The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Guns don't kill threads; Ratz kill threads!
User avatar
Robert_S
Cookie Monster
Posts: 13416
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 5:47 am
About me: Too young to die of boredom, too old to grow up.
Location: Illinois
Contact:

The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by Robert_S » Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:10 pm

Hey guys! I'm just wondering a few things here.

Is anyone in the gun section going to admit they changed their position over the course of these thousands of posts?

Do any of you think that you have changes anyone's mind?

Have any of you actually learned much of value about the other side?

Do you think the discussion here has evolved at all or is it just going over the same old ground again and again because nobody wants to let the other side get the last word?
What I've found with a few discussions I've had lately is this self-satisfaction that people express with their proffessed open mindedness. In realty it ammounts to wilful ignorance and intellectual cowardice as they are choosing to not form any sort of opinion on a particular topic. Basically "I don't know and I'm not going to look at any evidence because I'm quite happy on this fence."
-Mr P

The Net is best considered analogous to communication with disincarnate intelligences. As any neophyte would tell you. Do not invoke that which you have no facility to banish.
Audley Strange

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by Hermit » Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:31 pm

Robert_S wrote:Is anyone in the gun section going to admit they changed their position over the course of these thousands of posts?
I do, yes
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

User avatar
Robert_S
Cookie Monster
Posts: 13416
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 5:47 am
About me: Too young to die of boredom, too old to grow up.
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by Robert_S » Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:09 pm

Hermit wrote:
Robert_S wrote:Is anyone in the gun section going to admit they changed their position over the course of these thousands of posts?
I do, yes
:clap:


I'm just going to assume most everyone else is just too stubborn too let the other side get the last word.
What I've found with a few discussions I've had lately is this self-satisfaction that people express with their proffessed open mindedness. In realty it ammounts to wilful ignorance and intellectual cowardice as they are choosing to not form any sort of opinion on a particular topic. Basically "I don't know and I'm not going to look at any evidence because I'm quite happy on this fence."
-Mr P

The Net is best considered analogous to communication with disincarnate intelligences. As any neophyte would tell you. Do not invoke that which you have no facility to banish.
Audley Strange

User avatar
piscator
Posts: 4725
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:11 am
Location: The Big BSOD
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by piscator » Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:26 pm

R not.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by Hermit » Thu Feb 20, 2014 12:13 am

Robert_S wrote:
Hermit wrote:
Robert_S wrote:Is anyone in the gun section going to admit they changed their position over the course of these thousands of posts?
I do, yes
:clap:


I'm just going to assume most everyone else is just too stubborn too let the other side get the last word.
I should clarify at this point. After the implementation of very strict gun control and the accompanying gun buyback scheme gun control supporters kept pointing out that the incidence of homicides using firearms had dropped by near enough to 80% and the number of suicides using firearms was halved. The statistics are pretty much incontrovertible. I saw them as clear evidence that gun control works as advertised. Then someone mentioned that while the role of firearms had declined, people just used other tools to do what they intended to do. So I had another look at the statistics. This took a lot of time, but yes, it turned out that overall trends in homicides and suicides remained unchanged. So I changed my mind about the efficacy of gun control.

Some other points: 1. The issue is not as simple as I summarised them here. I did expand on it elsewhere, so I won't rehash the details here. 2. While I no longer think that gun control is effective in reducing crime, I don't think the unavailability of firearms causes more crime either. I have yet to see convincing evidence for either proposition. The stuff proposed to be proof of either doesn't do the job. 3. My change of mind occurred while participating in the debates at RDF and before Rationalia existed, but the discussions there were pretty much identical to the ones that are taking place here. A good number of the participants were the same in both too.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

User avatar
Robert_S
Cookie Monster
Posts: 13416
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 5:47 am
About me: Too young to die of boredom, too old to grow up.
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by Robert_S » Thu Feb 20, 2014 12:27 am

piscator wrote:R not.
Image
What I've found with a few discussions I've had lately is this self-satisfaction that people express with their proffessed open mindedness. In realty it ammounts to wilful ignorance and intellectual cowardice as they are choosing to not form any sort of opinion on a particular topic. Basically "I don't know and I'm not going to look at any evidence because I'm quite happy on this fence."
-Mr P

The Net is best considered analogous to communication with disincarnate intelligences. As any neophyte would tell you. Do not invoke that which you have no facility to banish.
Audley Strange

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74129
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by JimC » Thu Feb 20, 2014 2:36 am

The comparison is more apt between countries with historically low levels of gun ownership and availability (particularly hand guns), compared to countries with historically high levels. The low levels may or may not be maintained by tight firearm regulation. Simply, the stats are very clear that murder rates are significantly higher in places with many hand guns in circulation. So, it's not really about gun control per se.

That is enough for me to wish to maintain Australia's current tight regulation of firearms, and the majority is definitely with me on this. However, increasing gun controls in the USA
a) is up to the citizens of that place and
b) could actually make things worse, at least in the short term.
However, better background checks might be a reasonable step there, without infringing on the right of the relatively sane to arm themselves as they see fit...
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Robert_S
Cookie Monster
Posts: 13416
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 5:47 am
About me: Too young to die of boredom, too old to grow up.
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by Robert_S » Thu Feb 20, 2014 2:43 am

This is supposed to be a damn meta-discussion. :lay:
What I've found with a few discussions I've had lately is this self-satisfaction that people express with their proffessed open mindedness. In realty it ammounts to wilful ignorance and intellectual cowardice as they are choosing to not form any sort of opinion on a particular topic. Basically "I don't know and I'm not going to look at any evidence because I'm quite happy on this fence."
-Mr P

The Net is best considered analogous to communication with disincarnate intelligences. As any neophyte would tell you. Do not invoke that which you have no facility to banish.
Audley Strange

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74129
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by JimC » Thu Feb 20, 2014 2:47 am

Robert_S wrote:This is supposed to be a damn meta-discussion. :lay:
It was meta...

But now it's beta...

:biggrin:
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Robert_S
Cookie Monster
Posts: 13416
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 5:47 am
About me: Too young to die of boredom, too old to grow up.
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by Robert_S » Thu Feb 20, 2014 2:54 am

I'm not getting into another gun discussion unless everybody's together in the same room I get to be the only armed person in it. :evil:
What I've found with a few discussions I've had lately is this self-satisfaction that people express with their proffessed open mindedness. In realty it ammounts to wilful ignorance and intellectual cowardice as they are choosing to not form any sort of opinion on a particular topic. Basically "I don't know and I'm not going to look at any evidence because I'm quite happy on this fence."
-Mr P

The Net is best considered analogous to communication with disincarnate intelligences. As any neophyte would tell you. Do not invoke that which you have no facility to banish.
Audley Strange

User avatar
FBM
Ratz' first Gritizen.
Posts: 45327
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach"
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by FBM » Thu Feb 20, 2014 3:15 am

I have changed my position quite a bit, but without switching sides. I've found a centrist position that I'm comfortable with.
"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken

"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."

"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74129
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by JimC » Thu Feb 20, 2014 3:25 am

Should I divorce my craving to shoot something from my exploration of the ethical and political dimensions of gun control?

Is it even psychologically possible?

:ask:




(Rob, is that meta enough?)
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Robert_S
Cookie Monster
Posts: 13416
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 5:47 am
About me: Too young to die of boredom, too old to grow up.
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by Robert_S » Thu Feb 20, 2014 4:39 am

JimC wrote:Should I divorce my craving to shoot something from my exploration of the ethical and political dimensions of gun control?

Is it even psychologically possible?

:ask:




(Rob, is that meta enough?)
Much better! Thanks!
FBM wrote:I have changed my position quite a bit, but without switching sides. I've found a centrist position that I'm comfortable with.
Interesting.
What I've found with a few discussions I've had lately is this self-satisfaction that people express with their proffessed open mindedness. In realty it ammounts to wilful ignorance and intellectual cowardice as they are choosing to not form any sort of opinion on a particular topic. Basically "I don't know and I'm not going to look at any evidence because I'm quite happy on this fence."
-Mr P

The Net is best considered analogous to communication with disincarnate intelligences. As any neophyte would tell you. Do not invoke that which you have no facility to banish.
Audley Strange

User avatar
Audley Strange
"I blame the victim"
Posts: 7485
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by Audley Strange » Thu Feb 20, 2014 6:47 am

I've changed my mind too. I was never anti-gun, but it seemed to me bewildering that the States allowed its citizens guns. Then I read up more about it, including the constitution and many of the rants here and realised that its not guns that are the problem, but rather Americans with Guns that are a problem to other Americans and it's a price they are happy to pay.

So at that point I changed my view from "something must be done!" to "guns aren't the problem." Clearly they don't help, but America's issue with weaponry is a symptom of the culture not the guns.
"What started as a legitimate effort by the townspeople of Salem to identify, capture and kill those who did Satan's bidding quickly deteriorated into a witch hunt" Army Man

User avatar
FBM
Ratz' first Gritizen.
Posts: 45327
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach"
Contact:

Re: The Gun Discussion Meta-Thread.

Post by FBM » Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:11 am

I have to agree, Audley. All these debates have, for me, pinpointed and highlighted the gun-related problems in US culture. Prior to getting engaged in the discussion, I just defended gun ownership carte blanche. Now I can see more clearly that some people don't deserve access to guns because of the dangers that they (the people) pose.
"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken

"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."

"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest