|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 5:12 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| le-paul wrote: |
| But you said steelrails has a point - specifically when he drew the link between rural life and guns. |
And he did, at least when he was talking about guns and lifestyles. The comparison between guns and judo was strange.
| le-paul wrote: |
| We are talking about a girl with an Uzi here not whether or not farmers should be allowed to own a shot gun and kill crows. |
His first two sentences in this thread were: "The issue isn't that she was shooting a firearm. The issue was the type of firearm she was shooting," so I think it's fair to say that he was not endorsing the girl with the uzi either. The conversation seems to me to have extended beyond this one situation and into the general topic of guns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
le-paul
Joined: 07 Apr 2009
Location: dans la chambre
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| But you said steelrails has a point - specifically when he drew the link between rural life and guns. |
And he did, at least when he was talking about guns and lifestyles. The comparison between guns and judo was strange.
| le-paul wrote: |
| We are talking about a girl with an Uzi here not whether or not farmers should be allowed to own a shot gun and kill crows. |
His first two sentences in this thread were: "The issue isn't that she was shooting a firearm. The issue was the type of firearm she was shooting," so I think it's fair to say that he was not endorsing the girl with the uzi either. The conversation seems to me to have extended beyond this one situation and into the general topic of guns. |
Again... (as it always does) - which is moving away from the main point, so that the same tired arguments can be regurgitated - re: steelrails style. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| We are talking about a girl with an Uzi here not whether or not farmers should be allowed to own a shot gun and kill crows. |
No we weren't. When people moved the discussion into "There is no reason for a 9 year old to shoot a gun period", we moved it beyond this specific incident into a general discussion.
| Quote: |
| Again... (as it always does) - which is moving away from the main point, so that the same tired arguments can be regurgitated - re: steelrails style. |
Again, I didn't move it, PGHBusan did when he brought up 9 year olds not shooting guns period. You also said- "And that's why kids shouldn't be playing with them", moving it beyond just this specific incident.
Also, shooting at a YMCA riflery course or properly managed shooting range isn't playing around with them. It's being educated about their operation, maintenance, and how to fire one.
| Quote: |
| If you can honestly liken archery, judo and martial arts in general to owning, using and being taught how to use a gun, you're a bigger fool than you generally come across as. |
Your logical criteria was that shooting guns is "bad" because guns are meant to kill. Well, so is a bow and arrow. It's meant to kill animals or people, same as a person.
Martial arts may have little purpose beyond hurting someone. Oh wait, they have the purpose of "defense", say to prevent rape. Well, by that logic, so do firearms. This is not my criteria, this is yours taken to its logical conclusion.
| Quote: |
| Americans lose what little ability they have with LOGIC when guns come up |
True, there is a deeply irrational segment of the American population concerning guns.
However I would submit that plenty of those that harp on guns have an irrationality or lack of understanding (or perhaps perfectly cogent point) akin to say, a Muslim negatively viewing consumption of alcohol.
Hundreds of thousands of people die a year because of alcohol. Why do people need to consume it? How many children die because of it? Why can't you just ban it like Muslim countries and watch your alcohol deaths plummet? And the answers we'd give as a rebuttal parallel the answers concerning guns- It's a family tradition, banning it would cause more problems than it would solve, it's not that bad if used in moderation and people are properly educated, if the government banned it that would be a sign they are going "too far". Sounds a lot like the arguments gun owners give.
Are Brits and Aussies and the French and Germans and Japanese and Koreans being irrational when it comes to alcohol? According to the CDC, excessive alcohol deaths number approximately 88,000 a year in the U.S. That's more than guns! I'm willing to bet in Saudi Arabia that number is but a microscopic fraction. One could say the non-Muslim world has an irrational obsession with alcohol. Unfortunately, they can't even discuss the topic rationally. Sooner or later they will join the enlightened world and realize that their alcohol use is a sign of 3rd world behavior.
Now, if we can accept the problems with the above example and why alcohol is not the demon that it can be made out to be, isn't it possible that people who are denouncing guns are suffering from a similar lack of understanding? Look, either the reasons given for banning guns are perfectly valid for banning alcohol, or the reasons for not banning alcohol do have some validity when talking about not banning guns. You can't scream about Americans being irrational on guns and their massive amount of death and then proceed to ignore the alcohol situation. Or maybe, we can have a controlled middle ground where we have sensible regulations on guns (such as banning full autos, even at firing ranges) and sensible regulations on alcohol (no more chucking empties into the back seat while cruising down the highway like in the 1960s).
I wonder how many of the people out there that are against guns, ever took a riflery course when they were children? I can't imagine too many saying "OMG I should never have been allowed to do that!!!' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
le-paul
Joined: 07 Apr 2009
Location: dans la chambre
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| We are talking about a girl with an Uzi here not whether or not farmers should be allowed to own a shot gun and kill crows. |
No we weren't. When people moved the discussion into "There is no reason for a 9 year old to shoot a gun period", we moved it beyond this specific incident into a general discussion.
| Quote: |
| Again... (as it always does) - which is moving away from the main point, so that the same tired arguments can be regurgitated - re: steelrails style. |
Again, I didn't move it, PGHBusan did when he brought up 9 year olds not shooting guns period. You also said- "And that's why kids shouldn't be playing with them", moving it beyond just this specific incident.
Also, shooting at a YMCA riflery course or properly managed shooting range isn't playing around with them. It's being educated about their operation, maintenance, and how to fire one.
| Quote: |
| If you can honestly liken archery, judo and martial arts in general to owning, using and being taught how to use a gun, you're a bigger fool than you generally come across as. |
Your logical criteria was that shooting guns is "bad" because guns are meant to kill. Well, so is a bow and arrow. It's meant to kill animals or people, same as a person.
Martial arts may have little purpose beyond hurting someone. Oh wait, they have the purpose of "defense", say to prevent rape. Well, by that logic, so do firearms. This is not my criteria, this is yours taken to its logical conclusion.
| Quote: |
| Americans lose what little ability they have with LOGIC when guns come up |
True, there is a deeply irrational segment of the American population concerning guns.
However I would submit that plenty of those that harp on guns have an irrationality or lack of understanding (or perhaps perfectly cogent point) akin to say, a Muslim negatively viewing consumption of alcohol.
Hundreds of thousands of people die a year because of alcohol. Why do people need to consume it? How many children die because of it? Why can't you just ban it like Muslim countries and watch your alcohol deaths plummet? And the answers we'd give as a rebuttal parallel the answers concerning guns- It's a family tradition, banning it would cause more problems than it would solve, it's not that bad if used in moderation and people are properly educated, if the government banned it that would be a sign they are going "too far". Sounds a lot like the arguments gun owners give.
Are Brits and Aussies and the French and Germans and Japanese and Koreans being irrational when it comes to alcohol? According to the CDC, excessive alcohol deaths number approximately 88,000 a year in the U.S. That's more than guns! I'm willing to bet in Saudi Arabia that number is but a microscopic fraction. One could say the non-Muslim world has an irrational obsession with alcohol. Unfortunately, they can't even discuss the topic rationally. Sooner or later they will join the enlightened world and realize that their alcohol use is a sign of 3rd world behavior.
Now, if we can accept the problems with the above example and why alcohol is not the demon that it can be made out to be, isn't it possible that people who are denouncing guns are suffering from a similar lack of understanding? Look, either the reasons given for banning guns are perfectly valid for banning alcohol, or the reasons for not banning alcohol do have some validity when talking about not banning guns. You can't scream about Americans being irrational on guns and their massive amount of death and then proceed to ignore the alcohol situation. Or maybe, we can have a controlled middle ground where we have sensible regulations on guns (such as banning full autos, even at firing ranges) and sensible regulations on alcohol (no more chucking empties into the back seat while cruising down the highway like in the 1960s).
I wonder how many of the people out there that are against guns, ever took a riflery course when they were children? I can't imagine too many saying "OMG I should never have been allowed to do that!!!' |
I cant be bothered to read what you wrote - therefore you win by default.
Congratulations |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| le-paul wrote: |
| I cant be bothered to read what you wrote - therefore you win by default. |
Yeah, these long rambling posts with untrimmed quotes...
I tend to think anyone who cannot express their idea simply in one sentence does not yet understand their own idea. And if they did understand their idea, would realize it was wrong. 
Wrongness requires long posts as an attempt to complicate and hide the wrongness, as opposed to blatant wrongness.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stain
Joined: 08 Jan 2014
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| If you can honestly liken archery, judo and martial arts in general to owning, using and being taught how to use a gun, you're a bigger fool than you generally come across as. |
Americans lose what little ability they have with LOGIC when guns come up. Instantly the never ending excuses start...
I'm fine with Fox's logic that they might be needed for rural life, and with that will come hunting accidents. Perhaps we call that an acceptable loss? Sure, that seems reasonable.
But for the rest of the guns it's just stupid, there are great losses, yet nothing gained from having 1 gun per capita. Err, unless they use those guns to overthrow their incompetent and bankrupt government. |
I still don't understand why you are against guns in the states. You say there are great losses but you hate Americans and want them eradicated. Why do you care if they kill each other? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Stain wrote: |
| I still don't understand why you are against guns in the states. You say there are great losses but you hate Americans and want them eradicated. Why do you care if they kill each other? |
Damn man, you're right!!! 
It's not often that I get smoked with logic, but it just happened... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stain
Joined: 08 Jan 2014
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| Stain wrote: |
| I still don't understand why you are against guns in the states. You say there are great losses but you hate Americans and want them eradicated. Why do you care if they kill each other? |
Damn man, you're right!!!
It's not often that I get smoked with logic, but it just happened... |
Logic and feelings don't really mix. Look, I know Iogic has its faults. Consider the following syllogism.
Major premise: Sixty men can do a piece of work sixty times as quickly as one man.
Minor premise: One man can dig a posthole in sixty seconds.
Conclusion: Therefore, sixty men can dig a posthole in one second. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
DP
Last edited by Steelrails on Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:07 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| I cant be bothered to read what you wrote - therefore you win by default. |
Yeah, these long rambling posts with untrimmed quotes...
I tend to think anyone who cannot express their idea simply in one sentence does not yet understand their own idea. And if they did understand their idea, would realize it was wrong.
Wrongness requires long posts as an attempt to complicate and hide the wrongness, as opposed to blatant wrongness. |
I'm sorry, but that is intellectually lazy. If that were true, all the great works of literature and philosophy over the last 2000 years should be dismissed under the criteria of "You didn't make your point in one sentence".
That's like saying if someone can't make a good song in one measure, then they are an idiot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| I cant be bothered to read what you wrote - therefore you win by default. |
Yeah, these long rambling posts with untrimmed quotes...
I tend to think anyone who cannot express their idea simply in one sentence does not yet understand their own idea. And if they did understand their idea, would realize it was wrong.
Wrongness requires long posts as an attempt to complicate and hide the wrongness, as opposed to blatant wrongness. |
I'm sorry, but that is intellectually lazy. |
Yes, I know you and Atwood do not agree.
It's not laziness...more work does not make one more right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| I cant be bothered to read what you wrote - therefore you win by default. |
Yeah, these long rambling posts with untrimmed quotes...
I tend to think anyone who cannot express their idea simply in one sentence does not yet understand their own idea. And if they did understand their idea, would realize it was wrong.
Wrongness requires long posts as an attempt to complicate and hide the wrongness, as opposed to blatant wrongness. |
I'm sorry, but that is intellectually lazy. |
Yes, I know you and Atwood do not agree.
It's not laziness...more work does not make one more right. |
Hence the famous Pascal apology.
I'm sorry that this was such a long letter, but I didn't have time to write you a short one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| I cant be bothered to read what you wrote - therefore you win by default. |
Yeah, these long rambling posts with untrimmed quotes...
I tend to think anyone who cannot express their idea simply in one sentence does not yet understand their own idea. And if they did understand their idea, would realize it was wrong.
Wrongness requires long posts as an attempt to complicate and hide the wrongness, as opposed to blatant wrongness. |
I'm sorry, but that is intellectually lazy. |
Yes, I know you and Atwood do not agree.
It's not laziness...more work does not make one more right. |
Also, there was a reason I bolded a few sentences- basically to give the tldr points. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
Hence the famous Pascal apology.
I'm sorry that this was such a long letter, but I didn't have time to write you a short one. |
My first time hearing that one, an excellent quote. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. BlackCat
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Location: Insert witty remark HERE
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| trueblue wrote: |
The 2nd Amendment is what is supposed to keep a corrupt government at bay and the principles of liberty on the table. Yes, times have changed...but corruption and tyranny stay the same. That is what needs to be taught...not he commercialization or glorification of guns but the responsibilities, knowledge and discipline that must correlate with them.
|
Statements like this just don't make any sense. There are plenty of countries in the world that strictly restrict private gun ownership yet are completely peaceful, prosperous and, yes, 'free'. Most of these countries don't have elaborate home-grown operations spying on them, incredibly armed police departments, and more than 2 almost identical parties. If anything, the belief that guns is keeping Americans 'free' has actually made them less free because they concentrate less on actual things that would open up their government and make them more representative of their citizens. Instead of becoming active in the development of the country, many Americans think loading up on guns will 'protect' them from the problem.
Which leads us the the most ridiculous part of this argument; your guns are no match for whatever the government has if it really wanted to oppress you. I know Tea Baggers like to talk about facing down Obama with their shotgun in the town square, but it wouldn't even get to that point if the government didn't want it to. So instead, the government lets Americans have their toys so they can shoot each other and believe they're big strong men, when in reality they're just being distracted while their country gets more and more tyranical.
In Canada if you don't like government policies you form a party and challenge them, which is how our current government got into power (for better or for worse). In the US if you don't like what you're government is doing you show up to a rally with a gun, pretend to be a big man and talk about being more free than anyone else in the world. Then you go back to your home and everything carries on as normal.
Guns don't make you free. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
