The high price of freedom.

pgp_protector · Oct 3, 2015

dysert said:
Actually, it's both. Put a knife or a hammer in the hands of a mentally ill person and even if they go on a rampage there will be a lot less carnage. The problem with the gun is that it can kill so many people so fast and at a distance.

And one can kill and hurt just as many and just as quickly with the stuff you can buy down at the local CVS Pharmacy.
The Anarchist Cookbook came out over 40 years ago and is still available to anyone with internet access.
Even without the Easy Availability of Guns, someone who is mentally unstable that want to kill / hurt others will not have any problem doing it.

Blue Wren · Oct 4, 2015

OldWiseGuy said:
When the dust has settled the innocent lives taken by the Oregon shooter are indeed part of the price of freedom in the U.S. The shooter had not violated any gun laws, and the only way he could have been prevented from doing this act was to have been committed to a secure mental institution under the pertinent laws of the State of Oregon.

That's the only way? Truly? :doh:

AceHero · Oct 4, 2015

AceHero said:
As Joe the Plumber once said, "As harsh as this sounds – your dead kids don’t trump my Constitutional rights."

heatedmonk said:

And he's correct in my opinion.

Click to expand...

And that why nothing will ever change. As long as people value their guns more than human lives, people will continue to have their brains blown out in classrooms and movie theaters.

Freedom.

Armoured · Oct 4, 2015

ananda said:
In the historical American republic, harm (of whatever sort, including death) is supposed to be corrected and remedied after the fact (after the harm has been committed) through the system of law and justice. Also, in the American republic, the system of law and justice is supposed to protect the inviolable, unalienable Constitutional rights of the People, whether or not an exercise of those rights may or may not produce harm in the future.

Protection of unalienable Constitutional rights disregarding future consequences as only potentials + remedy of harm after the fact = the American republic system as created in the 1700s. This is a system, IMO, great for mature, intelligent, self-controlled adults.

Restriction of privileges in light of all potential future consequences + remedy of potential harm before the fact = the new fascist+communist hybrid that the American system is transitioning to. This is a system, IMO, great for immature children that need to be controlled.

If people here are arguing for "protection" before the fact (before harm has been committed), then it is no longer the historic American republic you guys are arguing for. Choose one or the other, you can't have both.

"Fascist+communist"?

Oafman · Oct 4, 2015

Well, I do at least respect the OP's honesty, when he implies that all these deaths are a price worth paying for his right to keep his toys. It's morally bankrupt, but it's honest.

heatedmonk · Oct 4, 2015

AceHero said:
And that why nothing will ever change. As long as people value their guns more than human lives, people will continue to have their brains blown out in classrooms and movie theaters.

Freedom.

Way to miss the point!

quatona · Oct 4, 2015

OldWiseGuy said:
When the dust has settled the innocent lives taken by the Oregon shooter are indeed part of the price of freedom in the U.S. The shooter had not violated any gun laws, and the only way he could have been prevented from doing this act was to have been committed to a secure mental institution under the pertinent laws of the State of Oregon.

The equation "freedom=gun ownership" is founded in a worldview I don´t share.
But, yes, the victims are the price you have to pay for this worldview.

Armoured · Oct 4, 2015

heatedmonk said:
Way to miss the point!

Which point is that, then?

quatona · Oct 4, 2015

OldWiseGuy said:
Our expectations are greater, as well as our disappointments, which may account for much of the violence.

That may or may not be the case - I just don´t seem to understand which are those high expectation that you hope to fulfill by everyone owning firearms.
To the observer it looks like resulting from the idea that everybody must be able threaten everybody else for society to function. Thus, the resulting increased violence appears to be more like the self-fulfilled prophecy of a deeply misanthropic premise.

OldWiseGuy · Oct 4, 2015

Ana the Ist said:
Well let's suppose you were considering making it legal to conceal carry in your state. Would you be interested in finding out how that worked out for other states first? Would you want to know things like "how many people were killed by someone who was legally CC at the time vs how many crimes were stopped by someone legally CC at the time"?

If not...what would you base your decision on?

Your post is a good case for not relying on statistics.

OldWiseGuy · Oct 4, 2015

Blue Wren said:
That's the only way? Truly?

The commitment laws require one or more doctor's evaluations as well as input from several family members to forcibly commit someone. This is the only way Mercer would have been stopped.

OldWiseGuy · Oct 4, 2015

quatona said:
That may or may not be the case - I just don´t seem to understand which are those high expectation that you hope to fulfill by everyone owning firearms.
To the observer it looks like resulting from the idea that everybody must be able threaten everybody else for society to function. Thus, the resulting increased violence appears to be more like the self-fulfilled prophecy of a deeply misanthropic premise.

You are missing the point. A person's disappointment, thus their (potential) anger and frustration, is greater in a land where everything seems to be available to everyone else. Money, friends, girls, acceptance, respect, etc. Lack of food in a land of want is far different than lack of food in a land of plenty.

OldWiseGuy · Oct 4, 2015

quatona said:
The equation "freedom=gun ownership" is founded in a worldview I don´t share.
But, yes, the victims are the price you have to pay for this worldview.

Private gun ownership defends a long list of other freedoms.

quatona · Oct 4, 2015

OldWiseGuy said:
You are missing the point. A person's disappointment, thus their (potential) anger and frustration, is greater in a land where everything seems to be available to everyone else. Money, friends, girls, acceptance, respect, etc. Lack of food in a land of want is far different than lack of food in a land of plenty.

Ah, you were comparing the USofA to other 3rd world countries....

I was assuming you were talking about countries where food, money, girls, acceptance and respect etc. are available to everyone - just not guns. My bad.

quatona · Oct 4, 2015

OldWiseGuy said:
Private gun ownership defends a long list of other freedoms.

Could you possibly name just the top 5 items of this long list?
I mean apart from the freedom to commit mass killings in theaters etc.

OldWiseGuy · Oct 4, 2015

Oafman said:
Well, I do at least respect the OP's honesty, when he implies that all these deaths are a price worth paying for his right to keep his toys. It's morally bankrupt, but it's honest.

We pay a high price in deaths for many freedoms here.

The U.S. military kills thousands of innocent people, usually en mass, and they get to keep their toys.

florida2 · Oct 4, 2015

OldWiseGuy said:
If my loved ones were victims I wouldn't be qualified to render an objective opinion on the subject.

And we have to go through them one at a time to get a clear picture.

And I would understand if they didn't.

The U.S. is unique, not to be compared with 'many' other countries.

We have freedom here in the UK just as much as you and, thankfully, strict gun laws. The USA isn't the only country with freedom, by the way

OldWiseGuy · Oct 4, 2015

florida2 said:
We have freedom here in the UK just as much as you and, thankfully, strict gun laws. The USA isn't the only country with freedom, by the way

We have the freedom to own guns here.

OldWiseGuy · Oct 4, 2015

quatona said:
Could you possibly name just the top 5 items of this long list?
I mean apart from the freedom to commit mass killings in theaters etc.

We have the freedom to defend against mass killings, if we chose to use it.

TheQuietRiot · Oct 4, 2015

OldWiseGuy said:
We have the freedom to own guns here.

So do we.

The high price of freedom.

Noted strange person

Well-Known Member

Veteran

So is America great again yet?

Try telling that to these bog brained murphys

Salvations Math: 3 Nails + 1 Cross= 4 Given

"God"? What do you mean??

So is America great again yet?

"God"? What do you mean??

Wake me when it's soup.

Wake me when it's soup.

Wake me when it's soup.

Wake me when it's soup.

"God"? What do you mean??

"God"? What do you mean??

Wake me when it's soup.

Well-Known Member

Wake me when it's soup.

Wake me when it's soup.

indomitable

Similar threads