freemindfade

Joined

• started 193 topics
• posted 5,163 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by freemindfade

• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  If the anti gun know it all's are serious about understanding how the real world works. I would strongly encourage watching Underworld Inc on netflix. Episode 1. Ghost guns.

  The extremes accomplish nothing. America should adopt and enforce strict laws about education and training for firearms before ownership. Banning them will do literally nothing. Banning may work in some cultures and not in others. It's not going to work in america. Watch the show!!

  The folks like fink who spout nonsensical information that reveal their ignorance of the matter are undermining a discussion about doing something that could actually improve things. See I'm not debating for either extreme pro gun nut or anti gun nut so don't say how I'm not debating well. I'm not debating at all. Just calling BS when I see it.

  Watch the episode and get back to me :)
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  If more guns = more death then where I currently live everyone should be dead lol
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  I can buy "semiautomatic military guns", as you call them, in Vancouver without a gun store as easily as I can rent a hooker without a hooker store. Easy. Maybe its a good thing but too many of you live in a good little law abiding citizen bubble. If were out there in the real real world you might see the world very differently.
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  So the next time a crazy terrorist or a wack job comes into a school and mows down a bunch of children , make sure you wag your finger at them telling them they are not behaving gun responsible, don't they remember the safety training they took.

  oh boy...smh

  Don't go outside fink, the sky might fall
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  Because they have very strict gun control. Something like 14 inspections or renewals per year.
  It's about balance and responsibility.

  eeeeeggggggsactly!
  no 2nd amendments

  no bans

  just control
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  Isn't that how it works in a perfect world?

  Very good. You have shown how complicated an issue this is clearer than I have seen on this forum to date. Thank you for not oversimplify the solution.
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  Is a set population safer or more perilously dangerous where there is the proliferation of personal gun ownership and distribution of guns and add in the sales of semiautomatic guns as well ?

  My short answer is it depends on the population.

  Switzerland is what? #4 on the per capita ownership?

  But where are they on gun deaths per capita? Pretty low?? (also deaths are generally suicide and "crimes of passion")

  In this one case it would seem responsible gun ownership has a bigger impact than just gun ownership

  just saying... I don't think two world cultures will be exactly the same.

  responsible gun ownership should be a priority and probably more attainable goal/initiative than an outright ban at this point
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  However states like California with very strict gun laws have very high murder/homicides by guns. The theory at first blush seems plausible however it is just that a theory. The numbers say otherwise.

  Chicago and New York are also good examples. You just as easily acquire this RPG everyone has been talking about as get a gun in the city limits of New York legally.

  Outside of highly sensationalized and emotional mass shootings most of the death by gun is going on in the inner cities where gun restrictions are highest.
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  All this reminds me of the demonizing of pot and the fear mongering propaganda of days past. People still swear "its a gateway drug!!!!" You'll get refer madness!!! It's a bandwagon that is blown out of proportion. You smoke pot you'll lose your mind! Pick up a gun somewhere a mass shooting takes place. And "ban" is just the simplest solution to more complex problems people can come up with.

  Back when columbine happened I remember people on the news debating the impact of the entertainment industry... they watched The Matrix!! They played Doom!!! They listened to Marilyn Manson!!!.. all these "things" were taking heat for what these kids did. Whatever the big agenda is lets scream about that now!
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  I have no position to hold

  I have a gun... its not going anywhere, I am just letting you guys talk and having a laugh.

  I'm pro gun for me and no one else. It ends there, all this political crap? whatever. Everyone else can figure that out on their own. I think loop holes should be closed, and more regulation is good. All these opinions do nothing to change anything. Only actions change the world.

  I have no position so I am not debating anything and i know that is driving you guys nuts. But if someone says something crazy I have to point it out. That's all. Don't get mad

  State your facts, don't mind me if I question them.