open All Channels
seplocked Out of Pod Experience
blankseplocked I'm glad I don't work in an office
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic

Citivolus
Posted - 2010.08.02 00:59:00 - [31]
 

Edited by: Citivolus on 02/08/2010 01:00:26
I think using a fire arm on this guy would not of been out of the question. He had an axe... one swing and it could of hit an artery = dead before someone could save the victim. Also, you dont know why he snapped, i mean worst case scenario is he is a guy that thinks he has nothing left to lose. They are the scariest.

I am glad that the guy wasnt shot or anything, but i do like that i can hold a permitted fire arm in the U.S. Maybe just because i live in a high gun crime city. I know how to use it and went through the right ways to get it. If they took it away, well i wouldnt have it ofcourse, but you think that the "bad guys" wouldnt? They get theirs illegally through gun running anyway.

My .02 isk.

So Sensational
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.08.02 01:04:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Pan Crastus
I find the reaction of the coworkers more amazing, in societies where people can relate to each other in a more personal way, some of the ~10 adults standing around would have tried to calm him down and possibly restrain him... But the zombies in that office were just acting like scared little children.



^^ This. One guy actually makes the effort to control the situation and everyone else just gawks, even when the one guy could use help in pinning the berserker down.

If you can't take the guy down, then at least help/encourage people to evacuate.


Maybe these people just don't give a **** unless they become the target? I'd probably go in there but only because it would give me the opportunity to knock someone out without going to jail or being sued.

Also, IN SOVIET RUSSIA, YOU FIRE OFFICE.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2010.08.02 01:13:00 - [33]
 

Edited by: stoicfaux on 02/08/2010 01:13:20
Originally by: Citivolus
Edited by: Citivolus on 02/08/2010 01:00:26
I think using a fire arm on this guy would not of been out of the question. He had an axe... one swing and it could of hit an artery = dead before someone could save the victim. Also, you dont know why he snapped, i mean worst case scenario is he is a guy that thinks he has nothing left to lose. They are the scariest.



The problem with pulling a firearm is that just seeing the gun (you're being confrontational) might be enough to anger him further. End result is that the guy gets shot not because people are in danger, he's shot because seeing the gun angered him further. Not a good reason to shoot someone, IMO.

If he's just trashing office furniture then just let him wear himself out. However, if he's throwing monitors at people and threatening bodily harm with a coat rack (it wasn't an axe) then you're in a gray area.


Citivolus
Posted - 2010.08.02 01:20:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
Edited by: stoicfaux on 02/08/2010 01:13:20
Originally by: Citivolus
Edited by: Citivolus on 02/08/2010 01:00:26
I think using a fire arm on this guy would not of been out of the question. He had an axe... one swing and it could of hit an artery = dead before someone could save the victim. Also, you dont know why he snapped, i mean worst case scenario is he is a guy that thinks he has nothing left to lose. They are the scariest.



The problem with pulling a firearm is that just seeing the gun (you're being confrontational) might be enough to anger him further. End result is that the guy gets shot not because people are in danger, he's shot because seeing the gun angered him further. Not a good reason to shoot someone, IMO.

If he's just trashing office furniture then just let him wear himself out. However, if he's throwing monitors at people and threatening bodily with a coat rack (it wasn't an axe) then you're in a gray area.




oh, it was a coat rack, i see. Well, i just saw the video once and saw someone say it was an axe. In the infamous coat rack situation... you would let him tire himself out and play the victim to a tragic emotional experience// and get the rest of the day off. Cool

yeah, seems i didnt see the situation. Just sniffed e-argument out about something i have an opinion on. Smile

So Sensational
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.08.02 01:21:00 - [35]
 

Edited by: So Sensational on 02/08/2010 01:29:38

Originally by: Citivolus
Edited by: Citivolus on 02/08/2010 01:00:26
I think using a fire arm on this guy would not of been out of the question. He had an axe... one swing and it could of hit an artery = dead before someone could save the victim. Also, you dont know why he snapped, i mean worst case scenario is he is a guy that thinks he has nothing left to lose. They are the scariest.

I am glad that the guy wasnt shot or anything, but i do like that i can hold a permitted fire arm in the U.S. Maybe just because i live in a high gun crime city. I know how to use it and went through the right ways to get it. If they took it away, well i wouldnt have it ofcourse, but you think that the "bad guys" wouldnt? They get theirs illegally through gun running anyway.

My .02 isk.

Hello, let me link something for you that might make you question how easy access to firearms might possibly make a society more prone to violence. Keep in mind that no other country anywhere near the top of this list is, in any form or way, close to being the most prosperous nation on the planet. Nor have they ever been (Russia wasn't Russia when they were an Empire, or the Soviet **** hole leftovers of that empire), for those of you who are China is de FUTUR3 believers.

You'd have to scroll down to spot 60 to find a legitimate western civilization and that's some island that the brits seem to own, just north of Normandy. I had no idea that it even existed tbh.

I'm not saying that guns are solely responsible, I'm sure your culture is ****ed up in 28 different ways I can't even imagine. But I'm also quite confident that it's a part of the problem. Here in my communist love palace of Sweden you don't even consider the ownership of a gun unless you're already a criminal and you want to move onto the big leagues.

Edit: There's also Greenland but who the **** wouldn't be mad if they lived in Greenland? I'm surprised they even have prisons, just subdue the criminal, lock him outside without clothes and then bring him in and heat him up when his sentence is over.

Citivolus
Posted - 2010.08.02 02:02:00 - [36]
 

Edited by: Citivolus on 02/08/2010 02:04:20
Edited by: Citivolus on 02/08/2010 02:03:10
Originally by: So Sensational
Edited by: So Sensational on 02/08/2010 01:29:38

Originally by: Citivolus
Edited by: Citivolus on 02/08/2010 01:00:26
I think using a fire arm on this guy would not of been out of the question. He had an axe... one swing and it could of hit an artery = dead before someone could save the victim. Also, you dont know why he snapped, i mean worst case scenario is he is a guy that thinks he has nothing left to lose. They are the scariest.

I am glad that the guy wasnt shot or anything, but i do like that i can hold a permitted fire arm in the U.S. Maybe just because i live in a high gun crime city. I know how to use it and went through the right ways to get it. If they took it away, well i wouldnt have it ofcourse, but you think that the "bad guys" wouldnt? They get theirs illegally through gun running anyway.

My .02 isk.

Hello, let me link something for you that might make you question how easy access to firearms might possibly make a society more prone to violence. Keep in mind that no other country anywhere near the top of this list is, in any form or way, close to being the most prosperous nation on the planet. Nor have they ever been (Russia wasn't Russia when they were an Empire, or the Soviet **** hole leftovers of that empire), for those of you who are China is de FUTUR3 believers.

You'd have to scroll down to spot 60 to find a legitimate western civilization and that's some island that the brits seem to own, just north of Normandy. I had no idea that it even existed tbh.

I'm not saying that guns are solely responsible, I'm sure your culture is ****ed up in 28 different ways I can't even imagine. But I'm also quite confident that it's a part of the problem. Here in my communist love palace of Sweden you don't even consider the ownership of a gun unless you're already a criminal and you want to move onto the big leagues.

Edit: There's also Greenland but who the **** wouldn't be mad if they lived in Greenland? I'm surprised they even have prisons, just subdue the criminal, lock him outside without clothes and then bring him in and heat him up when his sentence is over.


I can agree with you.. that the availability of guns does make it more of a problem and why we have a high incarceration rate. Although, this is disproven in many places... like canada. Their guns per capita is almost equal to the U.S. I really cant tell you all the answers because in truth America is a backwards nation sometimes. I think it really just the mentality sometimes. Big **** syndrome runs rampant here.

I just hate to see the rights i currently have revoked because as na intelligible cool minded individual who could perhaps defend himself from the violent nation he lives in.

And you dont have to be a big time theif to get an illegal gun. (hot or what not) you just have to be a knuckle head wit a wad of cash. I can agree that the availability is the problem perhaps.

I have a fire arm for home defense more than anything...
because if someone was pointing another gun on the street, well im not going to quick draw him... (unless, its my wallet then yes i intend to give it to the nice man with the gun pointed at me) But break ins ... and they do happen around where i live, it is very applicable.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2010.08.02 04:39:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: So Sensational

Hello, let me link something for you that might make you question how easy access to firearms might possibly make a society more prone to violence.


What does incarceration rate have to do with gun ownership?


Quote:
I'm not saying that guns are solely responsible, I'm sure your culture is ****ed up in 28 different ways I can't even imagine. But I'm also quite confident that it's a part of the problem. Here in my communist love palace of Sweden you don't even consider the ownership of a gun unless you're already a criminal and you want to move onto the big leagues.


It's trade off. If slaves have guns, they're not slaves. If gun ownership is a right, then your 'deaths by firearm' numbers will probably increase. However, the probability of your government successfully re-establishing the slave trade, sending minority groups to work camps, etc., approaches zero.

Seriously, what would happen to China's human rights record if all of China's citizens had the right (and means) to own firearms?

Slightly Sensational
Posted - 2010.08.02 06:10:00 - [38]
 

Edited by: Slightly Sensational on 02/08/2010 06:10:11
Originally by: Citivolus

I can agree with you.. that the availability of guns does make it more of a problem and why we have a high incarceration rate. Although, this is disproven in many places... like canada. Their guns per capita is almost equal to the U.S. I really cant tell you all the answers because in truth America is a backwards nation sometimes. I think it really just the mentality sometimes. Big **** syndrome runs rampant here.



Yeah definitely, as I said, I don't blame the guns entirely but they're a contributor and likely a big one too. Holding up a liquor store with a gun is a much smaller step into a criminal life than doing so with a knife. A knife is more personal, a knife is more dangerous for the perp, a knife is not as intimidating, and so on.

Originally by: stoicfaux
What does incarceration rate have to do with gun ownership?


Crime leads to crime yeah? If you have nothing better to do than to rob people you might as well start raping them too, if you weren't robbing them in the first place you probably wouldn't be raping them either. Perhaps **** isn't the best crime to illustrate the point but I like the word, **** that is.
Quote:

Seriously, what would happen to China's human rights record if all of China's citizens had the right (and means) to own firearms?


**** all without a revolution/some other spark.

Edit: Fail alt posting

Aera Aiana
Amarr
Posted - 2010.08.02 09:21:00 - [39]
 

Edited by: Aera Aiana on 02/08/2010 09:22:09
I wonder why only few people leave the office. I sure would see that I get out of there, let the guy calm down without so many people around him. He probably wouldn't have trashed the office half as bad if everyone had just left.
Not to mention the fact that it isn't their office, but their crappy employers office. Given the conditions there, he probably doesn't deserve any better than to have the place in pieces. Very Happy

CCP Eris Discordia

Posted - 2010.08.02 16:55:00 - [40]
 

We have nerf guns in the office but people lose their ammo so we don't use them often.

Very glad we don't see this kind of action at CCP, although when there is icecream on the balcony in summer it is every man and woman for themselves. Wink


Slade Trillgon
Endless Possibilities Inc.
Posted - 2010.08.02 17:22:00 - [41]
 

I guess he finally got word that the fixes he wanted were not scheduled to be dealt with for another 18 months Twisted Evil


Slade

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2010.08.02 19:57:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Slightly Sensational

Yeah definitely, as I said, I don't blame the guns entirely but they're a contributor and likely a big one too. Holding up a liquor store with a gun is a much smaller step into a criminal life than doing so with a knife. A knife is more personal, a knife is more dangerous for the perp, a knife is not as intimidating, and so on.



If everyone is armed, then how easy is it to rob a liquor store?


Quote:
Originally by: stoicfaux
What does incarceration rate have to do with gun ownership?


Crime leads to crime yeah? If you have nothing better to do than to rob people you might as well start raping them too, if you weren't robbing them in the first place you probably wouldn't be raping them either. Perhaps **** isn't the best crime to illustrate the point but I like the word, **** that is.


What's your point? I still don't see why you're assuming that people owning guns increases crime and/or results in large incarceration rates. Why and in what cases would it?

The US Drug War and drug laws have been criticized for putting large number of non-violent offenders in jail. Just how many prisoners are in prison for firearm related crimes?

"So Sensational" posted a link to prison populations with the unfounded assumption that large prison populations are related to firearm availability. Bad assumption, IMO. *shrug*


Quote:
Quote:

Seriously, what would happen to China's human rights record if all of China's citizens had the right (and means) to own firearms?


**** all without a revolution/some other spark.



The Chinese tend to prefer stability over revolution. If entire towns were armed, I don't think people would put up with the local party official's enforcement of edicts and harmonious well-being. (Revolution is one thing, a rash of local petty officials being "neutralized" is less dramatic.) If the local party officials are impotent, then the central party party is impotent.


So Sensational
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.08.02 22:05:00 - [43]
 

Edited by: So Sensational on 02/08/2010 22:06:30
Originally by: stoicfaux

If everyone is armed, then how easy is it to rob a liquor store?

Plenty of armed store owners get robbed everyday, some of them do stand up for themselves but it doesn't seem to be enough of a deterrent.


Quote:

What's your point? I still don't see why you're assuming that people owning guns increases crime and/or results in large incarceration rates. Why and in what cases would it?


Easy availability of firearms leads to an easier entry into a criminal life and an easier escalation into heavier crimes, a criminal life leads to more crime in general, not only by yourself but by those around you. Little brothers, sons, friends, and so on.


Quote:

The Chinese tend to prefer stability over revolution. If entire towns were armed, I don't think people would put up with the local party official's enforcement of edicts and harmonious well-being. (Revolution is one thing, a rash of local petty officials being "neutralized" is less dramatic.) If the local party officials are impotent, then the central party party is impotent.


It's cute that you argue the gun owners utopian world (where everyone has guns, work together and fight the power) against today's party. If entire towns were armed they still wouldn't stand a chance against the mighty all-powerful centralized party that has spies everywhere, assassinates people from black choppers and wear ninja suits.

Seriya
Caldari
LogiTech Systems
Posted - 2010.08.03 01:05:00 - [44]
 

Im guessing someone ganked his ship in jita with billions of isk in loot in his cargo. Emorage quit and took his anger out on everyone

Rolling Eyes

Olleybear
Minmatar
I R' Carebear
Posted - 2010.08.03 03:38:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: So Sensational

Easy availability of firearms leads to an easier entry into a criminal life and an easier escalation into heavier crimes, a criminal life leads to more crime in general, not only by yourself but by those around you. Little brothers, sons, friends, and so on.




I just quoted a small part of one persons post, but many people in this thread are making the same mistake.

Correlation does not imply Causation

Or for those that dont want to read the link:

Correlation between two variables does not automatically imply that one causes the other.

For instance, I can say that the global rise in temperatures is directly related to the decrease in the number of pirates in the RL world. Both facts by themselves are true, but one is not the cause of the other. Saying one causes the other, the way people say guns cause more violence, is wrong.

People cause violence. The guy in the video was using a coat rack for gods sake. If we were to then say coat racks cause violence in the workplace and we are glad our workplaces dont have coat racks, we would be just as wrong.

To educate those that dont understand why Americas 2nd Amendment even exists, our 2nd amendment exists so the citizens can protect themselves from an oppressive government that would lob a few mustard gas shells at a part of the population they dont like. Like Sadam Husein did to the kurds in the south of Iraq when he was in power.

People often dont realize just how nasty the world really is because they are in their airconditioned offices and homes watching some so called reality show after filling their bellies from the convienance of their refrigerator.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2010.08.03 04:48:00 - [46]
 

Edited by: stoicfaux on 03/08/2010 04:48:14
Originally by: So Sensational

Easy availability of firearms leads to an easier entry into a criminal life and an easier escalation into heavier crimes, a criminal life leads to more crime in general, not only by yourself but by those around you. Little brothers, sons, friends, and so on.


Eh, probably not. The US likes numbers.
* National Violent Death Reporting System
* the NVDRS report
* US Center for Disease Control: Injury Prevention & Control: Data & Statistics (WISQARSTM)
* US Bureau of Justice Statistics - Check out the increase in prison population and the increase in drug arrests. Check out that firearm homicides dropped.
* 10 Leading Causes of Injury Death by Age Group
Highlighting Violence-Related Injury Deaths, United States 2006


Looks more like age and race are more likely to affect who gets killed by a firearm. More people commit suicide with firearms than die from firearm homicides.

Long story short, it's complicated. Making overly simplistic statements like "guns cause crimes" is just a lazy way of not dealing with the problem. It takes a lot of effort to define the problem, analyze it, and then implement solutions. Even if you were to pony up the time, money and effort to end firearm related deaths, you could have saved more lives by reducing motor vehicle deaths instead. ugh


Quote:

It's cute that you argue the gun owners utopian world (where everyone has guns, work together and fight the power) against today's party.


No, no. A gun owning world doesn't create utopias. Instead, guns help to prevent dystopias.

Zumra
Posted - 2010.08.03 04:48:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: So Sensational
Edited by: So Sensational on 02/08/2010 01:29:38

Originally by: Citivolus
Edited by: Citivolus on 02/08/2010 01:00:26
I think using a fire arm on this guy would not of been out of the question. He had an axe... one swing and it could of hit an artery = dead before someone could save the victim. Also, you dont know why he snapped, i mean worst case scenario is he is a guy that thinks he has nothing left to lose. They are the scariest.

I am glad that the guy wasnt shot or anything, but i do like that i can hold a permitted fire arm in the U.S. Maybe just because i live in a high gun crime city. I know how to use it and went through the right ways to get it. If they took it away, well i wouldnt have it ofcourse, but you think that the "bad guys" wouldnt? They get theirs illegally through gun running anyway.

My .02 isk.

Hello, let me link something for you that might make you question how easy access to firearms might possibly make a society more prone to violence. Keep in mind that no other country anywhere near the top of this list is, in any form or way, close to being the most prosperous nation on the planet. Nor have they ever been (Russia wasn't Russia when they were an Empire, or the Soviet **** hole leftovers of that empire), for those of you who are China is de FUTUR3 believers.

You'd have to scroll down to spot 60 to find a legitimate western civilization and that's some island that the brits seem to own, just north of Normandy. I had no idea that it even existed tbh.

I'm not saying that guns are solely responsible, I'm sure your culture is ****ed up in 28 different ways I can't even imagine. But I'm also quite confident that it's a part of the problem. Here in my communist love palace of Sweden you don't even consider the ownership of a gun unless you're already a criminal and you want to move onto the big leagues.

Edit: There's also Greenland but who the **** wouldn't be mad if they lived in Greenland? I'm surprised they even have prisons, just subdue the criminal, lock him outside without clothes and then bring him in and heat him up when his sentence is over.


Love Liechtenstein at the bottom of that list with 20 incarcerations/100000 population. If you do the math, it is saying Liechtenstein has 7 people in its jail :P

So Sensational
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.08.03 06:19:00 - [48]
 

Edited by: So Sensational on 03/08/2010 06:42:57

Originally by: Olleybear
Saying one causes the other, the way people say guns cause more violence, is wrong.

People cause violence.


Except I never said that guns cause more violence, I said that the availability of guns, and thus the effect that ownership of a gun has on a person, causes more crime.
Originally by: stoicfaux

Eh, probably not. The US likes numbers.
* National Violent Death Reporting System
* the NVDRS report
* US Center for Disease Control: Injury Prevention & Control: Data & Statistics (WISQARSTM)
* US Bureau of Justice Statistics - Check out the increase in prison population and the increase in drug arrests. Check out that firearm homicides dropped.
* 10 Leading Causes of Injury Death by Age Group
Highlighting Violence-Related Injury Deaths, United States 2006


Looks more like age and race are more likely to affect who gets killed by a firearm. More people commit suicide with firearms than die from firearm homicides.

More than what? I never claimed anything had anything to do with the likelihood of being shot. Non of your statistics seem to counter my argument in any form or way. The US BoJ stats come closest except I never said that you need to be involved in a homicide while owning a gun to be living a criminal lifestyle, nor is it true. Take a person who buys a gun because he feels he needs protection to be a drug dealer, no gun, no drug dealing. This is obviously simplified but the point stands.

Originally by: stoicfaux

Long story short, it's complicated. Making overly simplistic statements like "guns cause crimes" is just a lazy way of not dealing with the problem. It takes a lot of effort to define the problem, analyze it, and then implement solutions. Even if you were to pony up the time, money and effort to end firearm related deaths, you could have saved more lives by reducing motor vehicle deaths instead.

Very true, I am mostly arguing with the theoretical statement of "guns make the world safer" and the "Don't take my guns away" people in general. Banning civilians from buying guns wouldn't do a lot in the US considering how many are out there already. The illegal market is fairly well established as well, compared to other countries much more so, as far as I know.

Originally by: stoicfaux

No, no. A gun owning world doesn't create utopias. Instead, guns help to prevent dystopias.


And my point was that every Chinese villager can't buy a gun, nor would they if they could, nor could they easily organize and "fight the power". Your example of every villager working together to kill off local government enforcers therefore becomes a utopia. If you think having legal firearms in today's China would decrease the human rights violations then I think you're wrong, probably would make it worse since the powers that be would be more at risk of injury, and thus go at it harder. Compare it to a dangerous man being pinned down to the ground, you do your best to pin him down harder, the more dangerous, the harder you hold him down.

Even so, your gun owning world is a utopia in the first place. I'd agree that if every single person had a gun, organized together and no one abused the system, it might be a better place. Assuming the world had my views on every subject. I wouldn't want this to be true in a world of faithful (No modern day "eating pigs is bad but I can have a glass of beer from time to time" version) Islamists who all believe that converting you and yours by Jihad actually is acceptable.

So Sensational
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.08.03 06:25:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: Zumra
Originally by: So Sensational
Edited by: So Sensational on 02/08/2010 01:29:38

Originally by: Citivolus
Edited by: Citivolus on 02/08/2010 01:00:26
I think using a fire arm on this guy would not of been out of the question. He had an axe... one swing and it could of hit an artery = dead before someone could save the victim. Also, you dont know why he snapped, i mean worst case scenario is he is a guy that thinks he has nothing left to lose. They are the scariest.

I am glad that the guy wasnt shot or anything, but i do like that i can hold a permitted fire arm in the U.S. Maybe just because i live in a high gun crime city. I know how to use it and went through the right ways to get it. If they took it away, well i wouldnt have it ofcourse, but you think that the "bad guys" wouldnt? They get theirs illegally through gun running anyway.

My .02 isk.

Hello, let me link something for you that might make you question how easy access to firearms might possibly make a society more prone to violence. Keep in mind that no other country anywhere near the top of this list is, in any form or way, close to being the most prosperous nation on the planet. Nor have they ever been (Russia wasn't Russia when they were an Empire, or the Soviet **** hole leftovers of that empire), for those of you who are China is de FUTUR3 believers.

You'd have to scroll down to spot 60 to find a legitimate western civilization and that's some island that the brits seem to own, just north of Normandy. I had no idea that it even existed tbh.

I'm not saying that guns are solely responsible, I'm sure your culture is ****ed up in 28 different ways I can't even imagine. But I'm also quite confident that it's a part of the problem. Here in my communist love palace of Sweden you don't even consider the ownership of a gun unless you're already a criminal and you want to move onto the big leagues.

Edit: There's also Greenland but who the **** wouldn't be mad if they lived in Greenland? I'm surprised they even have prisons, just subdue the criminal, lock him outside without clothes and then bring him in and heat him up when his sentence is over.


Love Liechtenstein at the bottom of that list with 20 incarcerations/100000 population. If you do the math, it is saying Liechtenstein has 7 people in its jail :P

Haha, yeah I don't know if that's true. Some surprising examples on there as well, an island nation called Nauru for example, which is third last on the list. Most other nations like it seem to be fairly high up but when you look closer you find this: "Nauruans are among the most obese people in the world. 90% of adults have a higher BMI than the world average.[46] Nauru has the world's highest level of type 2 diabetes, with more than 40% of the population affected.[47] Other significant dietary-related problems on Nauru include kidney disease and heart disease. Life expectancy on Nauru in 2006 was 58.0 years for males and 65.0 years for females.[48]"
Too fat for crime.

Then there's Timor-leste, last on the list, with highlights such as: "It continues to suffer the aftereffects of a decades-long independence struggle against Indonesia, which damaged infrastructure and displaced thousands of civilians. It is placed 162nd by Human Development Index (HDI) among the world's states, the second lowest in Asia."
I guess they're all so poor no one has any incentive to steal anything from anyone else.

Olleybear
Minmatar
I R' Carebear
Posted - 2010.08.03 08:51:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: So Sensational


Originally by: Olleybear
Saying one causes the other, the way people say guns cause more violence, is wrong.

People cause violence.


Except I never said that guns cause more violence, I said that the availability of guns, and thus the effect that ownership of a gun has on a person, causes more crime.




You are saying availability of gun and gun ownership causes crime. This is the kind of viewpoint that I described as wrong when I pointed out Correlation does not imply Causation.

You even linked incarceration rates in wikipedia to try to back up your claim that 'easy access to firearms might possibly make a society more prone to violence.' This is another example of Correlation does not imply Causation. Especially considering that wikipedia link is simple a list of incarceration rates. Absolutely nothing is listed about what any of the crimes were and if they were violent/nonviolent crime, let alone if guns were involved.

Saudi Arabia is 69th and Iraq is 141st on that incarceration list. Can we say people are even more free in Saudi Arabia and Iraq than in America because they dont incarcerate as many people as America? Sounds logical doesn't it, even though we both would hate to be a woman living in either country.

Slade Trillgon
Endless Possibilities Inc.
Posted - 2010.08.03 12:37:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: So Sensational


Then there's Timor-leste, last on the list, with highlights such as: "It continues to suffer the aftereffects of a decades-long independence struggle against Indonesia, which damaged infrastructure and displaced thousands of civilians. It is placed 162nd by Human Development Index (HDI) among the world's states, the second lowest in Asia."
I guess they're all so poor no one has any incentive to steal anything from anyone else.


Or they are so poor that they all realize that no one has anything worth stealing and that attempting to do so would be a massive waster of energy.

Remember association does not equal causation.

All that being said, homicide of all types, guns, knives, ropes, etc, is the 15th ranked cause of death in the US. We are talking about less than .75% of the annual death rate. Is this something that really needs attention now a days? I mean yes innocent people die daily from guns, but when guns contribute to so few deaths, do they really need to be banned?

Remember people, we live in a day and age where the media, wherever it is located, is going to put forth the most sensationalized news possible. Just keep that in mind as you all argue from both sides of the fence. We can not save everyone and some people need to die.

"Some people should die. That's just unconscious knowledge"

- Jane's Addiction "Pigs in Zen"


Slade

So Sensational
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.08.03 12:46:00 - [52]
 

Edited by: So Sensational on 03/08/2010 13:34:38
Originally by: Olleybear

You are saying availability of gun and gun ownership causes crime. This is the kind of viewpoint that I described as wrong when I pointed out Correlation does not imply Causation.



And I say it's not wrong, here let me point you to that part in your wiki link: "(though correlation is necessary for causation and can indicate possible causes or areas for further investigation)". What you should be saying is "Correlation does not prove causation", which is true. What you're doing is basically telling me that I might be wrong, yeah I know, pretty much every sentence I've written contains a "possibly". In this case however, my logic tells me that I'm onto something.

Availability -> Ownership -> Criminality. Not because a gun makes you a criminal, but because to become a criminal you might need a gun, you might feel you need a gun, you might not have become a criminal if your gang banging brother didn't have a gun that he gave to you on your 12th birthday.

There's definitely more to it than A -> B -> C, it's more like A -> B, C, D, etc -> Z. But that doesn't automatically prove that B is not a part of the problem, which you seem to be trying to do by using "Correlation does not imply Causation".



Originally by: Olleybear

You even linked incarceration rates in wikipedia to try to back up your claim that 'easy access to firearms might possibly make a society more prone to violence.' This is another example of Correlation does not imply Causation. Especially considering that wikipedia link is simple a list of incarceration rates. Absolutely nothing is listed about what any of the crimes were and if they were violent/nonviolent crime, let alone if guns were involved.

See it's cute when you're using that term all wrong. No correlation does not prove causation in this case, hence the word "possibly". The link wasn't proof, nor has any other link in this thread been proof of the "guns are great" view, including your super hero attempt at logic. The link shows that you have a much higher percentage of people in jail, thus there's something wrong, all I've said is that the guns are a part of the problem.

Quote:
Saudi Arabia is 69th and Iraq is 141st on that incarceration list. Can we say people are even more free in Saudi Arabia and Iraq than in America because they dont incarcerate as many people as America? Sounds logical doesn't it, even though we both would hate to be a woman living in either country.
As it turns out it's pretty ****ing easy to avoid jail in Iraq, all you have to do is die in the process. Or just get away with it if you belong to the local gang of thugs, no matter if they're soldiers, a warlord's band, the government, your PMC, whatever extraordinaire non-suicidal terrorist squads are roaming around.

Now I have no idea why you're bringing up freedom in general but it would seem that these two countries are completely different from the US and as such, have other factors that matter when you look at incarceration rates. In the first you could look to their extremely strict culture for example, in the later the fact that if you steal something you'll get your silly thieving face cluster****ed by a stone throwing fanatically religious neighborhood that don't like your kind.

Now if you wanted to be smart about this you could compare the US to say, Germany or Finland, where it's actually legal to own a gun, although from what I can tell they're not as readily available to the criminally insane. Even so they're much further down the list than number 1. Now if you read my posts you'd see that I don't blame guns exclusively.

Slade Trillgon
Endless Possibilities Inc.
Posted - 2010.08.03 13:05:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: So Sensational


Availability -> Ownership -> Criminality. Not because a gun makes you a criminal, but because to become a criminal you might need a gun, you might feel you need a gun, you might not have become a criminal if your gang banging brother didn't have a gun that he gave to you on your 12th birthday.




And again I say that considering the number of guns that are available in the US, legally or illegally acquired, they causes less then 1% point of the actual deaths in the US per year. Seriously now; if guns were legal in your country and foreigners were calling for your country to ban firearms since firearms caused less than 1% of your countries annual deaths would you vote to ban them on the grounds that too many people die by them yearly?


Slade

Vogue
Short Bus Pole Dancers
Posted - 2010.08.03 13:09:00 - [54]
 

Edited by: Vogue on 03/08/2010 13:10:13
I suppose it is the macho image criminals and gangsters associate with guns that in turn makes guns dangerous. A large kitchen knife can be just as lethal as a gun or even a bulky telephone to club someone on the head with. But there is not gratuitous popular fiction that has clubbing someone to death with a telephone glamorous. But there is for guns.

So Sensational
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.08.03 13:25:00 - [55]
 

Edited by: So Sensational on 03/08/2010 13:31:45

Quote:


And again I say that considering the number of guns that are available in the US, legally or illegally acquired, they causes less then 1% point of the actual deaths in the US per year. Seriously now; if guns were legal in your country and foreigners were calling for your country to ban firearms since firearms caused less than 1% of your countries annual deaths would you vote to ban them on the grounds that too many people die by them yearly?


Slade


Hello, please read any of my posts and quote me on the part where I said that guns should be banned because they're directly involved in a large percentage of the deaths in the US, so that I may edit that.

Also, no I wouldn't.

Shanter
Posted - 2010.08.03 18:46:00 - [56]
 

No way the wage of a menial office job is worth trying to stop the Hulk when he's got a coat rack and a few CRTs to toss around.

Also, just to toss my thoughts in, I don't have a problem with me owning guns, I just have a problem with other people owning guns. Very Happy

Viral Effect
Caldari
BRAINDEAD Corp
Posted - 2010.08.03 19:03:00 - [57]
 

I have heard of worse freak outs than that.

Olleybear
Minmatar
I R' Carebear
Posted - 2010.08.03 21:24:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: So Sensational
...including your super hero attempt at logic...


I stopped reading at that point.

Conversation is going from, 'I have a theory about guns', to 'I'm mad and going to throw out insults'.

Further discourse is discouraged and will not be commented on.

Slade Trillgon
Endless Possibilities Inc.
Posted - 2010.08.03 22:21:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: So Sensational

Hello, please read any of my posts and quote me on the part where I said that guns should be banned because they're directly involved in a large percentage of the deaths in the US, so that I may edit that.

Also, no I wouldn't.


I apologize if I made a incorrect assumption. But from your tone and the typical tone of many in OOPE in the past, that is the conclusion I jumped to. So what are you arguing then? Are you arguing that the availbility should be limited since a criminal may want to utilize a gun, or what? With the number of guns in the United States as high as they are, in relation to the number of deaths that are actually caused by guns, I do not see what you are trying to get at.


Slade

Alty VonAltenstein
Posted - 2010.08.04 02:19:00 - [60]
 

How in the **** did my post turn into a gun control discussion? The guy in the vid didnt even have a gun...he was armed with office supplies!


Pages: 1 [2] 3

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only