LogFAQs > #938648495

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, Database 6 ( 01.01.2020-07.18.2020 ), DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Security guard in Michigan shot and killed for asking customer to wear mask
LinkPizza 05/05/20 1:28:38 PM #36:	paulisdabomb posted... Okay so, you believe that violent behaviour can be conditioned out of a people? Would you say, historically, that humans voluntarily resort to peaceful means to resolve conflicts? My point is, sure, behaviour is worse than guns, but outlawing guns would solve this problem in a heartbeat, whereas trying to re-educate a people is kind of a challenge Not by just taking away their guns. Taking away someone's guns could possibly make people more violent. In the end, even if they didn't have guns, who to say they wouldn't have went back and stabbed the guard? Violence is violence. Is just that they chose a gun as their tool this time instead of something else... You can't say the problem would have been solved by removing guns when they probably would have just tried to kill him another way... paulisdabomb posted... And you know that it wouldn't solve anything because...? Has it been attempted? I don't think so. No offence, but your argument doesn't make sense to me, it's not even really an argument tbh. If violent people have fewer means to be violent, then even if the behaviour or urge is still present, it won't be able to manifest itself as much, often or severe. Excuse my graphic example, but beating someone to death (in world were guns are outlawed) or simply pulling a trigger, are two very different things. This means violence would naturally drop if guns aren't an option. All I really see is unwillingness to change, or even to try. It's sad :( That's just an assumption, though. It could work the other way, though. To compensate, people may become more violent because they don't have guns instead. Like you said, beating someone to death and pulling the trigger are two different things. Mead posted... which is why its long past time to start putting some serious restrictions on the weapons manufacturers Probably wouldn't do much. Guns can be made somewhat easily these days. I remember a friend telling me about how easy it was to make one out of basically scrap. And while it wouldn't be the best gun, it's still a gun. And the people who still make guns would probably sell them illegally, meaning that the worst of the worst would be the ones with guns still... Which wouldn't solve anything. The ones without guns would probably have been people who have never had to use their gun, or people that used their for like hunting or something... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:938648495] in Security g... [t:78659189]...</cite> <quote>paulisdabomb posted...</cite> <quote>Okay so, you believe that violent behaviour can be conditioned out of a people? Would you say, historically, that humans voluntarily resort to peaceful means to resolve conflicts? My point is, sure, behaviour is worse than guns, but outlawing guns would solve this problem in a heartbeat, whereas trying to re-educate a people is kind of a challenge </quote> Not by just taking away their guns. Taking away someone's guns could possibly make people more violent. In the end, even if they didn't have guns, who to say they wouldn't have went back and stabbed the guard? Violence is violence. Is just that they chose a gun as their tool this time instead of something else... You can't say the problem would have been solved by removing guns when they probably would have just tried to kill him another way... paulisdabomb posted...</cite> <quote>And you know that it wouldn't solve anything because...? Has it been attempted? I don't think so. No offence, but your argument doesn't make sense to me, it's not even really an argument tbh. If violent people have fewer means to be violent, then even if the behaviour or urge is still present, it won't be able to manifest itself as much, often or severe. Excuse my graphic example, but beating someone to death (in world were guns are outlawed) or simply pulling a trigger, are two very different things. This means violence would naturally drop if guns aren't an option. All I really see is unwillingness to change, or even to try. It's sad :(</quote> That's just an assumption, though. It could work the other way, though. To compensate, people may become more violent because they don't have guns instead. Like you said, beating someone to death and pulling the trigger are two different things. Mead posted...</cite> <quote>which is why its long past time to start putting some serious restrictions on the weapons manufacturers</quote> Probably wouldn't do much. Guns can be made somewhat easily these days. I remember a friend telling me about how easy it was to make one out of basically scrap. And while it wouldn't be the best gun, it's still a gun. And the people who still make guns would probably sell them illegally, meaning that the worst of the worst would be the ones with guns still... Which wouldn't solve anything. The ones without guns would probably have been people who have never had to use their gun, or people that used their for like hunting or something... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1