4 ms·

"The business of murdering people" -- there, better? Can we now address the elephant in the room?

DamnYuppie 14y ago
That would be war, genocide, and homicide. The elephant in the room is the feminization of our nation where everyone believes they need to be protected.
- PavlovsCat 14y ago
  There is a difference between being protected from all harm, ever, and simply not actively condonding, or even paying for being physically hurt and/or killed, or for others to enjoy that privilege. Unless we're in a "no, but the real issue is" dick waving contest, in which case I would like to bring up the heat death of the universe, the ultimate futility of all materalistic undertakings, and stoicism if not love being the only answer to that. Your turn :)
  - DamnYuppie 14y ago
    Your first sentence honestly makes no sense to me. Here is why I say that. We all have the ability to drive, and are in fact licensed to do so by the government, yet far more people die by automobile then by firearms. More people die by falling down stairs then by firearms. More people participate in hunting in this country then any other activity, and it has the lowest number of injuries. That being said it appears to me that you are seeking to deny people the ability to bare arms for the illusion of safety when there are many other things out there that are far more dangerous.
camus 14y ago
which is ?
- PavlovsCat 14y ago
  Oh, I don't know, maybe something along the lines of this: The business of buying weapons that takes place in the Pentagon is a corrupt business - ethically and morally corrupt from top to bottom. The process is dominated by advocacy, with few, if any, checks and balances. Most people in power like this system of doing business and do not want it changed. -- Colonel James G. Burton And yes, it's about buying weapons, not selling them (though of course, someone has to sell them to the Pentagon when they're buying). But do you really think there's not plenty of profitable looking the other way going on with the selling, too? Was Bill Hicks too simplicistic when he talked about arming the world, then starting wars because the world's so dangerous... ? The elephant in the room, to me, is the squeamishness about random, senseless murder on a small scale, and the numbness to planned, profitable murder on a big scale.

That would be war, genocide, and homicide. The elephant in the room is the feminization of our nation where everyone believes they need to be protected.

PavlovsCat 14y ago
There is a difference between being protected from all harm, ever, and simply not actively condonding, or even paying for being physically hurt and/or killed, or for others to enjoy that privilege. Unless we're in a "no, but the real issue is" dick waving contest, in which case I would like to bring up the heat death of the universe, the ultimate futility of all materalistic undertakings, and stoicism if not love being the only answer to that. Your turn :)
- DamnYuppie 14y ago
  Your first sentence honestly makes no sense to me. Here is why I say that. We all have the ability to drive, and are in fact licensed to do so by the government, yet far more people die by automobile then by firearms. More people die by falling down stairs then by firearms. More people participate in hunting in this country then any other activity, and it has the lowest number of injuries. That being said it appears to me that you are seeking to deny people the ability to bare arms for the illusion of safety when there are many other things out there that are far more dangerous.

camus 14y ago

which is ?

PavlovsCat 14y ago
Oh, I don't know, maybe something along the lines of this: The business of buying weapons that takes place in the Pentagon is a corrupt business - ethically and morally corrupt from top to bottom. The process is dominated by advocacy, with few, if any, checks and balances. Most people in power like this system of doing business and do not want it changed. -- Colonel James G. Burton And yes, it's about buying weapons, not selling them (though of course, someone has to sell them to the Pentagon when they're buying). But do you really think there's not plenty of profitable looking the other way going on with the selling, too? Was Bill Hicks too simplicistic when he talked about arming the world, then starting wars because the world's so dangerous... ? The elephant in the room, to me, is the squeamishness about random, senseless murder on a small scale, and the numbness to planned, profitable murder on a big scale.