Never let a crisis go to waste

[RF667799]

Technologies are defined by their design.

Cars are designed to be driven at extremely high speeds and directed wherever the operator wishes to go. Even if that is a crowded school crosswalk.

But you don't care. The high speeds and convenience of not having to don safety gear outweigh all the unintentional deaths directly attributed to the use of motor vehicles.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Possessing firearms does not cause children to die.

Show that it does and I'll destroy them all myself.

That was already discussed when support of pro gun policies were brought up.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Cars are designed to be driven at extremely high speeds and directed wherever the operator wishes to go. Even if that is a crowded school crosswalk.

But you don't care. The high speeds and convenience of not having to don safety gear outweigh all the unintentional deaths directly attributed to the use of motor vehicles.

Cars are designed to transport people in goods from one place to another. That’s an entirely different category and subject entirely different analysis and fundamental assumptions over something like guns.

 

[RF667799]

That was already discussed when support of pro gun policies were brought up.

Pro car policies apparently include that high speed capability is a must, and proper safety equipment is a no-go.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Pro car policies apparently include that high speed capability is a must, and proper safety equipment is a no-go.

Cool. That’s an irrelevant detail though.

 

[RF667799]

Cars are designed to transport people in goods from one place to another.

No. That's a purpose for which they can be used because of their design qualities.

Those same design qualities allow them to be used as weapons.

The New Orleans guy knew that.

 

[RF667799]

Cool. That’s an irrelevant detail though.

Not when you're blaming dead children on someone's desire for convenience.

 

[CLAX1911]

Any weapon that is designed to mass murder people

So that would only include like an improvised bomb.

include nerve gas,

Nerve gas was not created or designed to mass murder people. It was used to control battlefields

the maxim gun,

The maximum gun was not designed to murder people. It was designed to mow down advancing infantry. It would be a terrible mass murder weapon because you typically need a vehicle to transport it and a crew of six people to operate it

bombs, nuclear bombs, and genetically engineered viruses.

Only improvised bombs would be designed for mass murder bombs like grenades or claymore's were created to be anti-personnel in a battlefield setting. Nuclear bombs weren't designed to be for mass murder they were designed to be used as a tactical advantage against a country you're at war with.

Genetically engineered viruses are somewhat of a science fiction thing.

 

[Slartibartfast]

No. That's a purpose for which they can be used because of their design qualities.

Those same design qualities allow them to be used as weapons.

The New Orleans guy knew that.

When engineers for car companies are designing cars, their design purpose is for transport where it conforms to other stated requirements such as cost or safety.

 

[Slartibartfast]

So that would only include like an improvised bomb.

An improvised bomb is a bomb.

Nerve gas was not created or designed to mass murder people. It was used to control battlefields

… by killing people en masse …

The maximum gun was not designed to murder people. It was designed to mow down advancing infantry. It would be a terrible mass murder weapon because you typically need a vehicle to transport it and a crew of six people to operate it

It was designed to release a large number of bullets which are meant to go through flesh and damage living organisms.

Only improvised bombs would be designed for mass murder bombs like grenades or claymore's were created to be anti-personnel in a battlefield setting. Nuclear bombs weren't designed to be for mass murder they were designed to be used as a tactical advantage against a country you're at war with.

Genetically engineered viruses are somewhat of a science fiction thing.

All of those things I mentioned are designed to be weapons.

 

[CLAX1911]

That was already discussed when support of pro gun policies were brought up.

So? Possessing firearms still does not cause children to die.

Show that when I purchased my firearm a child died because of it. I want a name.

If you can't then your excuse is voided.

 

[CLAX1911]

When engineers for car companies are designing cars, their design purpose is for transport where it conforms to other stated requirements such as cost or safety.

When engineers design firearms the design is typically either for defense hunting target shooting or combat. Not mass murder.

 

[Slartibartfast]

So? Possessing firearms still does not cause children to die.

Show that when I purchased my firearm a child died because of it. I want a name.

If you can't then your excuse is voided.

I already mentioned the support of policies.

 

[RF667799]

When engineers for car companies are designing cars, their design purpose is for transport.

So? Their designs include aspects that make them very suitable as weapons, and very dangerous even when not used as weapons.

If you want to claim all guns can be used as weapons, that would be a true claim. However, it would also apply to cars.

 

[Slartibartfast]

So? Their designs include aspects that make them very suitable as weapons, and very dangerous even when not used as weapons.

If you want to claim all guns can be used as weapons, that would be a true claim. However, it would also apply to cars.

Secondary uses are irrelevant to the argument. Design purpose is what matters here. The fact that you have to refer to secondary uses is why I made the argument u made in post 504 and why that argument is in bad faith as it relies on you obfuscating these core concepts.

 

[CLAX1911]

I already mentioned the support of policies.

What policies? I asked you to show me that children died because I purchased a gun I wasn't mentioning any policies.

I guess you made a stupid statement and you have to play dumb to avoid accountability.

 

[Slartibartfast]

What policies? I asked you to show me that children died because I purchased a gun I wasn't mentioning any policies.

I guess you made a stupid statement and you have to play dumb to avoid accountability.

Like opposing a ban on automatic weapons or restrictions against carrying weapons in a public or populated place.

 

[CLAX1911]

An improvised bomb is a bomb.

But it's typically designed by the murderer themselves not by a manufacturer.

… by killing people en masse …

In a battlefield situation where it's necessary but not for mass murder where it's not.

It was designed to release a large number of bullets which are meant to go through flesh and damage living organisms.

Again in a battlefield situation.

All of those things I mentioned are designed to be weapons.

So show that they were designed specifically for mass murder and not justified killing such as stopping infantry and preventing attacks.

I love how you subtly move the goal posts when you get owned that's a great behavior you need to start doing more.

 

[CLAX1911]

Like opposing a ban on automatic weapons or restrictions against carrying weapons in a public or populated place.

No no I need you to show me how many children died when I purchased my gun because I purchased the gun.

I don't need to know how incompetent you are what it comes to firearms I'm already well aware.

 

[Slartibartfast]

But it's typically designed by the murderer themselves not by a manufacturer.

In a battlefield situation where it's necessary but not for mass murder where it's not.

Again in a battlefield situation.

War is a form of institutionalized murder.

So show that they were designed specifically for mass murder and not justified killing such as stopping infantry and preventing attacks.

I love how you subtly move the goal posts when you get owned that's a great behavior you need to start doing more.

I already made my case, whether they murder people in peace or war is irrelevant.

 

[Slartibartfast]

No no I need you to show me how many children died when I purchased my gun because I purchased the gun.

I don't need to know how incompetent you are what it comes to firearms I'm already well aware.

You will have to answer your own straw man.

 

[CLAX1911]

War is a form of institutionalized murder.

Not it's not necessarily it can be a defensive act. Murder is killing people without a reason.

I already made my case,

If you have no clue what murder is.

whether they murder people in peace or war is irrelevant.

Agreed but if you're shooting people out of necessity it's not murder.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Not it's not necessarily it can be a defensive act. Murder is killing people without a reason.


If you have no clue what murder is.

Agreed but if you're shooting people out of necessity it's not murder.

One nation will be the aggressor and have a military full of murderers. For example we have that situation with Russia right now. Weapons are designed to support that murder.

 

[RF667799]

When engineers design firearms the design is typically either for defense hunting target shooting or combat. Not mass murder.

A designing engineer or team might indeed have a purpose in mind when designing something. But that isn't necessarily a limitation on the final product.

The team designing the BT99 likely didn't intend it would be used for anything except 16 yard singles and handicap American trap. Everything about its design is intended to increase its suitability for that. It doesn't even have a mechanical safety catch. But none of that means it can't be used to kill someone. I've never seen anyone here argue that guns can't be used to kill. By virtue of their design, they can all be used to kill someone.

The team designing a Ford Lightning probably didn't intend that it be used to deliberately kill and injure dozens of people at a Mardi Gras parade. Nevertheless, it proved suitable for that mass murder as a consequence of its design.

How something is used is the prerogative of the user...not the designer. Certainly not some unnamed Chinese guy a thousand years ago, as some here have tried to argue.

But....did you notice how @Slartibartfast has shifted away from his "gun owners don't care about dead children" argument?

 

[Slartibartfast]

A designing engineer or team might indeed have a purpose in mind when designing something. But that isn't necessarily a limitation on the final product.

The team designing the BT99 likely didn't intend it would be used for anything except 16 yard singles and handicap American trap. Everything about its design is intended to increase its suitability for that. It doesn't even have a mechanical safety catch. But none of that means it can't be used to kill someone. I've never seen anyone here argue that guns can't be used to kill. By virtue of their design, they can all be used to kill someone.

The team designing a Ford Lightning probably didn't intend that it be used to deliberately kill and injure dozens of people at a Mardi Gras parade. Nevertheless, it proved suitable for that mass murder as a consequence of its design.

How something is used is the prerogative of the user...not the designer. Certainly not some unnamed Chinese guy a thousand years ago, as some here have tried to argue.

But....did you notice how @Slartibartfast has shifted away from his "gun owners don't care about dead children" argument?

Gun fetishists typically don’t care about dead children.