-->
@TheRealNihilist
No surprise that a race baiter is also a fascist baiter.
Nation = Fascism.
Opposition = Racists.
Good little indoctrinated NPC.
/end script
not just a bad person problem - a gun problem
Posts
Total:
154
-->
@n8nrgmi
I don't disagree with anything you've said in the opening post. I think that that graph makes it pretty clear that America has a disproportional problem with gun murders in comparison to other 1st world countries.
-->
@Greyparrot
No surprise that a race baiter is also a fascist baiter.
Do you love that word or something?
Nation = Fascism
Doing some for the "good" of the "nation" is a type of nationalism. Something that is good for nation which you have perceived to be is wrong. Me being publicly shamed does not in anyway solves the problems of United States like their addiction to wars, poverty and people not having health care. Go right ahead and advocate for what for you own interests instead of what is actually important for people's interest like poor people. You could say more but I think I am asking too much when by just claims your arguments sound awful. I can't imagine how bad a coherent substantiated point by you would be.
Opposition = Racists.
I wouldn't consider opposition as in anarchists racist. Am I still one?
Good little indoctrinated NPC.
Who can't elaborate their point in order to reduce the risk of revealing too much of their train of thought? Not me. Have you seen how much I explain?
/end script
You ran out of dialogue? You are not even important enough for a writer to even give you good lines. I think it would be the waste of the writer's time if you were actually put in the game. It is best remove you or my option improve on the existing character to give him more depth which I find this character sorely lacking. I think branching choices and the ability to be more in-depth would definitely help you as an NPC. Just food for thought it you want to be more than just a surface level character.
-->
@dustryder
Did SupaDudz or RationalMadman give you that profile picture?
If none what made you want to use that as a profile picture?
Pingu I am guessing who that is.
-->
@TheRealNihilist
I don't speak your language of race baiting and fascist baiting, so there is no way I could explain anything to you.
When you conflate nationalism with fascism, as in there are no types of nationalism that do not include fascism....
When you conflate anarchists with racists...as in there could never exist anarchists that don't believe in the junk science of DNA cultural exclusions.
Why even bother attempting to convince such a narrow mind limited with those specific wild generalizations and conflations?
-->
@dustryder
The United States is between Canada and Mexico, which are potentially more similar than the majority of first world countries in various respects, though I wouldn't close myself off to considerations in European data. I believe that North American data is sufficient for comparative analysis in application to policy topics within the United States, and may arguably be preferable to European data.
-->
@Greyparrot
I am speaking English. Do try and "explain" something if you can. I have failed to see you explain anything.I don't speak your language of race baiting and fascist baiting, so there is no way I could explain anything to you.
When you conflate nationalism with fascism, as in there are no types of nationalism that do not include fascism....
What are you even saying here? I stated nationalism is a type of fascism which is true.
When you conflate anarchists with racists...as in there could never exist anarchists that don't believe in the junk science of DNA cultural exclusions.
I didn't. I fixed that. I say anarchists are not racists but are still wrong.
Why even bother attempting to convince such a narrow mind with those specific wild generalizations and conflations?
Isn't the NPC supposed to answer questions instead of giving them? I am sure you must be malfunctioning. I guess DebateArt.com needs to fix you in order for DA to be higher on the search results than DDO in order to be the most popular platform. It is really important for you to be checked. I do care about DA beating DDO but that can only happen if you stop malfunctioning. Do go and bring more relevancy to DA.
-->
@TheRealNihilist
It's my own decision. And it's because Pingu is awesome :D
-->
@dustryder
Liked the show as a kid.
Don't really think I would like it if I watch it again but at least someone else finds happiness in it.
-->
@Snoopy
The United States is between Canada and Mexico, which are potentially more similar than the majority of first world countries in various respects, though I wouldn't close myself off to considerations in European data. I believe that North American data is sufficient for comparative analysis in application to policy topics within the United States, and may arguably be preferable to European data.
I think more data is always preferable.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
here is an analogy. if you have a sports car, you are more likely to speed than if you don't have a sports car. but, most cars that speed are not sports cars.
-->
@dustryder
The United States is between Canada and Mexico, which are potentially more similar than the majority of first world countries in various respects, though I wouldn't close myself off to considerations in European data. I believe that North American data is sufficient for comparative analysis in application to policy topics within the United States, and may arguably be preferable to European data.I think more data is always preferable.
Due to diminishing returns and increasing odds of corruption, that is not reliable advice
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Oh, I don't currently watch it if that's what you mean. That would be pretty odd. But the character itself is awesome and memorable
-->
@Snoopy
Such things can be accounted for when analyzing data. However you can't analyze data that you don't have or have refused to includeDue to diminishing returns and increasing odds of corruption, that is not reliable advice
-->
@dustryder
Snoopy: though I wouldn't close myself off to considerations in European data
The analysis of data does not necessitate nor does it deny its inclusion in application.
-->
@dustryder
can you make any sense out of why what you said about gun v non gun homicides and that graph, isn't clear to everyone?
-->
@Snoopy
No, but it does necessitate that you include it in the pool of data to be considered in the first place
-->
@dustryder
It can't always be said to be in the same pool...
-->
@n8nrgmi
I mean, in general I think everyone understands that America has a problem with gun murders and this isn't in doubt. What seems to be in doubt is the cause of these murders. However while the link between guns and gun deaths is both logical and well established, the claim that people are the cause of gun deaths, while superficially true is mostly poorly supported.
-->
@Snoopy
Which is when you evaluate it. This is not equivalent to analyzing it
-->
@dustryder
i'm not sure id agree that it's poorly supported. do you see any other valid way to interpret the graph, that says guns deaths are wildly out of whack while non gun deaths aren't.....to mean anything other than people are more likely to kill if they have a gun? i know with a lot of the statistics, there is the correlation versus causation argument so you dont know for sure that more guns leads to more deaths (maybe there are more deaths so that leads to more guns, or something). but i dont see another valid way to interpret the gun v non gun homicide graph.
-->
@dustryder
You need to know what you have, and what is valued now. Analysis as used below is not intended to be equivocal to the semantical addition to this thread above.Dusty: Which is when you evaluate it. This is not equivalent to analyzing it
Snoopy: The analysis of data does not necessitate nor does it deny its inclusion in application.
You made some sort of error prior to writing post #105, which is what the above is intended to point you towards
-->
@n8nrgmi
here is an analogy. if you have a sports car, you are more likely to speed than if you don't have a sports car. but, most cars that speed are not sports cars
If I want to speed I need a car. If I had a sports car I might go faster, but whether I go 110 mph or 120 mph it really makes no difference but driving a sports car is probably more fun, however if I was so inclined to do it, didn't have a sports car or access to one I could still do it just fine. Or perhaps a truck, motorcycle etc. Many tools are just as effective as accomplishing your goal, though they might not be as dramatic or flashy, never the less there's more than one way to skin a cat.
since people don't see to want to read links here you go courtesy of YYW on debate.org
While it may surprise many of you, I agree that no amount of gun control will reduce school shootings. Guns, after all, are not the cause of violence. They are the means by which violence of a particular kind is carried out. There was once a time where I supported gun control legislation, but living where I do now has convinced me of the futility of that venture.
We are not, for example, Australia. Nor are we Japan, or any other country where gun control has seen some success. We are more like Russia, in this respect. Our people and our culture are inextricably linked to firearms. Guns are a part of our culture, even if it would be ideal of some aspects of the culture could be divested from gun culture. There are too many guns in circulation in America, and it is too easy to illegally smuggle guns into the country for there ever to have any hope of real or meaningful gun control regulations to be able to achieve their intended effect. So, any mention of gun control misses the point.
The point at issue is why this particular kind of violence has become so commonplace. The easy explanations abound, of course. How we assess the situation in large part depends on the theory of human nature from which we began our consideration. Collectivists identify fault in the society. Individualists identify fault in the individual. Both, to some degree, have merit. What does not have merit, on the other hand, is the frivolous speculation that pollutes the discourse on this issue. Some blame video games, in the 90s. Social science, however, proved that that speculation was as meritless as it was counterproductive to even discuss. Others blamed rap music, or heavy metal, or whatever. That was equally vain and naive. Worse, many blame guns themselves without even bothering to consider what motivates an individual to visit such wanton violence on innocents.
I think the reason we have such difficulty rationally talking about mass killings of any kind, whether Las Vegas, Fort Hood, Columbine, Sandy Hook, or now this incident in Florida, is that it requires staring into the nexus between human evil and its interaction with the society at large. Recognizing both dimensions to this, as such, is what any real talk on these kinds of events has to focus on. But to take a step back, the point of any real talk on these events must be oriented towards figuring out a way to prevent this from happening again.
In the past I have advanced a theory that the commonalities behind each of these mass shooters suggests a pattern which can serve as a useful framework to understand who it is that is the most likely to perform a mass shooting. The factors are these: (1) male, (2) socially and sexually underperforming, (3) social outcasts (4) who believe that they have been unjustifiably aggrieved by some institution larger than themselves, (5) in such a way that their "pride" or "honor" has been insulted, (6) seek to exercise power against others, (7) so as to demonstrate to observers the extent of what horror they can visit upon the innocent, (8) in retaliation for those perceived grievances.
The set of people who fall within the scope of that framework is obviously over-inclusive, meaning that the individuals who fall within that group will doubtlessly not all perform acts of violence to hurt innocent people. Despite this, there is not a single mass-shooter who has failed to conform to that standard. There are always factors as well, to look for: The people who do these things usually have or experience some aggravating event prior to their committing a mass shooting; they usually demonstrate impulse control issues in one way or another; and they are usually all people who 'lay low' and who 'would not be expected' to do such horrible things. Even still, the best we can do here is identify who might be predisposed to committing such an act of mass violence.
Insofar as that's the case, though, what we can do is try to develop intervention mechanisms where people who are predisposed to violence by exhibiting the foregoing could be counseled, monitored, etc. from time to time. Perhaps state-funded therapy, offered on a voluntary basis, might help channel some of the rage into more productive outlets like self improvement rather than self and societal destruction. Perhaps not doing things like expelling students, or getting them "in the system" but creating a sort of "social rehabilitation" group that functioned like a midnight basketball team, or a YMCA, or some other kind of youth group.
The solutions I would like to see most are all "soft" solutions, rather than hard ones, though. They're the sort of thing that would be designed to prevent violence by preempting the reasons why people are violent in the first place. While it would be hard to measure their impact, even if we could not qualitatively identify all those episodes of wanton violence that were avoided, in the process real good could be brought about.
part 2 next
part 2
Now, on the whole as a country, and as a species, violence among people is going down, globally. (Stephen Pinker wrote a riveting book charting, with likely the best possible evidence that could be gleaned, the more or less liner historical decline of violence throughout space and time.) But these incidents remind us of just how bad things can be, and they reveal that the chain which connects us all is only as strong as our weakest link.The goal of any realistic effort to reduce violence of this or any other kind must be to focus on strengthening the links that connect us, rather than identifying and segregating those links that may -- for whatever reason -- have come to be weaker than others.
That is not to say that I discount the individual culpability of the individual who committed the incident in Florida. I do not. He is absolutely guilty, and absolutely deserving of the full force of our criminal justice system's capability to deliver punishment (other than the death penalty, but that's another issue). But the question remains as to how he got this way, in the first place? What made this kid so fvcked up that he was driven to execute such a godforsaken act of violence at all?
It probably began years before... maybe problems in his childhood, maybe abuse of one kind or another, maybe being bullied at school for any number of reasons and to any conceivable extent... who knows. But the point is that people don't just wake up one day and become mass killers. There are events and experiences in their lives that have to push them to that point, even if some people (e.g., with different brain structures, see generally the Psychopath Inside) may be more or less predisposed to antisocial acts of violence. These people are the weakest links in the chain. They aren't the only weak links, but strengthening the connections we share is the only realistic way to reduce violence of this or any other kind in the society.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
yes you could speed in a non sports car, but you are more likely to speed in a sports car. that's the analogy point that isn't sitting right with you according to the overall evidence. i could buy if you thought a person isn't more likely to kill with an assault rifle, but i don't know how you can claim they aren't more likely to choose an assault rifle over a hand gun if they do kill. at least, that's what they evidence indicates with all that math i did. if you are able and willing, i'd be open to seeing your math if you find some numbers that you find credible. i know the numbers for assault rifles in circulation and their use aren't well settled, but i used the best numbers i figured i could find.
-->
@n8nrgmi
I have a sports car and have NEVER received a speeding ticket, ever, but I have sped, but I've sped in all sorts of vehicles so perhaps it's not the tool but the person? millions 25-30 own what you think it an assault rifle, but yet don't kill people. Tell me how many of those who chose to use an assault rifle wouldn't have accomplished the same thing using a hand gun, shot gun, any other gun or guns since if you look at the stats I don't recall seeing any that didn't have multiple guns, including handguns. You do know some of these sickos have used both the assault rifle and handguns in the sprees, how do you explain that?
122 days later
i still see lots of verbiage, but nothing to explain the opening post. why are gun murders wildly out of whack, but not non gun murders, in the USA? if you can't find a reasonable alternative explanation other than we have too many guns, please state that you have no explanation.
we have only four percent of the world population, but half of the world's guns. there's a gun for everyone who's a citizen, on average. 340 million guns. that's got to account for something.
-->
@n8nrgmi
"we have too many guns" isn't an explanation. It doesn't really make any sense since guns that are made of wood and steel don't have any negative consequence on the environment. They just sit around and very slowly decay. "Gangsters are wielding firearms and obtaining them from wealthy suburbanites who collect them" is an explanation.
How does the ratio compare with Canada and Mexico?
-->
@Snoopy
you dont understand human nature if you dont think having guns around will make someone more likely to murder someone. simple fights turn deadly quick, when they otherwise wouldn't, amoung other things.
there too many things that correlate with gun ownership, like homicides and a lot more....