2012, 03:45:26 AM
Quote
I hate to say this but while you could indeed be correct you're not providing any way to determine which are useful stats and which are not. I would tend to believe you more if you were able to provide an insight into how you determine which statistics are correct, and which are not. For me, if proponents of both sides of an argument agree on the data, then that's a good start. After that it's all about the analysis. Which brings us to .....

If we're going to talk about gun control, the one thing that has been repeatedly proven in these mass shootings is that the shooters in the majority of these cases were complete maniacs and they often got their guns due to other peoples complacency and negligence. Like I said, rely on math, if you can't do that, rely on repetitive results, the more these situations repeat, even terrible situations, the more we can look at the patterns of what caused it.

If we're going to talk statistics, then some citations for your allegations would be handy.
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
December 22, 2012, 03:42:23 AM
Quote
I hate to say this but while you could indeed be correct you're not providing any way to determine which are useful stats and which are not. I would tend to believe you more if you were able to provide an insight into how you determine which statistics are correct, and which are not. For me, if proponents of both sides of an argument agree on the data, then that's a good start. After that it's all about the analysis. Which brings us to .....

If we're going to talk about gun control, the one thing that has been repeatedly proven in these mass shootings is that the shooters in the majority of these cases were complete maniacs and they often got their guns due to other peoples complacency and negligence. Like I said, rely on math, if you can't do that, rely on repetitive results, the more these situations repeat, even terrible situations, the more we can look at the patterns of what caused it and find a solution.

Unfortunately we can do very little to stop human negligence even if we educate them on it because that's in our very nature, we all end up doing stupid things every now and then.
Pages:
Jump to: