The last word is yours, of course, darling.
On 3 Feb., 15:57, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> Pot, meet Kettle.
>
> Gabbydott says:
>
> So much for the refined art of debating on the fair grounds of
> argumentation.
>
> " Tell Saint Pat who claims "It's obvious that we don't NEED guns or
> cars". Only his earthly form is so weak it prefers carrying a gun."
> On 3 Feb., 15:38, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:> Of
> course. We all prefer to stay alive as long as possible. If you don't,
> > you always have the ability to exercise your option to leave early.
>
> - Hide quoted text -
>
> > On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 9:35 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 9:53 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > So much for the refined art of debating on the fair grounds of
> > argumentation.
>
> > On 3 Feb., 15:38, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Of course. We all prefer to stay alive as long as possible. If you don't,
> > > you always have the ability to exercise your option to leave early.
>
> > > On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 9:35 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Tell Saint Pat who claims "It's obvious that we don't NEED guns or
> > > > cars". Only his earthly form is so weak it prefers carrying a gun.
>
> > > > On 3 Feb., 15:02, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > What's "Alien" about this behaviour, Gabby? Human have practiced it
> > since
> > > > > long before we were Sapiens. Every pre-modern species of human-kind
> > has
> > > > > developed and carried weaponry, to the best of their technological
> > > > ability.
> > > > > "Alien" is the supposition we would NOT need it.
>
> > > > > On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 9:00 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Puh, Pat. You cannot deny your American upbringing. Me, myself and
> > I -
> > > > > > full circle. Fear is for others.
>
> > > > > > There are non-criminal people living today who really need guns.
> > And
> > > > > > there are non-criminal people living on this beautiful planet who
> > > > > > really need cars. Let's start thinking what kinds of people these
> > > > > > could be. You might find it helpful to begin with finding potential
> > > > > > reasons for such alien behaviour.
>
> > > > > > On 3 Feb., 14:11, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > On 2 Feb, 17:24, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Chris,
>
> > > > > > > > I don't think it's about misperception. A car, a pool, a
> > knife...
> > > > each
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > these serve essential, non-violent, functions. A gun is
> > designed to
> > > > > > kill; it
> > > > > > > > has no other purpose. If people want to shoot targets, use a
> > gun
> > > > that
> > > > > > shoots
> > > > > > > > an infrared beam at an electronic target, or play a video game.
> > In
> > > > > > terms of
> > > > > > > > the theory, eliminating guns as a risk makes a lot of sense.
>
> > > > > > > > Eliminating cars has inherent functional problems for our
> > society.
>
> > > > > > > Much the same ones as eliminating guns. The biggest one being
> > that
> > > > > > > those who have them and want them simply WON'T be handing them
> > over
> > > > to
> > > > > > > anyone. This leaves ALL the guns in criminal hands. Personally,
> > I'd
> > > > > > > rather have one myself, so the criminal doesn't ALWAYS have one
> > up on
> > > > > > > me. It's obvious that we don't NEED guns or cars, as humans
> > lived
> > > > > > > many millenia prior to their invention, but, as you say,
> > eliminating
> > > > > > > things that people want is always tricky.
>
> > > > > > > > Ian
>
> > > > > > > > 2009/2/2 Chris Jenkins <[email protected]>
>
> > > > > > > > > In 'Freakonomics', Steven Levitt explored the remarkable
> > > > phenomenon
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > parental misperception of risk. He noted that a child was 11
> > > > times
> > > > > > more
> > > > > > > > > likely to die by swimming accident at a friend's house with a
> > > > pool,
> > > > > > than by
> > > > > > > > > shooting accident at a friend's house with a gun, and yet
> > parents
> > > > as
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > generality never restricted play due to the presence of a
> > pool,
> > > > but
> > > > > > would
> > > > > > > > > restrict play due to the presence of a gun.
> > > > > > > > > Statistically, I am far more likely to kill you with my:
>
> > > > > > > > > car
> > > > > > > > > knife
> > > > > > > > > baseball bat or other blunt trauma intrument
> > > > > > > > > alcohol
>
> > > > > > > > > than with my gun, yet your perception of personal risk is so
> > > > skewed
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > you literally feel your freedom is impinged upon merely by my
> > > > > > possession of
> > > > > > > > > this tool. That's a psychological phenomenon that is really
> > > > > > irrelevant to
> > > > > > > > > the greater conversation, and which probably deserves a
> > thread
> > > > unto
> > > > > > its
> > > > > > > > > own.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Ian Pollard <
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > >wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> Your posession of a firearm makes me less safe. Not being
> > > > murdered
> > > > > > or hurt
> > > > > > > > >> is a pretty fundamental freedom; can we agree on that much?
> > Now,
> > > > am
> > > > > > I more
> > > > > > > > >> likely to be a victim of gun crime in a country with lots of
> > > > guns or
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > >> country with very few?
>
> > > > > > > > >> (First person to mention Switzerland gets bitch-slapped.)
>
> > > > > > > > >> Ian- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
