Why are people protesting so hard in attack of Kyle but won't support removing guns from citizens?

Author: RationalMadman
Gun control
RM
Left-wing
gun rights
Media

Posts

Total: 75
#61
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,563
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@Double_R
While we’re on simple answers to simple questions… A man decides to head into a downtown area that’s experiencing civil unrest armed with an AR15. By the end of the night two people are killed by that AR15. Do you find this result surprising?
Seems more like evasive answers on your part, but it’s ok with me if you don’t like my questions.

FYI, Rittenhouse was not the only visibly armed person that night. The others stayed in groups I believe. It appears that Rittenhouse simply allowed himself to end up mostly alone, thus making himself a more attractive target to someone violently unstable like Rosenbaum. A deceptively attractive target, as it turned out…


Topic's author
#62
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@cristo71
there's a reason you only replied to him and not me. 

He's giving you the standard narrative, I'm spitting cold hard facts.

Kyle took a gun that has ended his friend with a ruined life and reputation for one straw purchase (a punishable crime meant for mass straw purchasers), he posed as an EMT, claimed to be a fire fighter in intent and then ended up acting like a wannabe soldier or cop. It is entirely his doing where he ended up, however I must concede that where he ended up was undeniably self-defence albeit overkill on Rosenbaum.
#63
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,563
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
@RM

No, rather it’s because you have me blocked…

#64
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,283
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@cristo71
Seems more like evasive answers on your part, but it’s ok with me if you don’t like my questions.
I answered your question directly. It was the first sentence of my post which you conveniently missed..
Topic's author
#65
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@cristo71
My bad, not that me blocking you was my bad but me not clocking/realising it.

I'll unblock but please no replies to me sympathising with racism again, you can pretend it was different what you said that led me to block you but I remember exactly what it was and stand by the block.

I unblock because you seem to want an actual debate for now, rather than defending racist parents stopping their children getting taught the fact that all races should be treated equally.
#66
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,563
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@Double_R
You answered simply in the negative (ie “no”). Then you added this:

Age is part of the problem, but it’s not the only issue.
From where I sit, it looks like you’re being intentionally vague and unnecessarily terse. Ok, but I’m not going to drag more comprehensive responses out of you by playing “20 questions” as if you would be doing me some big favor. Just curious how others view things so differently from myself…

#67
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,283
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@cristo71
You’re not looking for comprehensive answers, you’re looking for gotchas. I talked about 17 year olds running around strapped with AR15’s, that’s clearly a reference to gun laws themselves yet all you asked was if it would have been ok if he were 18. There’s nothing about that which suggests you are looking for a real answer.

#68
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,563
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@Double_R
If age weren’t the primary factor, you could have left it out of your law complaint entirely, and your point would have been clearer and easier to discuss, I would think.

Instead of this:

“17 year olds shouldn’t be running around with AR-15s.”
“Ok. Only adults, then?“
“No, you ‘gotcha!’ poster! Nobody should have them!!”
“Why so angry, dude?”

This:

“Semiautomatic pistols and rifles should not be as easily accessible as they are.” <— leave out specifics that are besides the point when you want to discuss a bigger issue

Alas, if you insist on projecting bad faith motives onto me, we are done here. Good morning, and good luck…

#69
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,563
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@RationalMadman
No deal, I’m afraid. First off, I disagree with your comprehension that I “sympathize with racism”— unless you are one of those people who thinks all white people who disagree with CRT are racist (and that black people who disagree are the “black faces of white supremacy”) which is a nonstarter anyway. And if you are intransigent in that conclusion, perhaps I ought to be the one blocking you… but that’s not really my style…
Topic's author
#70
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@cristo71
Nope, the discourse that took place started with me literally stating that racist parents are not good influences on their children.

You told me I'm closeminded for making that statement, to which I asked what you mean, then you abused semantics to try and frame my statement as being very different to what it was.
#71
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,563
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@RationalMadman
Nope, the discourse that took place started with me literally stating that racist parents are not good influences on their children.
Actually, it started with a criticism of the anti-racism agenda being taught in schools. Then you said the above. I pointed out that it was a facile point; it neither adds insight nor provokes further thought; it oversimplifies complex issues (that’s what “facile” means) such as racism, anti racism/CRT, good/bad parenting, etc.

You might as well have made a tautological claim such as “Bad parents are a bad influence on their children.” I think, or at least thought, you could do better than that…

Topic's author
#72
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@cristo71
You just directly equated being a racist parent to being a bad parent, this is actually further than I'd go because I merely said bad influence not overall bad parent.

I reckon some racist parents may, in terms of caring for their own, not actually be that bad. However, the influence their racist and thus inherently spiteful, divisive outlook and temperament will give to those they raise, regarding other races, is certainly a bad/negative influence.

Do you remember what I said that in reply to?

#73
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,563
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@RationalMadman
You just directly equated being a racist parent to being a bad parent, this is actually further than I'd go because I merely said bad influence not overall bad parent.
I wasn’t equating; I was drawing a parallel to exemplify a claim that doesn’t add new information to a discussion.

I reckon some racist parents may, in terms of caring for their own, not actually be that bad. However, the influence their racist and thus inherently spiteful, divisive outlook and temperament will give to those they raise, regarding other races, is certainly a bad/negative influence.
Now, THAT’S more like it, and I agree 100%. The problem for you is that you have said something about the subject which is agreeable to someone you believe “sympathizes with racism,” which is exactly why I said what I said in post 69 (why did it have to be THAT number?)

Do you remember what I said that in reply to?
Nope. It’s the first I’ve heard you say it.

#74
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,048
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@cristo71
There is only one objective criteria for a racist parent, one that teaches their child to see skin color as important.

Watch as Candace Owens educates this Racist Fox "news" hack.
#75
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,283
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@cristo71
If age weren’t the primary factor, you could have left it out of your law complaint entirely, and your point would have been clearer and easier to discuss,
Or, instead of only responding to one part of my post you could have responded to the entire thing. You talked about the 17 year olds part but ignored the “roaming through the streets with AR15’s” part. Both are important because they both point to the same thing… our gun laws are absurd. The fact that he was 17 was not the point, it added to the point, but by itself sounds silly which is why when you pull it out and ignore the rest it comes off as a bad faith attempt to score forum points. Especially when you then turn around and criticize me for evading your questions while you are actively evading mine.

So to recap my actual issue from legal standpoint (my main issue as I’ve made clear on this site is more ethical than legal), is the fact that our gun laws are absurd. Specifically here when considering self defense, it has no regard for the context that created the situation in the first place. It’s along the same lines as the George Zimmerman defense.