Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Cafe > General

General Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #5831  
Old 12-21-12, 01:41
patricknd's Avatar
patricknd patricknd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: houston texas
Posts: 1,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Januss View Post
I'm sorry, I thought it was a discussion about whether or not guns should be made less readily available, and what effect that might have on society as a whole.
Since we are not even discussing the same thing there is no need to respond to me.
Glad your side lost the election, it will be good for the country and the world if that continues.
Homes are safer without alcohol too. Let's outlaw that at the same time.

Read up on the part alcohol plays in gun crimes, maybe we're looking at the wrong culprit. Of course drinking is a lot more popular so we can't slaughter that sacred cow, can we?
Reply With Quote
  #5832  
Old 12-21-12, 01:46
patricknd's Avatar
patricknd patricknd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: houston texas
Posts: 1,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloCity View Post
Planned suicides are predominant, absolutely, but all I said was that there are a lot of impulse suicides. Which there are.

So let's assume that if 25% of attempts are impulsive, then stands to reason that 20-25% of "successful" suicides are also impulsive. And I'm not going to do the math but 20-25% of 32,000 is a pretty substantial number.

The only point I'm making is that here in the US, we predominantly use guns, and if we didn't have such easy access to guns, the US suicide rate would be lower - note: lower - because there would be fewer impulse suicides. We have a higher rate of suicide than we need to have because easy access to guns makes impulsive behavior more lethal.
Hells bells, I won't skeet shoot anymore cause my neighbor might kill himself if we're both allowed to own a shotgun.

Bringing suicide into this debate is retarded.
Reply With Quote
  #5833  
Old 12-21-12, 03:50
BroDeal's Avatar
BroDeal BroDeal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Above 5000 feet
Posts: 12,855
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amsterhammer View Post
Allow me to make some statistical comparisons between the US, and countries without a legalized, obsessive gun culture.

blah blah blah

What a surprise.
So what you are saying is that take out the gun violence and the U.S. is much more violent than Holland. Brilliant.

Next time try taking out the number of criminals killed by other criminals.
__________________
"Listen, my son. Trust no one! You can count on no one but yourself. Improve your skills, son. Harden your body. Become a number one man. Do not ever let anyone beat you!" -- Gekitotsu! Satsujin ken
Reply With Quote
  #5834  
Old 12-21-12, 05:20
Hugh Januss's Avatar
Hugh Januss Hugh Januss is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: socal
Posts: 5,764
Default

If we take out the people killed by criminals and the people killed by people whining and *****ing about their Constitutional Rights (even though they could not quote even the tiniest passage from said Constitution) then I bet we are down to nearly zero gun related deaths. Case closed.
__________________
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings."

Proud member of the Clinic 1200
Reply With Quote
  #5835  
Old 12-21-12, 07:07
frenchfry's Avatar
frenchfry frenchfry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Bourgogne
Posts: 1,535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroDeal View Post
Big surprise. Socialist is not bothered by the government taking three quarters of people's hard earned euros.

You should prove what a superior person you are by giving 75% of your income to the state.
The debate on taxes (and taxing the rich in particular) in France is the opposite end of the spectrum compared to what I see of the debate in the US. I find both debates sterile and often polluted by irrational reasoning.

In France, it is a popular opinion that all wealth is ill gotten, and that the rich are somehow unworthy by definition. There is a cultural basis for this, in theory your money is the "governments" money, and if you have any left after taxes it is only because the "government" is kind enough to let this happen. The ultimate goal is that the government take all wealth (income and capital) and redistribute it "fairly" to the population, as if wealth was not created but simply exists. Thus the expression "cradle to grave". Individual responsibility is discouraged, everyone is a victim looking for more handouts.

Unfortunately in reality we live on borrowed money due to the political incompetence and corporatism (from both right and left wing parties, there is virtually no difference) despite extremely high levels of taxation.

At the same time, I personally reject the consumption based society we have become and the excesses of greed that have transformed the capitalistic model that has given us so much into a moral desert lacking in basic values and human consideration.

In short, I disagree with the excesses of both systems/debates. We have to find a middle ground, however this is dependant on the will of the general population to engage in a meaningful discussion - something which I don't see happening.
__________________
"C'est une triste chose de songer que la nature parle et que le genre humain n'écoute pas" - Victor Hugo
Reply With Quote
  #5836  
Old 12-21-12, 10:36
rhubroma's Avatar
rhubroma rhubroma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,027
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchfry View Post
The debate on taxes (and taxing the rich in particular) in France is the opposite end of the spectrum compared to what I see of the debate in the US. I find both debates sterile and often polluted by irrational reasoning.

In France, it is a popular opinion that all wealth is ill gotten, and that the rich are somehow unworthy by definition. There is a cultural basis for this, in theory your money is the "governments" money, and if you have any left after taxes it is only because the "government" is kind enough to let this happen. The ultimate goal is that the government take all wealth (income and capital) and redistribute it "fairly" to the population, as if wealth was not created but simply exists. Thus the expression "cradle to grave". Individual responsibility is discouraged, everyone is a victim looking for more handouts.

Unfortunately in reality we live on borrowed money due to the political incompetence and corporatism (from both right and left wing parties, there is virtually no difference) despite extremely high levels of taxation.

At the same time, I personally reject the consumption based society we have become and the excesses of greed that have transformed the capitalistic model that has given us so much into a moral desert lacking in basic values and human consideration.

In short, I disagree with the excesses of both systems/debates. We have to find a middle ground, however this is dependant on the will of the general population to engage in a meaningful discussion - something which I don't see happening.
You paint an ideologically biased portrait of your fellow countryman, frenchfry, which you deliver as a non-partisan cirtique.

A certain level of assistentialismo also exists in Italy, however the idea about wealth as antagonistic to the interests of collective net worth and the purpose of taxation are embedded within a concept of res publica. And it is an age old one. Any attempts, therefore, to brand social initiatives as merely opportunistic at the personal level thus misses the point. Nothing is perfect, however the alternative is far worse.


As per your initial observation that the Feench view wealth is "ill gotton," there is of course a certain measure of XIX socialism, but also centuries of Catholicism, in that, and it is the same in Italy. However, one must admit there are concrete examples of how some weath is precisely just that, like for instance in the great Italian chivalric "reformer" Silvio Berlusconi.

Last edited by rhubroma; 12-21-12 at 11:41.
Reply With Quote
  #5837  
Old 12-21-12, 11:15
Glenn_Wilson's Avatar
Glenn_Wilson Glenn_Wilson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Newfoundland
Posts: 2,451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by patricknd View Post
Hells bells, I won't skeet shoot anymore cause my neighbor might kill himself if we're both allowed to own a shotgun.

Bringing suicide into this debate is retarded.
I would not go that far but I can say that.

But I do agree it is not in my opinion very relevant to weapon ownership debates.
__________________
something less offensive
Reply With Quote
  #5838  
Old 12-21-12, 11:17
Glenn_Wilson's Avatar
Glenn_Wilson Glenn_Wilson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Newfoundland
Posts: 2,451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by patricknd View Post
Homes are safer without alcohol too. Let's outlaw that at the same time.

Read up on the part alcohol plays in gun crimes, maybe we're looking at the wrong culprit. Of course drinking is a lot more popular so we can't slaughter that sacred cow, can we?
Hey what has happened to you Patrick????

Ok now I need to get back to my drinking.
__________________
something less offensive
Reply With Quote
  #5839  
Old 12-21-12, 11:29
patricknd's Avatar
patricknd patricknd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: houston texas
Posts: 1,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn_Wilson View Post
Hey what has happened to you Patrick????

Ok now I need to get back to my drinking.
I was trying to point out to the commies that all this issue really revolves around is responsible ownership and that maybe we should enforce the laws that we have and do a little better job in screening the buyers. Prohibition was a failure and extreme gun laws will be as well. There are far too many sport shooters, hunters etc to suggest as some of the shrill screamers have, that all guns should be confiscated, outlawed and beaten into plow shares. Hell, it's been pretty tame here compared to some of the comments and arguments I've been reading in different places.
Reply With Quote
  #5840  
Old 12-21-12, 11:48
Glenn_Wilson's Avatar
Glenn_Wilson Glenn_Wilson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Newfoundland
Posts: 2,451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by patricknd View Post
I was trying to point out to the commies that all this issue really revolves around is responsible ownership and that maybe we should enforce the laws that we have and do a little better job in screening the buyers. Prohibition was a failure and extreme gun laws will be as well. There are far too many sport shooters, hunters etc to suggest as some of the shrill screamers have, that all guns should be confiscated, outlawed and beaten into plow shares. Hell, it's been pretty tame here compared to some of the comments and arguments I've been reading in different places.
Ok I understand now. These Commie socialist have me surrounded at the moment to addddd insult to injury....they all are irish! Oh boy oh boy...

It is pretty tame here. Is it just me or does it look like ChrisE has hijacked BroDeal's account? I think the moderators need to look into this.

BroDeal makes some good points but he should have known that he would get a ration of grief for speaking his mind.

Anyhow I am leaving this commie infested land for the socialist lands of Japan tomorrow. I am going to take a break from the forum because once in Nippon I have many things to do. One which includes running 2 Ekiden's and watching some very interesting Ekiden's....And much Beer drinking! yebisu Beer ...here I come..
__________________
something less offensive
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:44.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.