Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Endus]

Lol you’re funny. No I said people who shoot up kindergartens are mentally ill. Then you accused me of being ableist

This is like complaining that you called black people lazy and stupid, and I called you racist.

and followed it in post referring to people who own fire arm as gun nuts. Which is a pejorative term for mentally ill people.

Also a term for a fan of something. See "movie nut" or the like. So no; that's where you drove even further off the rails in your victim complex.

Then you posted a bunch of shit I said about no one individual specifically like you don’t make comments yourself.

You claimed you don't insult people. I listed off a lot of insults you'd made just the last couple pages of this thread.

I never claimed I didn't insult people. So I'm not sure how you're thinking you're turning that around on me; I never made a claim that was false.

I didn’t lose shit. You just thought you were going to steam roll over me with your post a link bullshit you’ve infected others you bested.

I have evidence that backs my arguments.

You don't.

Somehow, that's my fault, I guess.

But you’re way off here maybe, arguing with the morons angry at you that 5v 1 you or more cause they’re still angry the last time you made them look foolish before they changed their names again, made you sloppy I don’t know.

But you always been better than this.

This feels pretty identical to those other circumstances. You seem pretty much exactly like any of those people I've upbraided like this in the past. Not really seeing the difference, frankly.

[Doctor Amadeus]

This is like complaining that you called black people lazy and stupid, and I called you racist.



Also a term for a fan of something. See "movie nut" or the like. So no; that's where you drove even further off the rails in your victim complex.



You claimed you don't insult people. I listed off a lot of insults you'd made just the last couple pages of this thread.

I never claimed I didn't insult people. So I'm not sure how you're thinking you're turning that around on me; I never made a claim that was false.



I have evidence that backs my arguments.

You don't.

Somehow, that's my fault, I guess.



This feels pretty identical to those other circumstances. You seem pretty much exactly like any of those people I've upbraided like this in the past. Not really seeing the difference, frankly.

You called gun owners Nut Jobs no matter how you spin it.

My descriptions of non specific people is no more an insult than calling mass shooters who kill kindergarteners mentally ill.

You’re full of shit if you think otherwise and everything I said about how your sloppy now is True.

Because I just wiped the floor with you and didn’t even try. Only you don’t even know it because you can’t tell or your ego won’t allow.

We’re done as far as I’m concerned with this argument. But if you want to give it a go any other time I’m sure you’ll take a shot.


Even if you don’t I don’t care. I would rather win an argument when you were at your best or lose.

You lost

- - - Updated - - -

Being an evil piece of shit and shooting up a school isn’t instantly a “mental illness”, this idea that being a complete piece of shit can be validated, excuses or justified by throwing people with actual mental illnesses, deficiencies and challenges under the bus for your own attempts to justify your own stance on an issue is also vile, disgusting and evil.

Have some empathy for people, don’t vilify innocent people by tarring them with the same brush as abhorrent murderers.

Being a piece of shit is a mental illness. Nothing normal about directly causing harm to people intentionally for no gain.

Nothing is gained or meant to be gained by killing kindergarteners.

[Edge-]

Being a piece of shit is a mental illness.

https://psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm

No, it's not.

[Doctor Amadeus]

https://psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm

No, it's not.

Yes it is. I’m not clicking your link.

[Edge-]

Yes it is. I’m not clicking your link.

I'm not interested in going back and forth with you anymore since you're the pigeon playing chess. But I'll just come in to fact-check you when you're shilling some bullshit.

"Being a piece of shit" is nowhere in the DSM-V.

[Cinnamilk]

@Doctor Amadeus

My parents always like to ask when I'll return to live in the US, and I laugh it off because the stress of living with people like you isn't worth it.

You're too absorbed in your fee fees about your right to own tools designed for killing that any sort of proposal to regulate it like any other industry we have just crosses the line.

Instead of actually taking the science into consideration and looking at how every other developed country was able to take the steps able to avoid this uniquely American phenomenon, you take everything as a personal insult and would rather subject the future generation to live in a constant state of fear under prisonfied schools.

That shit causes harm twofold: not only are you not actually addressing the major factor in the equation that allows these shootings to happen at the frequency that they do, but you're stealing childhoods that in any other country these children would actually get to carry out.

But thanks for the constant reminder of how shitty and flawed the people back home can think.

[Doctor Amadeus]

I'm not interested in going back and forth with you anymore since you're the pigeon playing chess. But I'll just come in to fact-check you when you're shilling some bullshit.

"Being a piece of shit" is nowhere in the DSM-V.

You’ll come back here to try to win in your mind credibility.

I’ll just continue to remind you waters wet and I’m not clicking on your links or providing any.

I know how to argue and speak for myself. I don’t need to misinterpret work as my ideas.

You like your links you can read them and tell me what you think it said.

- - - Updated - - -

@Doctor Amadeus

My parents always like to ask when I'll return to live in the US, and I laugh it off because the stress of living with people like you isn't worth it.

You're too absorbed in your fee fees about your right to own tools designed for killing that any sort of proposal to regulate it like any other industry we have just crosses the line.

Instead of actually taking the science into consideration and looking at how every other developed country was able to take the steps able to avoid this uniquely American phenomenon, you take everything as a personal insult and would rather subject the future generation to live in a constant state of fear under prisonfied schools.

That shit causes harm twofold: not only are you not actually addressing the major factor in the equation that allows these shootings to happen at the frequency that they do, but you're stealing childhoods that in any other country these children would actually get to carry out.

But thanks for the constant reminder of how shitty and flawed the people back home can think.

Well some people aren’t willing to be preached to by hypocrites who believe they are right because someone said and their fee fees.

The right to bare shall not be infringed.

Meaning I’m not going to lose my rights because of something you fear I’ll do because of someone else.

[Edge-]

The right to bare shall not be infringed.

Reminder: Amendments aren't absolute, and can be repealed.

See: Prohibition via Constitutional Amendment (18th), followed by the repeal of the Amendment (21st).

[Nurasu]

Reminder: Amendments aren't absolute, and can be repealed.

See: Prohibition via Constitutional Amendment (18th), followed by the repeal of the Amendment (21st).

Not to mention, their interpretation is constantly debated by the Supreme Court.

- - - Updated - - -

You’ll come back here to try to win in your mind credibility.

I’ll just continue to remind you waters wet and I’m not clicking on your links or providing any.

I know how to argue and speak for myself. I don’t need to misinterpret work as my ideas.

You like your links you can read them and tell me what you think it said.

"I'm not here to debate, I'm just here to spout my bullshit unchallenged."

[Elegiac]

Reminder: Amendments aren't absolute, and can be repealed.

See: Prohibition via Constitutional Amendment (18th), followed by the repeal of the Amendment (21st).

It's also a silly argument in general that deliberately tries to limit the scope of discussion because the points being made aren't indefensible beyond that scope. Every other right actually listed in the Constitution is defensible on its own merits, for the most part; freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of and from religion, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, et cetera.

Not so with the Second Amendment. The arguments in favor of firearm ownership as the default rather than the exception all fail when subjected to scrutiny because there's no evidence historically or currently supporting them; there's no reduction of crime, people are not made safer, and there has never once been an instance of actual tyranny in this country that the Second Amendment has prevented or abolished - slavery, Jim Crow, Japanese internment, et cetera. The only 'valid' arguments tend to be marginal use cases that would be more than satisfied by gun ownership as a permitted exception, but in no way support the practice being an enshrined and legally protected 'right'.

Not to mention, their interpretation is constantly debated by the Supreme Court.

People seem to forget that firearm ownership as a guaranteed individual right is actually newer than Tumblr.

[Edge-]

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/09/11040...yland-shooting

So do we need to harden manufacturing facilities now, too? Put in some "door control"? Armed guards?

Not much info beyond 3 people killed and one injured, and the shooter is no longer a threat (doesn't say if he's dead or apprehended).

This isn't even about "weaponizing dead kids", these all seem to be adults. I'm just wondering when we can do something about guns that's not a "knee jerk reaction" when we seem to have mass shootings every few days.

[Endus]

You’ll come back here to try to win in your mind credibility.

I’ll just continue to remind you waters wet and I’m not clicking on your links or providing any.

I know how to argue and speak for myself. I don’t need to misinterpret work as my ideas.

You like your links you can read them and tell me what you think it said.

This is just you engaging in unapologetic willful ignorance. You admit you don't know anything, refuse to inform yourself when offered the chance, and insult and abuse those who you disagree with.

The right to bare shall not be infringed.

Meaning I’m not going to lose my rights because of something you fear I’ll do because of someone else.

Or what?

Congress repeals the 2nd tomorrow; what're you gonna do?

It's just an Amendment. They've been repealed before. The Constitution was meant to be a living document, changing as society needed.

[Doctor Amadeus]

This is just you engaging in unapologetic willful ignorance. You admit you don't know anything, refuse to inform yourself when offered the chance, and insult and abuse those who you disagree with.

Or what?

Congress repeals the 2nd tomorrow; what're you gonna do?

It's just an Amendment. They've been repealed before. The Constitution was meant to be a living document, changing as society needed.

Says the guy who called me ableist and then proceeds to unapologetically call people who own gun nuts. You're welcome to keep trying, but you aren't going to walk that back, and as I said there is no amount of links that will change that or that I am going to click.

As for what will I do, trust me you aren't going to repeal the 2nd amendment, so there is no reason to entertain what will I do. I am willing to do what every other law abiding gun owner will do to defend what was fought for to begin with.


But unlike you I am not going to use children or mass shootings as an excuse one way or another. I am not willing to give up my guns because I don't want to and as long as it's my right I will defend it.

[Breccia]

Correlation ain't causation, and that bridle you're hanging only fits one way or it doesn't. Meaning you can't be for one and not the other. If you find gun owner ship and someone's mentality or behavior as people indictive of discriminations. So too are individuals who otherwise can't deal with their problems emotionally and mentally.

Prime example, IF YOU SHOOT UP A GOD DAMN KINDERGATEN!

Two things.

One, stat teacher here, you can't just handwave stuff with "correllation isn't causation". That's the mathematical equivalent of "nuh uh". At the very minimum you need to propose a lurking variable, something along the lines of "places with more guns per capita and also more gun crime per capita have more mental illness per capita" which, considering where you're talking about, might actually be something you can back up.

Two, nobody here is arguing that a sane person would shoot up a school of random children. But, as some of us have already detailed, the problem is diagnosing people with a legit mental illness before the murders. It is just as unhelpful to blame mental illness without a solution, as it is to blame gun ownership without a solution. Which the GOP is doing, in Texas, right now, I've cited it. If the only evidence someone is crazy is they committed a murder, the diagnosis is too late and useless.

[PhaelixWW]

Congress repeals the 2nd tomorrow; what're you gonna do?

Congress can't repeal an Amendment. It takes 2/3 of both chambers to even propose an amendment, and then it still has to be ratified by 3/4 of the State legislatures.

How likely do you think that is?

[Endus]

Says the guy who called me ableist and then proceeds to unapologetically call people who own gun nuts. You're welcome to keep trying, but you aren't going to walk that back, and as I said there is no amount of links that will change that or that I am going to click.

Nothing I would need to walk back; you're lying about what was said and what "gun nut" even means. Just unrepentant lying.

- - - Updated - - -

Congress can't repeal an Amendment. It takes 2/3 of both chambers to even propose an amendment, and then it still has to be ratified by 3/4 of the State legislatures.

How likely do you think that is?

Practically, in 2022? Impossible. Republicans would oppose a "puppies are cute" bill if Dems proposed it. But what you're responding to was a hypothetical to point out the implicit threat of violence in Amadeus' comment.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Two things.

One, stat teacher here, you can't just handwave stuff with "correllation isn't causation". That's the mathematical equivalent of "nuh uh". At the very minimum you need to propose a lurking variable, something along the lines of "places with more guns per capita and also more gun crime per capita have more mental illness per capita" which, considering where you're talking about, might actually be something you can back up.

Well more specifically a scientific fact, but It's not a nuh uh here, I have always explicitly spelled out my argument or the reason for any opinion I arrive at. Guns are a took, comparing the U.S to any other nation without accounting for variables is not valid, thus making most comparisons invalid over all.

Per capita violence as it relates to proportionality yes, I get, but that only considers the scope, not the external environment's. Specifically, such as culture, traditions social or political conflicts etc.

Two, nobody here is arguing that a sane person would shoot up a school of random children. But, as some of us have already detailed, the problem is diagnosing people with a legit mental illness before the murders. It is just as unhelpful to blame mental illness without a solution, as it is to blame gun ownership without a solution. Which the GOP is doing, in Texas, right now, I've cited it. If the only evidence someone is crazy is they committed a murder, the diagnosis is too late and useless.

No there not, you are correct, but the problem is when you scream from the heavens that you can't call people who commit mass shootings mentally ill, is leaves the person making that statement responsible for making the distinction clear.

Not by posting links by academics who are not especially here to be challenged or respond to their works. And ME or anyone here NOT being an academic to really place context to a finding.

Studies and Papers aren't always conclusion to an issue, but a lot of times a perspective also based on an argument of study. Again not appropriate for bolstering the argument to counter not specific accusation but a general statement, people who commit mass murder through shootings are mentally ill.

Honestly the fact a handful of people do that shit on here has actually accomplished reducing arguments to little or no value when it comes to actually discussing an issue.

[Endus]

Two, nobody here is arguing that a sane person would shoot up a school of random children. But, as some of us have already detailed, the problem is diagnosing people with a legit mental illness before the murders. It is just as unhelpful to blame mental illness without a solution, as it is to blame gun ownership without a solution. Which the GOP is doing, in Texas, right now, I've cited it. If the only evidence someone is crazy is they committed a murder, the diagnosis is too late and useless.

Uhh, no. I'm absolutely saying that. The vast majority of mass shooters are completely sane. Just evil and violent. Same for terrorists, Nazis (now and in the past), child abusers, rapists, and so on.

Stigmatizing mental health when the overwhelming majority of violent offenders aren't suffering mental illness leads to us missing the actual motivators, and stigmatizes millions of innocents.

Stop giving bad people the excuse of being sick. Let them carry the full responsibility of their awful choices.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Nothing I would need to walk back; you're lying about what was said and what "gun nut" even means. Just unrepentant lying.

No if you were honest you would, accusing me of ableism whether you honestly believe that I don't know, but it is completely beyond the lines for challenging my statement. I didn't make any clinical diagnosis for which you clearly ran the gambit against anyways, you seriously fucking just took your own ball and scored a touch down against yourself.

With the "gun nuts" statement. You have NO fucking standing to say anything about what you accused me of in terms of insults without any specifics, when you specifically nailed down with the same kind of statement you are bitching about me for.

Practically, in 2022? Impossible. Republicans would oppose a "puppies are cute" bill if Dems proposed it. But what you're responding to was a hypothetical to point out the implicit threat of violence in Amadeus' comment.

It was a tactic, it was disingenuous and right now you have no business even expecting me to take you seriously.

[Endus]

No if you were honest you would, accusing me of ableism whether you honestly believe that I don't know, but it is completely beyond the lines for challenging my statement. I didn't make any clinical diagnosis for which you clearly ran the gambit against anyways, you seriously fucking just took your own ball and scored a touch down against yourself.

With the "gun nuts" statement. You have NO fucking standing to say anything about what you accused me of in terms of insults without any specifics, when you specifically nailed down with the same kind of statement you are bitching about me for.

Still lying about what "nut" means in context. Are "movie nuts" crazy? "Sports nuts"?

It was a tactic, it was disingenuous and right now you have no business even expecting me to take you seriously.

You still don't know what "disingenuous" means.