Common sense question about gun control leaders [W:753]

[haymarket]

It's a fallacy of tyrants to use Hitlers example of public demand as an indication of correctness. Tyrannical oppressive people simply have no concept of right or wrong and only what they want at any cost. Death and injury to others is inconsequential to them.

Who are these evil bogeymen you attempt to demonize with such hyperbolic over the top characterizations?

 

[Crimefree]

your fallacy is your tactic claiming that the American people are IGNORANT.

I realize it is not new and has appeared here many many many times in many many many threads on this topic but I can never remember anyone ever submitting any verifiable proof of it.

Do you have them to submit for verification of your claim?

Non sequiture.

Fragmentation and Short-Term Memorization Are Predictable Outcomes of a Non-substantive Concept of Critical Thinking

Students in colleges today are achieving little connection and depth, either within or across subjects. Atomized lists dominate textbooks, atomized teaching dominates instruction, and atomized recall dominates learning. What is learned are superficial fragments, typically soon forgotten. What is missing is the coherence, connection, and depth of understanding that accompanies systematic critical thinking.
- The State of Critical Thinking Today
“Too many facts, too little conceptualizing, too much memorizing, and too little thinking.”
~ Paul Hurd, the Organizer in Developing Blueprints for Institutional Change

"What good fortune for governments that the people do not think." - Adolf Hitler

“The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holders lack of rational conviction. Opinions in politics and religion are almost always held passionately.”
― Bertrand Russell, Sceptical Essays

“We live in a world where unfortunately the distinction between true and false appears to become increasingly blurred by manipulation of facts, by exploitation of uncritical minds, and by the pollution of the language.”
― Arne Tiselius

“In a world where critical thinking skills are almost wholly absent, repetition effectively leapfrogs the cognitive portion of the brain. It helps something get processed as truth. We used to call it unsubstantiated buy-in. Belief without evidence. It only works in a society where thinking for one's self is discouraged. That's how we lost our country.”
― Laura Bynum, Veracity

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.
― Bertrand Russell

 

[Crimefree]

Who are these evil bogeymen you attempt to demonize with such hyperbolic over the top characterizations?

When you have something sensible to say I'll get back to you.

There is no point in responding to egotistical emotional diatribes. The sense of self-importance allows no correction of what is patently verbal sewage.

 

[haymarket]

Non sequiture.

Fragmentation and Short-Term Memorization Are Predictable Outcomes of a Non-substantive Concept of Critical Thinking

Students in colleges today are achieving little connection and depth, either within or across subjects. Atomized lists dominate textbooks, atomized teaching dominates instruction, and atomized recall dominates learning. What is learned are superficial fragments, typically soon forgotten. What is missing is the coherence, connection, and depth of understanding that accompanies systematic critical thinking.
- The State of Critical Thinking Today
“Too many facts, too little conceptualizing, too much memorizing, and too little thinking.”
~ Paul Hurd, the Organizer in Developing Blueprints for Institutional Change

"What good fortune for governments that the people do not think." - Adolf Hitler

“The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holders lack of rational conviction. Opinions in politics and religion are almost always held passionately.”
― Bertrand Russell, Sceptical Essays

“We live in a world where unfortunately the distinction between true and false appears to become increasingly blurred by manipulation of facts, by exploitation of uncritical minds, and by the pollution of the language.”
― Arne Tiselius

“In a world where critical thinking skills are almost wholly absent, repetition effectively leapfrogs the cognitive portion of the brain. It helps something get processed as truth. We used to call it unsubstantiated buy-in. Belief without evidence. It only works in a society where thinking for one's self is discouraged. That's how we lost our country.”
― Laura Bynum, Veracity

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.
― Bertrand Russell

Could you offer a reasonable explanation as to why you would reproduce a post of mine asking the poster to provide verifiable evidence of their claims of fact that the American people are ignorant and then go on and on and not say one word in actual response to the issues raised in my post?

Evidence that can be verified as to a claim of fact has nothing at all to do with presenting opinions of other people about the subject of opinion itself. As such your post FAILS to speak to my post which you reproduced as the springboard to your statement.

So why did you reproduce it if you were powerless to provide the evidence asked for? :doh:roll:

 

[haymarket]

When you have something sensible to say I'll get back to you.

There is no point in responding to egotistical emotional diatribes. The sense of self-importance allows no correction of what is patently verbal sewage.

Then why do you make them in post after post after post in thread after thread after thread and back away when challenged to present fact?

And thank you for confirming you COULD NOT present the people I asked about and which you demonized with your hyperbolic exaggerations. :2wave:

 

[Federalist]

People like me support people having guns for self defense and home protection and business protection and hunting and sport and recreation and other such uses. We also believe that we want to live in society where COMMON SENSE (your word again) is used and exercised in matters of public policy - and that includes guns.....and we DO NOT want to live in a society which is gun centric or a return to the Old West where everybody who wants to walks around armed or where only technology and ones pocketbook is the limit on weaponry people have.

So you don't want your fellow Americans to be able to bear arms. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[haymarket]

More hyperbolic demonization, twisting and perversion of what was actually said. And in other breaking news - the sun came up in the east this morning. :roll:

 

[Federalist]

More hyperbolic demonization, twisting and perversion of what was actually said.

You just said that you don't want to live in a society where everyone who wants to walks around armed (bears arms). I'm not twisting anything by simply noting your stated position. You don't want your fellow Americans to walk around armed.

 

[haymarket]

You just said that you don't want to live in a society where everyone who wants to walks around armed (bears arms). I'm not twisting anything by simply noting your stated position. You don't want your fellow Americans to walk around armed.

you need to be educated on the issue

start here

Gun control in the Old West

the reality is that gun regulation has been around for a very long time and even in the American West was exercised and enforced. There is a huge difference between people being able to exercise their rights and having EVERYONE walk around armed in all aspects of daily life. I certainly do not want that - but of course, those who want to create a gun centric America most certainly welcome such a prospect.

 

[Crimefree]

Could you offer a reasonable explanation as to why you would reproduce a post of mine asking the poster to provide verifiable evidence of their claims of fact that the American people are ignorant and then go on and on and not say one word in actual response to the issues raised in my post?

Evidence that can be verified as to a claim of fact has nothing at all to do with presenting opinions of other people about the subject of opinion itself. As such your post FAILS to speak to my post which you reproduced as the springboard to your statement.

So why did you reproduce it if you were powerless to provide the evidence asked for?

:lamo :roll: :doh :shock:

You have yet to show they are not ignorant or cast reasonable doubt on the statement. Get to it now. Your word is far from worth anything in that direction. Since the very question is a subject of concern for current research in colleges I rest my case.

Fragmentation and Short-Term Memorization Are Predictable Outcomes of a Non-substantive Concept of Critical Thinking

Students in colleges today are achieving little connection and depth, either within or across subjects. Atomized lists dominate textbooks, atomized teaching dominates instruction, and atomized recall dominates learning. What is learned are superficial fragments, typically soon forgotten. What is missing is the coherence, connection, and depth of understanding that accompanies systematic critical thinking.
- The State of Critical Thinking Today
“Too many facts, too little conceptualizing, too much memorizing, and too little thinking.”
~ Paul Hurd, the Organizer in Developing Blueprints for Institutional Change

So why can't you read and comprehend? :doh

 

[haymarket]

:lamo :roll: :doh :shock:

You have yet to show they are not ignorant or cast reasonable doubt on the statement.

You are asking me to prove a negative. That is impossible. I cannot prove that there are NOT three inch high monkeys made of blue flame who play professional basketball underneath the surface of Uranus either.

If you or anyone else here wants to make a claim of fact that the American people are IGNORANT ,it is 100% completely and totally YOUR responsibility to offer evidence of it.

And all your silly comments about thinking do not change that simple reality of making claims of fact.

 

[haymarket]

You just said that you don't want to live in a society where everyone who wants to walks around armed (bears arms). I'm not twisting anything by simply noting your stated position. You don't want your fellow Americans to walk around armed.

I posted this last month. Perhaps you missed it. I reproduce here it for your convenience and edification as it speaks directly to the very idea of having a society where everyone walks around armed and why that is simply NOT the America that would be livable for many many reasons.

******************

I want to relate a few things to you that I believe are central in helping to set the stage for what I feel is one of the real key issues in America today. I recently came across the famous painting done by the great American artist Norman Rockwell of a simple man standing up to speak his piece at a town meeting.

It is called FREEDOM OF SPEECH and was done to raise money for the war effort in World War II.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom...ech_(painting)

It could be anywhere in the land but the image of the New England town meeting comes to mind where citizens assembled and were able to give their opinion on a subject of local concern before a vote or action was taken by their representatives or the amassed crowd. The ability to speak out freely without fear of threat or violence or intimidation is central to our way of life.

Study the painting for a minute and then ask yourself if the message would change significantly if the man was in crowd where heavilly armed men, angry and scowling at him for saying something they did not like were allowed to be in that crowd because they have a "right" to openly carry the firearm of their choice?

Is that the political process we want to encourage? Is that the America we want for ourselves and for our posterity?

Last year I was working in Lansing, Michigan at the state capitol and saw something which disgusted me. As on almost every spring or fall day when the legislature is in session, scores of school busses from all over the state show up starting early in the morning and hundreds if not thousands of school children flood the capitol with their teachers and other adults to get a first hand view of their state government. Last year, a group in Michigan which wants to promote what they call "gun rights" including open carry, showed up in force and in mass on one of these days in their camo and fatigues with weapons on hips and backs and sometimes both.

With the memory of Sandy Hook still vivid, children became upset at seeing armed men in the capitol who were NOT cops nor soldiers and trips were aborted and the busses packed in haste and the capitol was virtually empty of kids in an hour or two. All because some grown men wanted to strut around with their macho toys. And spare me the contempt about my use of the langauge. These guys were yahoos pure and simple and I do not give two craps about what you think their rights are.

Their conduct negated the ability of hundreds if not thousands of school kids to further their education that day. And spare me the crap about educating kids to the wonders of what you think the Second Amendment is. Yeah - the could have visited a brothel also and been educated to that. But that was NOT the purpose of that day.

So regardless of what you think about my reaction to this - it brings up a central question about the competing future of America.

It is a fact that the gun lobby and many of their supporters push open carry and want to see it become commonplace across the land. It is a fact that they want to remove restrictions on the type of weapons one can carry and even obtain. They want to oppose any effort to limit magazine size or to prohibit automatic weapons and they proudly brag about taking their own security into their own hands and not depending on the police for their safety and appear to look with scorn and contempt at anyone who does not behave nor believe as they do.

Recently we saw in Nevada where large numbers of heavily armed men came out to show support for somebody they believed was being mistreated by the government. Their show of force was so convincing and so intimidating that the government backed down to them in a show of what some would call intelligent restraint while others might characterize it as outright cowardice and rewarding domestic terrorism.

Guns guns and more guns taking a place front and center in society and taking a place that is far more obvious and far more intrusive than anything we have seen in what we thought was the normal everyday America that most of us grew up with.

SO HERE IS THE QUESTION: if the gun lobby and their supporters get their way, do you want to live in an America where openly armed men are commonplace in our streets, in our buildings, in our halls, in our stores, and just about everywhere? Do you want to live in an America where when you yell at a ballplayer on the field somebody with that jersey on a few rows ahead of you stands up, yells back at you to shut up and is wearing a firearm in a clear sign of intimidation? Would it cause you concern and outright fright if you and your family to be eating at a restaurant when two fella's walk in wearing camo with guns on their back and hips and they are clearly not police nor soldiers?

In short - is that the America you want to live in? Is a gun centric America that apparently the far right fantasizes about a dream or is it a nightmare?

I was born in 49 and as I grew up in the Fifties and Sixties you never saw armed men in public who were not police or soldiers. It simply did not happen. People used personal restraint and exercised common sense and knew better than to scare the daylights out of their neighbors and community. In fact, imagine what would have happened if a man with a long fun had started walking down most streets in America during those years - let alone scores of them taking over the ground of the state capitol.

So how do you fell about living in a future America where the gun lobby continues to prevail and guns are worn by more people and worn more openly and become more and more a fixture in our daily lives and activities?

Is that the America you want you and your children to live in?

 

[Federalist]

the reality is that gun regulation has been around for a very long time and even in the American West was exercised and enforced. There is a huge difference between people being able to exercise their rights and having EVERYONE walk around armed in all aspects of daily life. I certainly do not want that - but of course, those who want to create a gun centric America most certainly welcome such a prospect.

Yes, I understand that you don't want people walking around armed in their daily life. To note that this is your position is not to twist or pervert anything.

 

[Federalist]

I posted this last month. Perhaps you missed it. I reproduce here it for your convenience and edification as it speaks directly to the very idea of having a society where everyone walks around armed and why that is simply NOT the America that would be livable for many many reasons.

******************

I want to relate a few things to you that I believe are central in helping to set the stage for what I feel is one of the real key issues in America today. I recently came across the famous painting done by the great American artist Norman Rockwell of a simple man standing up to speak his piece at a town meeting.

It is called FREEDOM OF SPEECH and was done to raise money for the war effort in World War II.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom...ech_(painting)

It could be anywhere in the land but the image of the New England town meeting comes to mind where citizens assembled and were able to give their opinion on a subject of local concern before a vote or action was taken by their representatives or the amassed crowd. The ability to speak out freely without fear of threat or violence or intimidation is central to our way of life.

Study the painting for a minute and then ask yourself if the message would change significantly if the man was in crowd where heavilly armed men, angry and scowling at him for saying something they did not like were allowed to be in that crowd because they have a "right" to openly carry the firearm of their choice?

Is that the political process we want to encourage? Is that the America we want for ourselves and for our posterity?

Last year I was working in Lansing, Michigan at the state capitol and saw something which disgusted me. As on almost every spring or fall day when the legislature is in session, scores of school busses from all over the state show up starting early in the morning and hundreds if not thousands of school children flood the capitol with their teachers and other adults to get a first hand view of their state government. Last year, a group in Michigan which wants to promote what they call "gun rights" including open carry, showed up in force and in mass on one of these days in their camo and fatigues with weapons on hips and backs and sometimes both.

With the memory of Sandy Hook still vivid, children became upset at seeing armed men in the capitol who were NOT cops nor soldiers and trips were aborted and the busses packed in haste and the capitol was virtually empty of kids in an hour or two. All because some grown men wanted to strut around with their macho toys. And spare me the contempt about my use of the langauge. These guys were yahoos pure and simple and I do not give two craps about what you think their rights are.

Their conduct negated the ability of hundreds if not thousands of school kids to further their education that day. And spare me the crap about educating kids to the wonders of what you think the Second Amendment is. Yeah - the could have visited a brothel also and been educated to that. But that was NOT the purpose of that day.

So regardless of what you think about my reaction to this - it brings up a central question about the competing future of America.

It is a fact that the gun lobby and many of their supporters push open carry and want to see it become commonplace across the land. It is a fact that they want to remove restrictions on the type of weapons one can carry and even obtain. They want to oppose any effort to limit magazine size or to prohibit automatic weapons and they proudly brag about taking their own security into their own hands and not depending on the police for their safety and appear to look with scorn and contempt at anyone who does not behave nor believe as they do.

Recently we saw in Nevada where large numbers of heavily armed men came out to show support for somebody they believed was being mistreated by the government. Their show of force was so convincing and so intimidating that the government backed down to them in a show of what some would call intelligent restraint while others might characterize it as outright cowardice and rewarding domestic terrorism.

Guns guns and more guns taking a place front and center in society and taking a place that is far more obvious and far more intrusive than anything we have seen in what we thought was the normal everyday America that most of us grew up with.

SO HERE IS THE QUESTION: if the gun lobby and their supporters get their way, do you want to live in an America where openly armed men are commonplace in our streets, in our buildings, in our halls, in our stores, and just about everywhere? Do you want to live in an America where when you yell at a ballplayer on the field somebody with that jersey on a few rows ahead of you stands up, yells back at you to shut up and is wearing a firearm in a clear sign of intimidation? Would it cause you concern and outright fright if you and your family to be eating at a restaurant when two fella's walk in wearing camo with guns on their back and hips and they are clearly not police nor soldiers?

In short - is that the America you want to live in? Is a gun centric America that apparently the far right fantasizes about a dream or is it a nightmare?

I was born in 49 and as I grew up in the Fifties and Sixties you never saw armed men in public who were not police or soldiers. It simply did not happen. People used personal restraint and exercised common sense and knew better than to scare the daylights out of their neighbors and community. In fact, imagine what would have happened if a man with a long fun had started walking down most streets in America during those years - let alone scores of them taking over the ground of the state capitol.

So how do you fell about living in a future America where the gun lobby continues to prevail and guns are worn by more people and worn more openly and become more and more a fixture in our daily lives and activities?

Is that the America you want you and your children to live in?

You oppose open carry. Somehow that doesn't surprise me.

 

[haymarket]

You oppose open carry. Somehow that doesn't surprise me.

Yes I do for all the very pragmatic and practical reasons I just provided in the post which you reproduced but dodged completely. That is NOT the America I want to live in nor do I suspect most Americans want that either.

The Second Amendment does not mention anything about OPEN CARRY.

 

[Federalist]

The Second Amendment does not mention anything about OPEN CARRY.

Correct. Open carry is not outlawed by the second amendment or by anything else in the constitution.

Outlawing open carry appears to be your very own idea.

 

[Crimefree]

Then why do you make them in post after post after post in thread after thread after thread and back away when challenged to present fact?

And thank you for confirming you COULD NOT present the people I asked about and which you demonized with your hyperbolic exaggerations. :2wave:

There is no point in responding to egotistical emotional diatribes. Your ridiculous ad hominem suggestions require PROOF now buzz off. Your word is worth nothing more than the contempt it deserves.

 

[Federalist]

Yes I do for all the very pragmatic and practical reasons I just provided in the post which you reproduced but dodged completely.

Dodged completely? You explained how seeing your fellow Americans proudly bearing arms makes you afraid. I responded by noting that I find it completely unsurprising that you oppose open carry (which is not prohibited by the constitution, by the way).

 

[haymarket]

There is no point in responding to egotistical emotional diatribes. Your ridiculous ad hominem suggestions require PROOF now buzz off. Your word is worth nothing more than the contempt it deserves.

Your sad attempt to excuse your own ability to provide evidence for claims made here by gun supporters which you support show that you are unable to actually debate this issue.

Your repeated attempts to attack me does NOT provide the evidence asked for.

 

[haymarket]

Dodged completely? You explained how seeing your fellow Americans proudly bearing arms makes you afraid. I responded by noting that I find it completely unsurprising that you oppose open carry (which is not prohibited by the constitution, by the way).

Yes, dodged completely. Instead of discussing the issues raised by me in that post you simply opted for a short drive-by quip designed to curry favor with gun sycophants and demonize me. Of course, what else is new?

I welcome your participation in a open and honest discussion about a gun centric society and its impact upon American life that goes beyond the knee jerk simplicity of simply stating the same old words that we all know but disagree on what they actually mean.

I welcome your participation in a discussion which goes beyond the desire to simply appeal to your fellow travelers and takes an honest look at America and its people and the type of society we want for both ourselves and our communities.

Can you do that?

 

[haymarket]

Correct. Open carry is not outlawed by the second amendment or by anything else in the constitution.

Outlawing open carry appears to be your very own idea.

Did you not read the article I earlier provided about the American West and how they prohibited open carry in many towns? :doh:shock::roll:

 

[Crimefree]

You are asking me to prove a negative. That is impossible. I cannot prove that there are NOT three inch high monkeys made of blue flame who play professional basketball underneath the surface of Uranus either.

If you or anyone else here wants to make a claim of fact that the American people are IGNORANT ,it is 100% completely and totally YOUR responsibility to offer evidence of it.

And all your silly comments about thinking do not change that simple reality of making claims of fact.

Then the statement that such people are ignorant stands as demonstrated and not refuted by you. You made the claim they were not ignorant and got proven wrong back it up of go away eating crow again.

 

[Federalist]

Yes, dodged completely. Instead of discussing the issues raised by me in that post you simply opted for a short drive-by quip designed to curry favor with gun sycophants and demonize me. Of course, what else is new?

The issues you raised is that 1) seeing your fellow Americans carrying arms makes you afraid, and 2) you don't want a society where they are allowed to do so. I contributed to the discussion by noting that it is unsurprising that you oppose open carry. What else do you feel needs to be discussed?

 

[Federalist]

Did you not read the article I earlier provided about the American West and how they prohibited open carry in many towns?

Yes I did read it. It didn't cite any constitutional language that bans open carry. So banning open carry is not a constitutional issue. It is a policy issue. And as I noted earlier, it is completely unsurprising that your would favor banning open carry.

 

[Crimefree]

Your sad attempt to excuse your own ability to provide evidence for claims made here by gun supporters which you support show that you are unable to actually debate this issue.

Your repeated attempts to attack me does NOT provide the evidence asked for.

A ranking idiot might suggest they were attacked after posting ad hominem remarks that failed to address the point in debate since apparently such ignorant egotistical fools cannot help themselves. When they receive a response in kind they should not be stupid enough to claim innocence or shock.

If you don't like your sewage posts being answered in kind don't respond with the sewage dreamt up as rational debate. Address the points being made. It's not difficult and others manage it quite nicely.

A parrot cannot be called intelligent or thinking by comparison. Sigh!!! Your powers of comprehension are seriously in doubt.

The current principle of rote learning is learning like a parrot. Education seems to be wasted here.

Are you a prime example of rote learning? When you look outside how many examples do you see who are not examples of rote learning?

You now arguing with the evidence of educators. What is your evidence they are wrong. You had the opinion of experts but ignored in preference to one of your sewerage diatribes. Why was that? Did not like it? And thanks for confirming my statement correct by not responding to it..