PDA

View Full Version : US News & World Report - Debate Club RE: Magazine Capacity


HowardW56
01-08-2013, 8:05 AM
With a article written by Gene Hoffman. Read & rate the articles....

http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-high-capacity-ammunition-magazines-be-banned/high-capacity-magazines-are-needed-for-self-defense

OleCuss
01-08-2013, 8:22 AM
'Tis a good article/opinion. Worth the read.

Californio
01-08-2013, 9:40 AM
All the usually suspects say YES to the ban but cannot articulate why except it feels good. Good Article Gene.

Country Woodpecker
01-08-2013, 9:51 AM
Excellent article. It amazes me how pro-2nd Amendment advocates can article with well thought out ideas and use logic to see why something like banning high capacity magazines doesn't make sense to stop these horrible acts from happening. On the other hand you hit it on the head with "feels good" tactics to convince others to side with them.

Another false logic idea is that by banning something people believe those items magically disappear off the planet. There is the assumption it hinders or effects criminals actions when history and reality have shown otherwise. Much like gun free zones don't work to stop gun murders and just like increasing fines in those zones obviously won't hinder someone intent on mass murder and suicide.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Uxi
01-08-2013, 10:03 AM
Love the logic. I scoffed at the references to evil though. :D

Joewy
01-08-2013, 10:10 AM
I read it and the opposing views and Ill tell you the logic of the antis is right out of Orwells 1984....

hoffmang
01-08-2013, 5:19 PM
Love the logic. I scoffed at the references to evil though. :D

What would you call the perp?

-Gene

ModernSpartan
01-08-2013, 5:25 PM
What would you call the perp?

-Gene

A person.

People aren't evil, they just make choices that society and culture deems misguided or inappropriate.

Many people on this planet are one life or paradigm altering incident away from being "normal" to "evil."

kaligaran
01-08-2013, 5:32 PM
A person.

People aren't evil, they just make choices that society and culture deems misguided or inappropriate.

Many people on this planet are one life or paradigm altering incident away from being "normal" to "evil."

Evil
Adjective
Profoundly immoral and malevolent.


I think it fits perfectly.

aileron
01-08-2013, 6:06 PM
Man they are taking a beating on the up arrows / down arrows.


#1 FOR STANDARD MAGS (SM)
THUMBS UP (TU) 1711
THUMBS DOWN (TD) 19

#2 FOR SM
TU 1576
TD 27

#4 AGAINST SM
TU 22
TD 1382

#5 AGAINST SM
TU 34
TD 1403

They will never learn.

I also didn't like the attempt at manipulating the minds of the people reading the arguments by showing all the cartoon links. Very disingenuous.

safewaysecurity
01-08-2013, 6:08 PM
I guess Hitler wasn't evil, he was just misguided. ..

Uxi
01-08-2013, 6:18 PM
What would you call the perp?


Not sure yet. Probably cray cray, depending what meds he was on.

Not entirely sure I disagree with "evil," either it just kept jumping out as I was reading.

ModernSpartan
01-08-2013, 6:19 PM
Implying people are evil is just a cop out, ignoring the breakdown in society and it's level of respect and overall integrity.

It also implies that people would be the opposite, which is "good" when they just fall under what society deems normal, and therefore, deemed morally correct.

Other countries on this planet, even groups in this country, have differing views of moral or ethical behavior, does that make their definition of moral "evil" since it doesn't match yours?

Uxi
01-08-2013, 6:21 PM
Some certainly can be evil. That takes perspective along with a complete and thorough evaluation. This is still too recent and the initial misreporting along with the left's propagandizing for gun control is sort of mucking it up, though.

safewaysecurity
01-08-2013, 6:22 PM
Gene THANK YOU for mentioning the LEO aspect of tje debate. Its something I constantly mention.

chris
01-08-2013, 6:23 PM
I guess Hitler wasn't evil, he was just misguided. ..

in todays society yes.

Wrangler John
01-08-2013, 6:48 PM
A person.

People aren't evil, they just make choices that society and culture deems misguided or inappropriate.

Many people on this planet are one life or paradigm altering incident away from being "normal" to "evil."

Nonsense, there are people born with the genetics to do evil, just as many harbor the genetics to develop brain lesions in early adulthood that cause psychosis. They are born that way, which has nothing to do with nurture or environment. While in times past evil was personified to account for the predilection of certain individuals to do evil, science is just beginning to recognize that the laws of probability govern genetic outcomes. We were told in an earlier CNN report that:

"Geneticists are now studying Adam Lanza's DNA, a spokeswoman for the University of Connecticut Health Center said last week.

"The geneticists were asked to join the investigation by the state medical examiner's office, spokeswoman Carolyn Pennington told CNN. She said that there is no specific genetic marker the team is looking for, and that lab results and a complete analysis of the DNA "are not expected for several weeks ... probably the end of January."

They are beginning to search for a recognizable "evil gene". So, while more questions await, we can discount the bunko idea that one life altering incident is responsible for normal people turning to evil behavior. To do less would be to accept those who commit acts of evil as innocent victims of society, rather than malicious defective maniacs. Then there is the possibility that demonic influences exist no less than the influences of good and altruism, which is a far more difficult study.

hoffmang
01-08-2013, 7:27 PM
Not sure yet. Probably cray cray, depending what meds he was on.

Not entirely sure I disagree with "evil," either it just kept jumping out as I was reading.

The reports that he was mentally ill generally got retracted, save for the comment that his mother was trying to commit him. Without enough data, I didn't feel like I could assume that this was fully a mental health episode. It's quite possible he just really was this much of a sociopath - which is generally mostly evil.

-Gene

Scott Connors
01-08-2013, 9:33 PM
A person.

People aren't evil, they just make choices that society and culture deems misguided or inappropriate.

Many people on this planet are one life or paradigm altering incident away from being "normal" to "evil."

Evil is real, it is the result of a moral choice that people make, a choice that negates the personhood of another human being and reduces them to an object for our amusement, lust and rage.

This type of moral relativism is one reason why we have mass shootings. Read less Foccault and (I say this as an agnostic) more Augustine, or even George Sterling's "The Implications of Infinity."

Your statement implies that there can be societies that would not "deem" these actions "misguided." I do not wish to live in such a society. It would make Hobbes' worse nightmares seem a blessed realm by comparison.

0nTarg3t
01-08-2013, 10:05 PM
A person.

People aren't evil, they just make choices that society and culture deems misguided or inappropriate.

Many people on this planet are one life or paradigm altering incident away from being "normal" to "evil."



lol that sounds like a modern atheist response if i ever heard one:D

bwiese
01-08-2013, 10:12 PM
lol that sounds like a modern atheist response if i ever heard one:D

And you say atheist like it's a bad thing?

IVC
01-08-2013, 10:28 PM
I have one problem with the article, though.

The argument about reloading 7 times vs. 2-3 times and discussion of what would happen if the attacker had only a ten round magazine implicitly validates the main gun control fallacy of "what is banned will not be used in crime."

I would prefer such an argument to be prefaced with an explicit disclosure of "even if the attacker chose to follow the law and bring along only 10 round magazines..."

Hiking CA
01-08-2013, 10:49 PM
It is a very well put article. I will be passing it on to others. Thanks for all of your efforts.

Cylarz
01-09-2013, 12:08 AM
And you say atheist like it's a bad thing?

It is a bad thing.

Aside from being scientifically indefensible on its face, it is unable to answer any of the big questions of life - how we got here, what we're supposed to be doing, or where we're going. It also leaves one completely unprepared to grapple with real-world observations, like "evil." I've never bought into the "morality is a social construct" or "morality is defined by individual choice" nonsense....and furthermore those who crusade against absolutes, employ absolutes quite frequently, especially while crusading against absolutes.

There is an objective right or wrong, and even the atheists know this. They sure as heck know when someone has wronged them; and if there is an objective moral law, then there by definition is a Lawgiver. (That individual has a name, and that name is Jesus.)

Evil (nobody else on the thread seems to understand this), is a natural human condition, present in every last single human being who has ever lived, who lives, or who ever will live, save for one. (Guess who that is.) Some of us, with God's help, actively resist that evil nature and those temptations, but make no mistake...there is no one among us who is good on his own merits, no....not even one. Even those who know God spend most of their time falling down - doing what they shouldn't be doing, or failing to do what they should.

The problem with gun control is that it - like every other liberal crusade - makes the mistake of assuming that the problem is "society" or some inanimate object...and since man is falsely assumed to be naturally good (when he's actually naturally evil), the next assumption is that human society can reach some sort of perfection state, some pinnacle....getting us there, according to social engineers (atheists by definition, and most of the political left) is that it is just a matter of having the right people in charge or the right combination of government policies, or the right amount of tinkering with social institutions.

Of course, it never works out, and in more extreme cases it leads to gross human rights abuses of those deemed "inferior" because they don't fit in to the social engineers' model. This is precisely what happened in Cambodia, the Soviet Union, Maoist China, Hitler's Germany, and countless other places.

If you disagree with my analysis, I'm really not sure what to tell you.

imabird
01-09-2013, 12:31 AM
Good article Gene. I agree with nutnfancy when it comes to adopting the "anti" terminology.

They're not high capacity mags. They're just normal capacity mags.

You did make this point but still gave in to the terminology.

imabird
01-09-2013, 12:31 AM
Good article Gene. I agree with nutnfancy when it comes to adopting the "anti" terminology.

They're not high capacity mags. They're just normal capacity mags.

You did make this point but still gave in to the terminology.

GW
01-09-2013, 12:44 AM
So, an atheist cannot be a "good" person' has no moral compass?
I would disagree.
Re: this thread I thought it was a well stated argument and I particularly enjoyed the closing line about LEO's and their magazines.

AlexDD
01-09-2013, 1:13 PM
I hate the word evil. Many of the atrocious things that are done are by people that lack human empathy such as psychopaths, sociopaths, etc.... They don't feel about others which removes the barrier that allows them to do unspeakable things to others. Wish there was more science about what is considered evil and how it is processed in people who do it.

BTW Great article by Gene.

otalps
01-09-2013, 1:26 PM
When countering the arbitrary 10 round number why not mention 1873 Winchesters or Henry Rifles. They hold more than that and are even more scary because you can reload while not being empty.

Rossi357
01-09-2013, 1:38 PM
And you say atheist like it's a bad thing?

This ^^^^^^

Rossi357
01-09-2013, 1:46 PM
How we got here, what we're supposed to be doing, or where we're going.
These are questions. If you believe in God, you don't look for the answers. An atheist keeps looking for the answers.

baddos
01-09-2013, 2:05 PM
I would say a modern atheist is a bad thing from my perspective because they generally will try to push their beliefs on others just like the religions they rail against.

postal
01-09-2013, 2:15 PM
Good article Gene.




It is a bad thing.


There is an objective right or wrong, and even the atheists know this. -yup.
They sure as heck know when someone has wronged them; and if there is an objective moral law, then there by definition is a Lawgiver. (That individual has a name, and that name is Jesus.)


^^^NOPE!

So according to your rant, there was no law before jebus huh? In any civilization before or after jebus without jebuses teachings????

So much fail.

postal
01-09-2013, 2:16 PM
I would say a modern atheist is a bad thing from my perspective because they generally will try to push their beliefs on others just like the religions they rail against.


I dont go door to door puking my non beliefs all over your shirt.:D

shortyforty
01-09-2013, 2:22 PM
Great article Gene! Thanks for putting it together. Thanks for doing so much to get the facts out. You are a great asset to our cause and we appreciate you very much. Shorty

wazdat
01-09-2013, 2:25 PM
I wanted to post this as a reply to McCarthy argument but couldn't (no Facebook).


So if we follow McCarthy's anti-gun logic, every automobile should have an ignition interlock breathalyzer because even though millions of people are law abiding and do not get behind the wheel after consuming alcohol, that will stop the small number that do break the law by driving drunk. I'm sure the American public would love you to death for trying to pass such B.S. legislation.

hoffmang
01-09-2013, 3:19 PM
I would prefer such an argument to be prefaced with an explicit disclosure of "even if the attacker chose to follow the law and bring along only 10 round magazines..."
Not enough words to do that sadly.
Good article Gene. I agree with nutnfancy when it comes to adopting the "anti" terminology.

They're not high capacity mags. They're just normal capacity mags.

You did make this point but still gave in to the terminology.
And that's why I made that point. Unlike "assault weapon" there is a legitimate concept of "large-capacity" magazine. I'd be hard pressed to refute that a 50 round magazine for my Sig P226 isn't large-capacity. However an 18 round one certainly is not.
When countering the arbitrary 10 round number why not mention 1873 Winchesters or Henry Rifles. They hold more than that and are even more scary because you can reload while not being empty.
I always have that one in my back pocket. I could not really work it into this limited word count here, but it goes to show how historically common round counts more than 10 are.

-Gene

1859sharps
01-09-2013, 4:11 PM
People aren't evil, they just make choices that society and culture deems misguided or inappropriate.

Many people on this planet are one life or paradigm altering incident away from being "normal" to "evil."

While you can make a logical argument that the definition of evil can slip into the subjective based on culture, religion, lack of religion, etc, etc.

However, I think you can also make a clear argument for evil in this context since we are only talking about the US in the context of this discussion.

In the US, when one person preys on another, that is generally considered being evil.

I think Gene's use of the word is correct and appropriate.

The reports that he was mentally ill generally got retracted, save for the comment that his mother was trying to commit him. Without enough data, I didn't feel like I could assume that this was fully a mental health episode. It's quite possible he just really was this much of a sociopath - which is generally mostly evil.

-Gene

I would agree that labeling the sandy hook shooter mentally ill in the traditional since would not be accurate or correct.

However, there are "mental illnesses" for lack of a better way to "label/describe" that do not fall into the "category of illnesses" where people do not have control over their actions that can, and may play into what allows someone to shoot up a bunch of kids.

someone "pulls a sandy hook" for one of two reasons.

1. they choose evil. this is absolutely a real and distinct possibility.

2. or they are sick. what throws people, even some professionals, is the "sickness" does NOT preclude them from being FULLY aware of their choices. The issue is their "Sickness" allows them to not care or act anyway EVEN though they KNOW what they did or are doing or about to is wrong.

I do have some experience with this type person. NOT all of them will be a "sandy hook shooter". But their "illness" leads to them doing some pretty cruel things to other people. Generally it's their families, but not always.

the "illness" is currently labeled a personality disorder, I think with time the "diagnosis" will be refined and and definition and understanding and "treatment" will improve.

The thing to keep in mind also, is unlike say schizophrenia may re-leave responsibility, personality disorders do NOT re leave responsibility.

I think we need to NOT dismiss this other factor. When you understand how a person with a personality disorder thinks, their "logic" etc, it does go a long ways to understanding how someone ends up at a school shooting children, can be technically "sick" but NOT absolved of responsibility for their actions.

Simply choosing to be evil also goes a long way to explaining why someone would shoot up kids. But there are many evil people in the world, and most aren't shooting up kids. there are biological safe guards in place (though they aren't 100% perfect) and simply saying the sandy hook shooter is evil may not answer all questions of why.

OH, an great article, thanks for all your efforts, work, time you put out to protect the 2nd amendment.

postal
01-09-2013, 6:46 PM
To keep things simple, "evil" seems appropriate.

The rest is just symantecs.

Scarecrow Repair
01-09-2013, 7:15 PM
Aside from being scientifically indefensible on its face

Dude, drop it, it was a funny, it was O/T, and you've already started with a losing argument. No religion, or non-religion, answers the question of what came before the religion, except to say it was always there, which as much as admits it has no answer.

jdberger
01-10-2013, 12:06 AM
Ah, Calguns...

We got a nice editorial from a respected member and the discssuion devolves (pun intended) into a debate about religion.

Nice article, Gene.

mag360
01-10-2013, 12:37 AM
@jd "ah, calguns" my sentiments exactly.

Decoligny
01-10-2013, 8:35 AM
Implying people are evil is just a cop out, ignoring the breakdown in society and it's level of respect and overall integrity.

It also implies that people would be the opposite, which is "good" when they just fall under what society deems normal, and therefore, deemed morally correct.

Other countries on this planet, even groups in this country, have differing views of moral or ethical behavior, does that make their definition of moral "evil" since it doesn't match yours?

Implying people are tall is just a cop out.

It implies that people could be the opposite, which is "short" when they just fall under what society deems as normal height, and therefore, are not deemed average or tall.

Other countries on this planet, even groups in this country, have differing views of normal height, does that make thier definition of "tall" or "short" wrong because it doesn't match yours?

Good and Evil are societally set concepts, just as Tall and Short are societally set concepts. The pygmy tribes don't consider themselves to be short. They consider themselves to be normal. Jeffrey Dohmer problably didn't consider himself to be evil, he considered eating the flesh of his victim perfectly normal.

He was however, BY OUR SOCIETAL STANDARDS


E V I L

If you remove the standards by which me determine what a thing is, then you end up with pure animal savagery and no society at all.