The Political Discussion Thread

[Ukko]

The stopping point comes when people no longer attempt to take things from other people.

This will only happen in this fantasy world you mention below, so...

Yes, if you're discussing a fantasy world, it can be one of your choices. However, I'm referring to the real world.

You mean this real world you're talking about where people will stop stealing or committing violent crime because everyone has guns?

Yes, this tool was designed to kill things. But among it's uses is as a tool for defense against aggression. Since we can't take them away from those who would take other people's property, I'd say that keeping them available as a means of defense against such people is a good thing. Or would you rather that folks just allow the people who want to steal their property to do so?

Killing is pretty much its only use, whatever the excuse used to justify it. Stealing isn't a crime punishable by death, nor should it be. Wanting to kill people for stealing is incredibly disturbing. It makes the hand chopping they do in the middle east seem moderate and tame.

Getting shot will generally stop someone who is attempting to deprive someone else of their property in their tracks. It will also stop most forms of physical aggression as well. In this case, the tool is being used in a positive manner, protecting someone from aggression of another.

But it doesn't stop any of those things though. You only have to look at the world around you to see that. Folk tend to become more reckless and dangerous when they have nothing to lose. You think you're safe because you have a gun to defend against a crook with one and thats that. But the they have one so i need one mentality doesnt breed "oh crap, he has a gun, i'll leave him alone." Its more "Oh crap he has a gun! I'll get a bigger gun and kill him before he has a chance to react." Places just turn into war zones. And stealing or being aggressive, again not things that should cost somebody their life.

You seem to focus on the inappropriate use of firearms as justification for their removal from existence.

Try to consider the positive uses that this tool has. Defending people from aggression is a worthwhile goal. If the people who seek to take property from other people by force have to factor in a very real possibility of their own immediate death at the hands of their intended victim, I'm thinking there might be a whole lot less aggression in this country.

Fair enough i'll buy into your whole deal for a minute. You're being very vague at the moment so, as someone who deals with one kind of aggression or another at work on a daily basis, could you please tell me exactly how aggressive is aggressive enough to warrant execution. How do you prevent people from intentionally pissing off someone they dont like in order to get an aggressive reaction out of them so that they can kill them? How do you prevent a person who is being pissed off from killing their annoyer (ok i know thats not a word lol) and claiming it was to prevent just such a trap?
Do you intervene in fights by shooting the one whose fault you think it is? Or if two people are being aggressive do we stop street fight all together and have a good clean old fashioned duel?

I'd also like to know what a person has to steal to warrant execution. Does the thief have take something from your person directly or are you allowed to track them down shoot them? Is it the value of the thing they steal or the manner in which they steal it?

It hasnt stopped aggression in your country or in others though.

BTW, if some of that sounded snarky, it wasnt meant to be!

[Falcon Horus]

the video says otherwise (shows an almost 90° turn)

Yep, i have to agree with Reaver, it makes a sharp turn

Ah, I should have paid better attention. My apologies.

[SoulReaver]

so back to square1 how the f does it do that

[Annoyed]

This will only happen in this fantasy world you mention below, so...

You mean this real world you're talking about where people will stop stealing or committing violent crime because everyone has guns?

I'm well aware that even a fully armed society won't completely stop crime. But it would greatly decrease it.

First, if a criminal is killed by their intended victim, that particular criminal will certainly not be committing any more crimes in the future. And if it becomes commonplace for muggers, rapists, burglars and other low lifes to be shot by their intended victims, certainly others will consider a different career path. No, it won't eliminate the problem altogether, but any reduction will be welcome too.

Killing is pretty much its only use, whatever the excuse used to justify it. Stealing isn't a crime punishable by death, nor should it be. Wanting to kill people for stealing is incredibly disturbing. It makes the hand chopping they do in the middle east seem moderate and tame.
===
But it doesn't stop any of those things though. You only have to look at the world around you to see that. Folk tend to become more reckless and dangerous when they have nothing to lose. You think you're safe because you have a gun to defend against a crook with one and thats that. But the they have one so i need one mentality doesnt breed "oh crap, he has a gun, i'll leave him alone." Its more "Oh crap he has a gun! I'll get a bigger gun and kill him before he has a chance to react." Places just turn into war zones. And stealing or being aggressive, again not things that should cost somebody their life.

You seem to have a great deal more sympathy for the criminal than you do the victim. I have zero sympathy for the criminal. Whatever his intended victim can do to him is what he has earned by his actions.

Fair enough i'll buy into your whole deal for a minute. You're being very vague at the moment so, as someone who deals with one kind of aggression or another at work on a daily basis, could you please tell me exactly how aggressive is aggressive enough to warrant execution. How do you prevent people from intentionally pissing off someone they dont like in order to get an aggressive reaction out of them so that they can kill them? How do you prevent a person who is being pissed off from killing their annoyer (ok i know thats not a word lol) and claiming it was to prevent just such a trap?
Do you intervene in fights by shooting the one whose fault you think it is? Or if two people are being aggressive do we stop street fight all together and have a good clean old fashioned duel?

The argument about provoking someone so that he shows an aggressive response is a non-starter; ideally, my right to swing my arm ends at the start of your nose. We can sit here or stand on the streetcorner all day long, calling each other every name in the book. That does not justify physical aggression from either one of us towards the other. We're adults, we should be able to handle verbal crap without any difficulty. Ignore it, remove yourself from the situation, whatever is needed.

I'd also like to know what a person has to steal to warrant execution. Does the thief have take something from your person directly or are you allowed to track them down shoot them? Is it the value of the thing they steal or the manner in which they steal it?

Again, sympathy for the criminal, of which I have none. If a thug is threatening me with harm or is breaking into my home, he deserves whatever he gets. He earned his reward. Tracking them down after the fact, however, should remain the task of the police.

[pookey]

so back to square1 how the f does it do that

It's a lie, they made it up to justify the money they spent ?

[pookey]

Ah, I should have paid better attention. My apologies.

We all make those mistakes dear *feeds the lil thing on her shoulder*

[Falcon Horus]

You assume everyone is willing to take a life.

I have no experience in such matters, except when it comes to animal life (and even that was a task I rarely managed to accomplish without apologizing to the animal lying in wait of its imminent death)*, but I'm fairly sure not everyone is so eager to pay the price for such actions.

* sick and injured beyond help Koi fish & goldfish

[SoulReaver]

You assume everyone is willing to take a life.

I have no experience in such matters, except when it comes to animal life (and even that was a task I rarely managed to accomplish without apologizing to the animal lying in wait of its imminent death)*, but I'm fairly sure not everyone is so eager to pay the price for such actions.

* sick and injured beyond help Koi fish & goldfish

I hope the fish accepted your apologies

[SoulReaver]

It's a lie, they made it up to justify the money they spent ?

most plausible explanation so far

[Falcon Horus]

I hope the fish accepted your apologies

If not, I'll have to pay for my crimes some day.

[jelgate]

If not, I'll have to pay for my crimes some day.

FH has vegan tendencies. This is the one thing I can not tolerate.

[Annoyed]

You assume everyone is willing to take a life.

I have no experience in such matters, except when it comes to animal life (and even that was a task I rarely managed to accomplish without apologizing to the animal lying in wait of its imminent death)*, but I'm fairly sure not everyone is so eager to pay the price for such actions.

* sick and injured beyond help Koi fish & goldfish

Don't get me wrong. I hope I am never put into that situation. But if I am, I should have the right to use anything at my disposal to defend myself.

[mad_gater]

I'm well aware that even a fully armed society won't completely stop crime. But it would greatly decrease it.

First, if a criminal is killed by their intended victim, that particular criminal will certainly not be committing any more crimes in the future. And if it becomes commonplace for muggers, rapists, burglars and other low lifes to be shot by their intended victims, certainly others will consider a different career path. No, it won't eliminate the problem altogether, but any reduction will be welcome too.



You seem to have a great deal more sympathy for the criminal than you do the victim. I have zero sympathy for the criminal. Whatever his intended victim can do to him is what he has earned by his actions.



The argument about provoking someone so that he shows an aggressive response is a non-starter; ideally, my right to swing my arm ends at the start of your nose. We can sit here or stand on the streetcorner all day long, calling each other every name in the book. That does not justify physical aggression from either one of us towards the other. We're adults, we should be able to handle verbal crap without any difficulty. Ignore it, remove yourself from the situation, whatever is needed.



Again, sympathy for the criminal, of which I have none. If a thug is threatening me with harm or is breaking into my home, he deserves whatever he gets. He earned his reward. Tracking them down after the fact, however, should remain the task of the police.

yup....we have both the legal and moral right to use force in our own defense and in defense of others

and you can bet your bottom dollar that should I ever have any kids I'll make darn sure they learn the value of standing up for themselves, forcefully if necessary

According to Ukko's logic the individual has no right to defend himself against gratuitous aggression. The only problem with that logic is that if the individual has no moral right to defend himself than in order to be intellectually honest that logic would also have to hold for LEO's and nations as LEO's are charged with the defense of the local community (or state in the case of state troopers) and soldiers are charged with the defense of nations. Both the LEO's and soldier's right to defend and protect is derived from the individual's right to defend himself and others. So if the individual has no right to defend himself then logically speaking nations and communities aren't entitled to be defended either.

[SoulReaver]

FH has vegan tendencies. This is the one thing I can not tolerate.

I also have vegan tendencies

Spoiler:

most animals I eat, are vegan

[Falcon Horus]

FH has vegan tendencies. This is the one thing I can not tolerate.

Neither can I - I need meat. Mmmm... lamb.... Irish Lambstew

Don't get me wrong. I hope I am never put into that situation. But if I am, I should have the right to use anything at my disposal to defend myself.

To defend thyself means the offender is facing you - not with his/her back to you (or you know, running for the hills).

In which case, you may use everything at your disposal (or so our self-defense teacher once told us).

I also have vegan tendencies

Spoiler:

most animals I eat, are vegan