4 ms·

Huh? That's such a pessimistic view of the world. I would say the opposite is true, statistically. There are far fewer psychopaths out to kill people than there

Huh? That's such a pessimistic view of the world. I would say the opposite is true, statistically. There are far fewer psychopaths out to kill people than there are people who are not willing to do so. Thus in absence of any other facts about said someone, I would be willing to trust that someone, than to distrust that individual. It's a shame that distrust is your default M.O.

hga 13y ago
Bingo; I carry concealed almost every time I walk out the door, yet I find it unnecessary to employ the Iraq combat theater advice of US Marine general James Mattis, "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet."
tensor 13y ago
By your logic, why can't everyone own a mini-nuke? Or let's make it more realistic, a tank? How about Grenades? Fully automatic weapons? I mean, statistically speaking you should trust people right? Now here is where you draw some arbitrary line where on one side is liberty or some other overloaded emotionally charged word and on the other are things that don't qualify as liberty. My line is different than yours. It does not mean that I am "against freedom" anymore than you are a horrible fascist denying my inherent rights as a human to own a tank.
- hga 13y ago
  Ummm, at least in the US people do still own tanks and fully automatic weapons; don't know about grenades (doubtful, however much our betters assure us Mexican criminals buy them at US gun shows), but they and "mini-nukes" are sort of the same sort of thing. Don't know how many civilian tanks out there really have operable canon, but there is a mechanism whereby a civilian can own a "destructive device", it and each round of ammo for it subject to a $200 tax. I've heard this coming into play for people who take boats in dangerous waters, getting RPGs with the appropriate licenses. Machine gun ownership is widespread; the number in public circulation got capped in 1986, but there are a quarter million at last count. Again, you need the license/$200 tax (was ~$3,500 in 2013 dollars when the law was passed in 1934), but the mechanism exists with many using it.
  - tensor 13y ago
    You are evading the point by focusing on arbitrary details. There is a limit to the destructive power of weapons that a citizen can own in the US. It may vary by state and weapon type, but there are definitely limits. The same is true of free speech. You do actually have limits, though choose not to recognize them. For example, you cannot make various types of death threats. You can be sued for libel. You cannot speak copyrighted works. It may be ok to say that atheists or gay people should die, but try saying that about some of your authority figures and see what happens. So many people have these very strong notions of black and white when it comes to these sorts of political issues. In reality, none of these issues are black and white.
    - hga 13y ago
      "You are evading the point...." Errr, I'm not upstream of you on this sub-debate, I just wanted to point out you had some of your facts wrong. And as it turns out, in a way that supports your point. We do draw lines, and "undirected" weapons from grenades to "mini-nukes" is one of them. Although I'd note that most gun control is prior restraint, something that is considered to be illegitimate with speech in the US.

hga 13y ago

Bingo; I carry concealed almost every time I walk out the door, yet I find it unnecessary to employ the Iraq combat theater advice of US Marine general James Mattis, "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet."

tensor 13y ago

By your logic, why can't everyone own a mini-nuke? Or let's make it more realistic, a tank? How about Grenades? Fully automatic weapons? I mean, statistically speaking you should trust people right? Now here is where you draw some arbitrary line where on one side is liberty or some other overloaded emotionally charged word and on the other are things that don't qualify as liberty. My line is different than yours. It does not mean that I am "against freedom" anymore than you are a horrible fascist denying my inherent rights as a human to own a tank.

hga 13y ago
Ummm, at least in the US people do still own tanks and fully automatic weapons; don't know about grenades (doubtful, however much our betters assure us Mexican criminals buy them at US gun shows), but they and "mini-nukes" are sort of the same sort of thing. Don't know how many civilian tanks out there really have operable canon, but there is a mechanism whereby a civilian can own a "destructive device", it and each round of ammo for it subject to a $200 tax. I've heard this coming into play for people who take boats in dangerous waters, getting RPGs with the appropriate licenses. Machine gun ownership is widespread; the number in public circulation got capped in 1986, but there are a quarter million at last count. Again, you need the license/$200 tax (was ~$3,500 in 2013 dollars when the law was passed in 1934), but the mechanism exists with many using it.
- tensor 13y ago
  You are evading the point by focusing on arbitrary details. There is a limit to the destructive power of weapons that a citizen can own in the US. It may vary by state and weapon type, but there are definitely limits. The same is true of free speech. You do actually have limits, though choose not to recognize them. For example, you cannot make various types of death threats. You can be sued for libel. You cannot speak copyrighted works. It may be ok to say that atheists or gay people should die, but try saying that about some of your authority figures and see what happens. So many people have these very strong notions of black and white when it comes to these sorts of political issues. In reality, none of these issues are black and white.
  - hga 13y ago
    "You are evading the point...." Errr, I'm not upstream of you on this sub-debate, I just wanted to point out you had some of your facts wrong. And as it turns out, in a way that supports your point. We do draw lines, and "undirected" weapons from grenades to "mini-nukes" is one of them. Although I'd note that most gun control is prior restraint, something that is considered to be illegitimate with speech in the US.