Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
New Server | HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info forum | HOMM4: info forum | HOMM5: info forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Volcanic Wastelands > Thread: Random Thoughts: Porcelain Throne Philosophy edition
Thread: Random Thoughts: Porcelain Throne Philosophy edition This thread is 66 pages long: 1 10 20 30 40 ... 44 45 46 47 48 ... 50 60 66 · «PREV / NEXT»
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted April 18, 2018 01:45 PM

What blizz said and...

1-When I call them semi-automatics, you say there are also semi-automatic hand guns, when I call them military grade, you say they are the civillian version of the models. It's good to learn more details about anything but overall this is just a technicality. We all understand what kind of weapons we are talking about, guns designed to mass kill from a great range with heavy power. Guns you don't necessarily need, to protect yourself from a burglar or hunt deer or practice maksmanship. And it is not about "leftists" not knowing these guns, marines and rangers say the same thing, too. It is pointless to have them in civillian life, they dont serve a function other than escalating danger.

2- The rest of your post somehow talks as if everbody else ignored the socio-cultural aspect of the issue where as I and many others talked about it for pages. But what you do is like going in a discussion about effects of CGI usage in 2000's science fiction cinema and start talking about information technologies. They are not irrelevant subjects but you are being way too general. Everything from overpopulation to ghettos, school bullies to immigration, rest of the world also has. The distinct thing about this amount of mass shootings is not these, it is U.S. kind of gun regulation and gun culture. So the "inanimate objects" are obviously a parameter in the discussion, not just decor.
____________
I admit it, I like it when they are bombastic - Neraus

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted April 18, 2018 01:52 PM

Neraus said:

I also bloody need to purchase some insecticides, ants and mosquitoes are going to eat me alive.

My first spring in Ayvalik, my first spring with my own yard, I open my bedroom window looking at my tree with excited joy and in 20 seconds about 40 flies storm in. Trees are all kind of flying bug magnets.

I electrocuted them with my awesome racket, of course. Hadoken!
____________
I admit it, I like it when they are bombastic - Neraus

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
fred79
fred79


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
SCOURGE OF THE H-SEA
posted April 18, 2018 01:56 PM

Blizzardboy said:
More binary arguments that are made of straw to defend a crooked lobby.

Do you have a specific person here who said or who believes that better regulation on guns means a total solution to violent crime? I don't remember ever seeing that.

(I'd simply support banning semi-automatics and handguns entirely, but I'll support anything that moves us in that direction)


no, my arguments are sound. i never said anything would be a total solution to crime, either. what i specified, is what the left's focused on, instead of the real issues surrounding the problem.

and, like i pointed out, it doesn't matter what either of us thinks, regarding gun freedom. the situation isn't going to change, period. you might as well try to stop lightning from killing people occasionally; because that's how much success you'll have.

all anti-gun measures are going to do, is drive the price up on guns(and more prolificly activate the gun-dealing trade), which will just help the gun lobby anyway. anything already owned would be grandfathered in, just like with clinton's assault weapons ban. so, all 500,000,000 guns already in circulation, will remain out there, regardless. buy-backs might work for a couple thousand, but that isn't even beginning to make a dent.

there is literally nothing you can do to change what is, now. it's just not possible, no matter what. the only thing people can do, is increase security where it's needed(lol, like in "gun-free safezones"). that is the only viable option.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
fred79
fred79


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
SCOURGE OF THE H-SEA
posted April 18, 2018 02:05 PM

artu said:
I electrocuted them with my awesome racket, of course. Hadoken!


lol.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Ghost
Ghost


Supreme Hero
Therefore I am
posted April 18, 2018 08:29 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HWVAgmqLyc&list=FLIAoU0irmtUmg-jfyjix3_g&index=0

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
blizzardboy
blizzardboy


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Prince of Poetry
posted April 18, 2018 11:10 PM
Edited by blizzardboy at 23:35, 18 Apr 2018.

fred79 said:
Blizzardboy said:
More binary arguments that are made of straw to defend a crooked lobby.

Do you have a specific person here who said or who believes that better regulation on guns means a total solution to violent crime? I don't remember ever seeing that.

(I'd simply support banning semi-automatics and handguns entirely, but I'll support anything that moves us in that direction)


no, my arguments are sound. i never said anything would be a total solution to crime, either. what i specified, is what the left's focused on, instead of the real issues surrounding the problem.

and, like i pointed out, it doesn't matter what either of us thinks, regarding gun freedom. the situation isn't going to change, period. you might as well try to stop lightning from killing people occasionally; because that's how much success you'll have.

all anti-gun measures are going to do, is drive the price up on guns(and more prolificly activate the gun-dealing trade), which will just help the gun lobby anyway. anything already owned would be grandfathered in, just like with clinton's assault weapons ban. so, all 500,000,000 guns already in circulation, will remain out there, regardless. buy-backs might work for a couple thousand, but that isn't even beginning to make a dent.

there is literally nothing you can do to change what is, now. it's just not possible, no matter what. the only thing people can do, is increase security where it's needed(lol, like in "gun-free safezones"). that is the only viable option.


I disagree with your analysis almost entirely and find it presumptive and dependent on short-term thinking, not to mention it has a good bit of prejudice wrapped up in it.

Here is where I have no disagrement:

US situation with guns is indeed very much unique and much, much more entangled than when UK or Australia got rid of their handguns. There was not nearly the degree of hot button politics charging up the issue, nor were guns ubiquitous like they are in the States. For that reason, weaning the US off of its "gun addiction" won't be simple. Not "impossible" but definitely not simple. If a person thinks a few legislations getting passed is all that is needed, I 100% agree that that person is naive and uninformed on the issue.


Now, on to the many reasons why you are wrong:

To start with, saying that greatly reducing guns in the US is impossible is completely baseless. If you look at the history behind the issue, it was circa late 1960s when the NRA as we know it began to mutate from a rifleman sporting organization into a high powered, hot button lobby propaganda machine that started saying, "More guns, more guns, more guns" to every and any dilemma, and that is when the gun frenzy in the US began to steadily rise to its high point in the 1990s. The powers behind this change were a mix of people of a libertarian/anarchist mindset, which was an overzealous reaction towards communism / authoritarian socialism (when one ideology gains power in the world, it isn't at all unusual for its opposite to emerge somewhere as a kind of reflex).

Before this time, the US wasn't terribly unique with guns. Yeah, if you look at the 1940s you had a LOT more people living on farms or in rural areas, and regulations in general weren't as thorough back during the youth of the Golden Generation, so naturally you had plenty of people who owned rifles and some revolvers. But guns were not POLITICAL DYNAMITE the way they were by the 1970s. Those social and political dynamics didn't exist. One simple way of seeing this demonstrated is the Republican president in the 1950s: Dwight Eisenhower. There was almost nothing about him that was neoconservative or firebrand in the way modern Republicans sometimes are, and Trump and his ilk most definitely are (in fact, in the 1940s/50s, Democrats were generally closer to Republicans in the current sense). In other words, the situation with guns as it currently exists is something that is - at most - about 50 years old.

So you are telling me that it is now absolutely impossible to reverse that? Complete nonsense. Americans have already been steadily cooling off to the NRA and moving towards more regulations since the 90s. What you actually have is a minority of people who are - for whatever reason - deeply committed and zealous towards guns, and admittedly, they are quite organized. So, that gives them power.

There are all sorts of clever ways you can wean the country off of its gun addiction. If you tried to do it all simultaneously, you are absolutely right that that would not end well. But what if - say - you started cutting away at the gun lobby over 5 years? Or 10 years. And then 20. People would experience shock if lots of changes happened all at once, but not if you chipped away at it. However many guns might be present in the country, it is a finite amount. If it goes from 500mil to 400mil in a few years, that is 100mil less. And then down to 250mil, etc.

And it would not instigate a revolution. Quite simple: suppose Jim is strongly pro-gun and likes the idea of resisting if legislation tried to change that. He talks to his buddies about it and uses some boastful choice words. Okay: talk is cheap. Guess what: Jim has a spouse/long-term girlfriend. Uh oh. And he has kids that he loves and who love him. Uh oh again. And he has a career that he has been throwing time and effort into, working his way up the ladder through the sweat of his brow. Uh oh again. What are the chances of him pissing that away? Almost 0. And any one of those things would be enough to be a huge deterrent from going into resistance mode. People have lives and unless they have basically nothing to lose, it would really take a lot to throw that away.

So unless the government was extremely clumsy in how it handled the issue, the actual number of people who would resist on a hardcore level are a minority of a minority of a minority. It's a number that can be handled.

So no, current gun culture is not permanently embedded into the fabric of the US because it was never permanent to begin with. There are already signs of it weakening and the NRA is perfectly aware of this. People are fed up and becoming exhausted with the merry-go-round of mass shootings with weapons that are (literally) over 10 times more effective at killing than a shotgun or hunting rifle.

edit: And parts of your posts are simply rants. "I don't think morons should have guns". Fantastic. Who exactly determines who a "moron" is? This is just (I'm assuming) another way of saying you want background checks.  

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
fred79
fred79


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
SCOURGE OF THE H-SEA
posted April 18, 2018 11:32 PM
Edited by fred79 at 23:39, 18 Apr 2018.

agreed, i rant in my posts. that's no big surprise. but at least my points are measured using logic, and not feeling. i may rant about stuff, but i at least understand the reality behind what i'm ranting about.

now, as for the rest of your disagreement, you're not factoring in the one thing that makes your entire argument against mine moot: what can be obtained illegally. if you were to line up the history of illegal drugs and the drug war alongside the prolific rise of firearms in our country, you would see that the two graph lines would be nearly identical in a steady rise after a certain point in time.

now, do you think the nra had a hand in the drug war? because according to you, the nra is the reason we have so many guns in this country. how about all the drugs?

the MAJOR point that you're not getting, is that it doesn't matter if they even MADE guns illegal. you'd STILL be able to get them, because the drug cartels and gangs would now have another source of profit. you make something harder to get, or illegal, and someone will find a way to turn a profit selling you what you can't get elsewhere.

think about how much money the cartels make in a year. billions of dollars, dude. billions. and they have access to anything anyone could ever want. think of how much MORE money they could make, if they sold what was once LEGAL guns, ILLEGALLY. the only reason they're not big on that NOW, is because guns in the states, are for the most part, legal. their only clientele for illegal firearms atm, are criminals. think of how much their empire would expand, if suddenly the previously law-abiding citizen couldn't purchase a firearm legally. your argument doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

your solution, is to try and ban something from the public. did the prohibition era not teach you anything, or what? even if they banned ALL GUNS, people would STILL find a way to get, or manufacture their own.


i don't even understand why we're arguing anyway. nothing is going to change one way or the other. legal or no, we in the u.s. can get whatever we want, if we have the money. we're the world's largest consumers, dude. and people know that, and they want to make money exploiting that.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Blizzardboy
Blizzardboy


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Prince of Poetry
posted April 18, 2018 11:38 PM
Edited by Blizzardboy at 23:39, 18 Apr 2018.

I have to go but I will explain later why guns don't  have the same potential as contraband as something highly chemically addictive such as opoids.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
fred79
fred79


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
SCOURGE OF THE H-SEA
posted April 18, 2018 11:46 PM

Blizzardboy said:
I have to do but I will explain later why guns don't  have the same potential as contraband as something highly chemically addictive such as opoids.


lol, so now the cartels make all their money selling opioids, and not every best-selling drug known to man?

and, what the hell, dude. you're talking about addiction. in case you don't realize, addiction comes in more forms, than just drug addiction. people in the states are also addicted to FREEDOM, and the 2nd amendment, and BEING ABLE TO PROTECT THOSE FAMILIES YOU MENTIONED.

and besides, how in the hell can you think that the drugs users out there are all ADDICTS in the first place??? i mean, come on, man.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted April 19, 2018 12:23 AM

Lol, fred I love have you switch from "damn, all these people are sheep" to "Americans will never give up their fredoom" when the subject is guns. Also, if you claim to use logic, then you must follow the steps, Blizz's argument is that the current situation of guns is a relitavely new phenomenon already disolving, that it is not part of core American culture and it is not what the Constitution refers to. He explained that in detail with like a dozen examples and a mini history lecture. Yet, you still bring up the Second Amendment. Now, bringing up illegal guns is a valid point, since his arguments did not cover that. He also knows this, so he says he'll reply when available. But bringing up the Second Amendment is like completely ignoring his whole argumentation, which is certainly not logical.
____________
I admit it, I like it when they are bombastic - Neraus

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
fred79
fred79


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
SCOURGE OF THE H-SEA
posted April 19, 2018 12:43 AM

yeah, and he claims that gun owners who believe in their rights are a minority of people. which is absolute hogwash.

it is now quite clear, that the left have no understanding of this topic, at all. maybe you guys all read the same backwater leftist rags that fill your minds with bullsnow, i dunno.

artu, you claim that i flip-flop between claiming americans are sheep, and people who won't give up their freedom. did it never occur to you, that the people i am referring to, who are sheep, are the people who AREN'T proactive gun owners, or FOR the 2nd amendment? that maybe, i'm referring to the left quite specifically, regarding the gun issue?

i give bulk generalizations, because that's what i see in bulk: 2 main groups: anti-gun leftists, and pro-gun right-leaners. there may be a mix between the two, but those two groups are mostly one way or the other. like jews and palestinians, if you will.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted April 19, 2018 01:28 AM

Well, when you call people sheep, you refer to an overwhelmingly brutal majority of people, you sometimes go straight to calling "humanity" sheep with "a few exceptions here and there" in your own words. So if "proactive gunowners," whoever they may be, are part of those exceptions according to you, they must indeed be a very small minority by your own definition.
____________
I admit it, I like it when they are bombastic - Neraus

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
fred79
fred79


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
SCOURGE OF THE H-SEA
posted April 19, 2018 01:38 AM
Edited by fred79 at 01:43, 19 Apr 2018.

gun owners have all the power in the world, artu. the bigger the gun(or bomb, if you want to speak nationally), the greater the power.

what the left suggests, is giving up that power(if however gradually). so that everyone can be just as subservient to people that STILL HAVE GUNS(read, their controllers and any common or organized criminal, or ANY threat that can be dealt with by using a gun in general), as they are.

we may not USE our guns, but we at least have them if we NEED them.

leftists only gain power through WHINING and MANIPULATION. and that power DOESN'T LAST.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Salamandre
Salamandre


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
posted April 19, 2018 01:45 AM

fred79 said:
maybe you guys all read the same backwater leftist rags that fill your minds with bullsnow, i dunno.


That, we know already.

Now, I wonder one thing. One quarter of americains own guns (read that on some survey, correct me if I'm wrong), that makes ~ 80 millions people, so if you consider the 10k deaths by gun each year - suicides aside, only 0.01% of them are irresponsible, the vast-vast-vast overwhelming majority of gun owners are okay. So why is this being debated, since the leftflakes preferred argument is always "the majority should not pay for the sins of the few"?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted April 19, 2018 01:49 AM
Edited by artu at 02:09, 19 Apr 2018.

@fred
The kind of gun owners you talk about have have zero power against any modern, organized military and you very well know this. It would be much more convenient and politically justifiable for any government to crush a group of armed militia than to use violence against peaceful protesters. That's how the movement of Martin Luther won (although he, himself was assassinated) yet, the Black Panthers mostly ended up in jail.


@Sal

I can find your arguments from five years ago where you spill out pretty much the same things as those leftflakes, yet since your mind devolved into evaluating everything into a binary state of right versus left which must always be wrong, your memory probably blocks that out. Gun ownership is a very broad definition, you can own a revolver or you can own a gatling gun, we are not talking about banning guns completely. And these kind social issues arent solved with such plain arithmetics, you feel quite comfortable making two terrorists about the whole immigration issue which involves millions yet now most gun owners are peaceful is an argument? You talk about reality, blizz gave stats, historical summary, all you mumble is soyflake this, leftflake that... What have you turned into, man, it almost feels tragic.
____________
I admit it, I like it when they are bombastic - Neraus

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
fred79
fred79


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
SCOURGE OF THE H-SEA
posted April 19, 2018 01:59 AM
Edited by fred79 at 02:01, 19 Apr 2018.

we don't have power, huh? how come we still have our guns then? and any guns we currently have will be grandfathered in, despite any change in law? how is it that we STILL have the power to defend ourselves and protect our loved ones, since you leftists are soooooo good at disarming the law-abiding and near completely non-violent gun owners?

hmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

*blinks eyes rapidly in a cute way at artu because he knows he's won this argument 100 times over already*



yeah, what sal said, too.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
fred79
fred79


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
SCOURGE OF THE H-SEA
posted April 19, 2018 02:04 AM
Edited by fred79 at 02:08, 19 Apr 2018.

and as far as what sal said, if the left were SO CONCERNED about lives like they claim to be, then why aren't they after people for all the MALPRACTICE deaths? or for the FOOD INDUSTRY and all the health-related deaths they cause? or for any of the OTHER causes of death that are far more prevalent in the u.s.?

why does the left focus ONLY on removing or restricting guns from law-abiding citizens?

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

answer me that, alley cat.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Blizzardboy
Blizzardboy


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Prince of Poetry
posted April 19, 2018 02:15 AM
Edited by Blizzardboy at 02:19, 19 Apr 2018.

Okay I'm out in town on my cell, but somebody is wrong on the internet, so here goes:

1) Guns primarily provide protection/war against other gangs. Random kids/young adults who commit random felonies aren't hardened criminals and have far less motivation to acquire a gun. Especially if possession of one in of itself will mean extra legal charges if caught. It is a greater hazard. And also there is less need for a gun if people in general don't have guns. The stakes are upped if much of civilian population is armed.

2) People aren't punished through gun control because they shouldn't have them to begin with. They arent entitled to them

3) Guns and drugs somewhat go hand in hand. Reforming drug policies means less need for drug dealers to be packing.

4) People develop a psychological dependency on certain things but almost nobody is going to be gnawing their nails into a bloody stump if they don't have a gun. Addictive drugs can make people do almost anything in the way sex sometimes can. Guns do not have that effect.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted April 19, 2018 02:16 AM
Edited by artu at 02:21, 19 Apr 2018.

Dude, this is way past left versus right, you have a national disease in your hands and complaints from all sides of the political spectrum echoing through out the world.

And the reason you still have your guns is because as of now, you have a legal right to. You can bet your ass nobody is going to start a revolution to be able to keep semi-automatic rifles.

And I wouldnt recommend taking the word of Sal seriously on anything that goes "snowflakes, leftists, soyflakes... etc." He's a pissed old man, married to a black cat.
____________
I admit it, I like it when they are bombastic - Neraus

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
fred79
fred79


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
SCOURGE OF THE H-SEA
posted April 19, 2018 02:23 AM
Edited by fred79 at 02:24, 19 Apr 2018.

Blizzardboy said:
Okay I'm out in town on my cell, but somebody is wrong on the internet, so here goes:

1) Guns primarily provide protection/war against other gangs. Random kids/young adults who commit random felonies aren't hardened criminals and have far less motivation to acquire a gun. Especially if possession of one in of itself will mean extra legal charges if caught. It is a greater hazard. And also there is less need for a gun if people in general don't have guns. The stakes are upped if much of civilian population is armed.

2) People aren't punished through gun control because they shouldn't have them to begin with. They Sent entitled to them


1: if you don't like guns, then move to a country that doesn't allow them. your opinion is fine, but don't think that your opinion makes it ok to try and restrict others, based on your opinion.

2. people shouldn't have guns? again, move. this is the u.s., and the 2nd amendment is in our constitution for a reason. in case you were wondering, the 2nd amendment was put in place BECAUSE this is the u.s., and not england. that amendment was SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED SO THAT THE U.S. can exist in the state it was originally founded in.


your opinion on this is as unamerican as it gets, dude.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 66 pages long: 1 10 20 30 40 ... 44 45 46 47 48 ... 50 60 66 · «PREV / NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.0757 seconds