Robb Elementary School shooting

Idolater

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Stripe said:
What?

No. We'd let them know in advance. How long would they need to run out?
Click to expand...
I'm talking about an immoral but likely effective policy, where whenever there are Kamikaze mass murders (like the OP), the mass murderer's family is subsequently punished. Innocent people (just like the mass murderer's victims) would be put in jeopardy with this policy, but it might be just the right innocent people that would deter these scum of the Earth mass murderers. You make an imaginary scale or balance. Today, when the mass murderers consider their crime, the scale has his murderous desire on one side, and the lives of unimportant people on the other. No contest, his desires outweigh these innocent people.

Now put their family on one side of that scale, with this immoral policy I'm not seriously entertaining. Now that stops some of these Kamikaze mass murderers. They weigh their bloodlust against their family. Is it going to stop all of em? no. Some? Many? Yes.

But it's still an immoral policy. So even though it's possible to argue that it would probably work, it's still off the table because it's immoral.

Like gun control.
 
Idolater

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
And this is where "Originalists" and utilitarian legal positivists differ starkly.

If it works, or even just if it might work, then the latter (utilitarians) will consider it, while the former automatically, preemptively rules out all immoral choices like torture and other forms of cruel and unusual punishment, they rule it out of hand right immediately. Circa, "You have to find another solution, gun control is immoral, as it would be immoral to punish a Kamikaze mass murderer's innocent surviving family."

@Stripe just fyi, I did see Dr. Strangelove, and so I do know we need to tell people well in advance of actually implementing this policy, in order for it to logically possibly do any good. I am not talking about the OP's Kamikaze mass murderer's family, though imma pray for them.
 
M

marke

Well-known member
User Name said:
Russia is not a stable democracy with a thriving economy. The US is. Therefore, you are making a false equivalence between the two.

Instead, compare the USA to other stable democracies with strong economies. When you do so, you'll immediately notice two things:

1) Guns are allowed to proliferate in the USA.
2) Gun crimes/mass shootings are far more common in the USA.
Click to expand...
What you are doing is accepting the crafted narrative that a handful of countries seem to show that confiscating guns made the crime rate go down even though other countries showed the opposite. Drop the narrative. There must be other factors involved and not just guns or the narrative would hold true for all nations.
 
ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Idolater said:
I'm talking about an immoral but likely effective policy, where whenever there are Kamikaze mass murders (like the OP), the mass murderer's family is subsequently punished. Innocent people (just like the mass murderer's victims) would be put in jeopardy with this policy, but it might be just the right innocent people that would deter these scum of the Earth mass murderers. You make an imaginary scale or balance. Today, when the mass murderers consider their crime, the scale has his murderous desire on one side, and the lives of unimportant people on the other. No contest, his desires outweigh these innocent people.

Now put their family on one side of that scale, with this immoral policy I'm not seriously entertaining. Now that stops some of these Kamikaze mass murderers. They weigh their bloodlust against their family. Is it going to stop all of em? no. Some? Many? Yes.

But it's still an immoral policy. So even though it's possible to argue that it would probably work, it's still off the table because it's immoral.

Like gun control.
Click to expand...
Should parents be held responsible for the actions of their children?
 
Stripe

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
ok doser said:
Should parents be held responsible for the actions of their children?
Click to expand...
I'd be OK if the cops went to the family home, told the people there that it was being purchased on the spot, handed over the cash and then let people do as they wanted with the property.

But keep the fire department on standby.
 
Idolater

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
ok doser said:
Should parents be held responsible for the actions of their children?
Click to expand...
This may appear to be an evasive answer, but I'd say basically yes, so long as you can convince a jury. There's certainly no right of parental immunity or anything like that.
 
Idolater

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Stripe said:
Spoilsport.


You won me over.
Click to expand...
In hardest to defend rights when there's a Super-Duper Tragedy.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Our_Universal_Rights/comments/uxf2gu America is in ideological combat right now. Which side will win the independents? And create a legislative supermajority, that can then do some of the revolutionary and innovative things that Americans are capable of doing when we're united?

This is why school shootings prove that we're the best country in the world, ever has been, and ever will be. God bless America. Pray for America. America is fighting for your rights as a child of God. Republicans.
 
Idolater

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
I don't care that it's art, I care that the model is using poor trigger discipline. This is the type of gun safety violation that results in negligent discharges. The NRA exists to extinguish this kind of dangerous behavior with guns.

Keep your finger off the trigger and entirely outside the trigger guard, until and unless you're ready to shoot. "Art" or otherwise.

Cf. Mr. Alec Baldwin.
 
PureX

PureX

Well-known member
Idolater said:
If this is true it's because the NRA doesn't have enough political power. So which one are you saying. Epic fail, or not?
Click to expand...
The NRA promotes gun insanity on behalf of the manufacturers. "Freedom = guns". "Manhood = guns". "Self-empowerment = guns". Guns used to be just necessary tools. Now, thanks to the NRA, they are totems for ideology, and cultural signifiers. And millions of morons that have no need for nor enough sufficiently responsible brain cells to own them have piles of them. Because they now think guns make them free, and strong, and manly. (It's why they are morons.)

And when a nation as prone to extreme violence as ours becomes awash in guns, lots of innocent people die.
 
Last edited:
TomO

TomO

Get used to it.
Hall of Fame
"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."
~Benjamin Franklin

"Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin"
~THE ALMIGHTY
 
M

marke

Well-known member
PureX said:
The NRA promotes gun insanity on behalf of the manufacturers. "Freedom = guns". "Manhood = guns". "Self-empowerment = guns". Guns used to be just necessary tools. Now, thanks to the NRA, they are totems for ideology, and cultural signifiers. And millions of morons that have no need for nor enough sufficiently responsible brain cells to own them have piles of them. Because they now think guns make them free, and strong, and manly. (It's why they are morons.)

And when a nation as prone to extreme violence as ours becomes awash in guns, lots of innocent people die.
Click to expand...
Only one in ten thousand guns are ever used to commit a crime in America. If lefties manage to get guns outlawed like guns are outlawed in China or North Korea, then one in every ten guns remaining will likely be used in a crime and the crime rate will go up as it did in Russia when the population there was disarmed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top