|
about 30 ppl killed in YET ANOTHER shooting (pg. 31)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Lagrangian |
| "Do we really believe government can provide total security? Do we want to involuntarily commit every disaffected, disturbed, or alienated person who fantasizes about violence? Or can we accept that liberty is more important than the illusion of state-provided security? Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. We shouldn’t settle for substituting one type of violence for another. Government role is to protect liberty, not to pursue unobtainable safety." |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lagrangian
"Do we really believe government can provide total security? Do we want to involuntarily commit every disaffected, disturbed, or alienated person who fantasizes about violence? Or can we accept that liberty is more important than the illusion of state-provided security? Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. We shouldn’t settle for substituting one type of violence for another. Government role is to protect liberty, not to pursue unobtainable safety." |
False choice. |
|
|
| Lagrangian |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
YEAH, SCREW THE POLICE! IF I DIDN'T WANT CRIMINALS, I'D FIGHT THEM MYSELF! :mad: |
More often than not, in America, a faction of law enforcement agents are corrupt to the hilt.
As an Anarcho-Capitalist with great interest in Social Engineering, I believe the government is more often than not the oppressor of freedom. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lagrangian
More often than not, in America, a faction of law enforcement agents are corrupt to the hilt.
As an Anarcho-Capitalist with great interest in Social Engineering, I believe the government is more often than not the oppressor of freedom. |
|
|
|
| Evolve140 |
| blessings be upon humanity |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lagrangian
More often than not, in America, a faction of law enforcement agents are corrupt to the hilt.
As an Anarcho-Capitalist with great interest in Social Engineering, I believe the government is more often than not the oppressor of freedom. |
Free Market Economics is death. |
|
|
| Lagrangian |
| quote: | Originally posted by EddieZilker
Free Market Economics is death. |
lol you've never made business with south america have you? no wonder you guys are broke. |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lagrangian
lol you've never made business with south america have you? no wonder you guys are broke. |
I've read plenty about Free Market Economics in South America.
None of it's very pretty. |
|
|
| theCheif |
| quote: | Originally posted by EddieZilker
If I wake up to three armed burglars (or some other lop-sided hypothetical), I'd rather be the one to out-gun than the one being out-gunned. |
You seem to believe that clip size is the relevant consideration in this scenario, which would be rather silly. Whether you have 30, 20, 10, or 3 bullets is far less relevant than your ability to get to and properly utilize those bullets. In terms of your personal safety, you're probably already screwed no matter what you do when you've been awoken by three armed burglars, but even if you hypothetically have a chance to defend yourself, your own skill is far more important than having a 30-round magazine.
| quote: | | Anyone who thinks that banning assault weapons is going to achieve the desired results, currently, however is kidding themselves. |
This is quite an assumption, isn't it? If a desired result is having fewer assault weapons on the streets, it's pretty clear that banning them would bring us closer to that goal. It's not at all clear to me why you've chosen this straw position to argue against, however.
| quote: | | While it is an ideal that should be worked toward - a world in which the ownership of an AR15 isn't contemplated on any sort of serious level - that is not going to be a situation that occurs overnight. |
You acknowledge that such a goal is feasible, even if not overnight, which suggests you accept that attempts to realize that goal would have an effect. Not that any actual person's goal is necessarily the complete removal of AR15s, mind you--just that if it were, it's not like saying "we can never get rid of all of them" could possibly be a justification for not getting rid of some of them.
| quote: | | One of my points, not relating to the one I was making with this remark, is that their position levels an unrealistic expectation... |
Whose position? You seem to be arguing with imaginary opponents.
| quote: | | Disarmament isn't something that's going to be accomplished without making other changes to our society that alleviates the motivations for obtaining firearms; which was the point I was trying to make with the text you quoted. |
I agree with you here, of course, but social change requires an active effort. It would be staggeringly pointless to adopt a position of "we shouldn't regulate something until our desired regulations are unnecessary." The legal system is both the result of and a contributor to the national ethos.
Ultimately, nothing is safer than living in a stable society. This narrative of "bigger guns for home defense" is built on a macho fantasy, and I don't see how it can bring us any closer to that goal. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by theCheif
You seem to believe that clip |
Stopped right there. |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by theCheif
I agree with you here, of course, but social change requires an active effort. It would be staggeringly pointless to adopt a position of "we shouldn't regulate something until our desired regulations are unnecessary." The legal system is both the result of and a contributor to the national ethos.
Ultimately, nothing is safer than living in a stable society. This narrative of "bigger guns for home defense" is built on a macho fantasy, and I don't see how it can bring us any closer to that goal. |
I'm not saying not to regulate AR15's (or any firearm for that matter). I went to great effort to discredit the NRA and even argue that I wanted better regulation for firearms, earlier. You seem to have read that I want the ability to purchase weapons while completely discounting that, overall, I tend to favor more government control of them.
What seems elusive is the understanding, from far left of center anti-gun advocates, that as far as guns in America are concerned, the tooth-paste isn't just out of the tube. It is all but rinsed from the s-curve in the plumbing. Telling people that they can't purchase assault weapons when there is an abundance of them in circulation seems foolhardy. |
|
|
|
|
