Printable View
As an American liberal with many liberal friends, I can't find anyone who likes Piers Morgan, even if we do agree with many of his (professed) views. Honestly, he makes liberals look bad because he reinforces the stereotypical image many conservatives have constructed--pompous, arrogant, and all-around unlikeable. In one interview he told Jesse Ventura (one huge nutballs) his argument was "facile," and it was, but the way he said it just sounded so pretentious. I wish he'd go away.
http://youtu.be/q8D7vribc5c
You can't say fairer than that.
That is gold Emil :D I hope Piers Morgan sees it
Yeah, I was watching the video again with my son, and he loved that Alex Jones shut Piers down. "That's what Piers would be doing to him, if he let him," he said. He loved that Alex Jones "owned" Piers Morgan.
Well, this Alex guy has a show, so both of them know a little something about showmanship of a certain kind.
My son said the same thing Volya did, that if you looked past the craziness he made some good points. I did a teensy bit of research and found this:
http://www.naturalnews.com/022930_dr...sant_drug.html
Which links to my concerns that mental health issues are not being addressed.
It's obvious that a certain amount of kidology is going on in the televised debates about gun control because the media commentators on both sides of the argument have TV ratings to consider. Nevertheless, they do articulate both sides of the argument in a manner that might seem offensive to some but does forcibly reflect the division that exists on the issue. Of course one would wish for a reasoned debate on the problem but in upper-middle class discussion it becomes all to often duplicitous circumlocution.
This is why, though one may deplore his abrasiveness, Alex Jones speaks for millions of people with whom self-regarding liberals are unable to connect. I know that I am intruding here on a national scenario that doesn't directly concern me but whatever the USA decides to do on this issue, and not that of outsiders, remains the only possible solution to this problem.
^Well said, and yet,
I feel dumber for having watched that, Emil. Perhaps we should rethink the 2nd and the 1st amendments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Emil Miller
Does anybody here remember when cigarettes were good for you? "They open the lungs for better breathing." It'll probably be another generation or two before they figure out just how much damage has been done by all the antidepressants they've pushed on grammar schoolers.Quote:
Originally Posted by qimissung
My little 8-year-old nephew was diagnosed with ADHD. Seems he was having trouble sitting still in school. To my brother's credit, he refused to medicate the little fella with Ritalin or anything else.
He told the doctor, "That boy ain't got ADHD; he's got STD."
The doctor said, "He's got a Sexually Transmitted Disease?"
"No, Doc, he's got Sh*t To Do. It's why he can't sit still."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4UQuote:
Originally Posted by Sancho
(Particularly 3:37-5:37)
I enjoyed that video, Scher. I think it's exactly what my brother intuited about ADHD. Anyhow, the little guy is doing just fine without the pharmaceuticals.
This is the first time I've heard of Alex Jones. That video pretty much discredits him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Emil Miller
If you like that video, Sancho, you might find Ken Robinson's other lectures on youtube also interesting, eg, "Do Schools Kill Creativity?"or "Bring on the Learning Revolution!" He is a wonderful speaker who raises very interesting points about education systems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sancho
I apologise for derailing the discussion!
And you a mod. :hand:Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
I know, I know... It is just that education is a topic I am very passionate about and Ken Robinson is da man!Quote:
Originally Posted by Calidore
Going back to the topic... Maybe if we were to change our education system, guns would not be such a big problem.
(Yes, a last minute save)
Bah, this conversation jumped the tracks a long time ago. Besides, straying off topic is one of the things that makes life interesting.
I, for one, am glad Scher shared, and I agree: Ken Robinson is El Hombre. If we'd've had teachers like him when I was in school, I wouldn't have been sitting there contemplating shooting myself half the time. (Shucks, it ain't hard staying on topic.)
But speaking of jumping the tracks, here's an educational video from Sancho's day:
http://youtu.be/8zFS7TFzlro
Yeah, guys, I hear you on medicating children. You know most schools in the United States actually did away with recess? It really makes you wonder if they actually understand children. As it happens, I have two offspring who have been diagnosed with ADHD and ADD, inattentive type, so I do believe that the condition exists. We did not use medication when they were young, mostly because we didn't know then that they had it; that is not to say they did not have difficulty with school. My youngest one started taking medication in middle school. One teacher actually said that the before and after difference in his behavior was like a miracle. He opted not to take it in high school, and I won't go into the struggle he had to graduate, but he did.Sometimes he would fail a class, then pass the state mandated tests with flying colors. Go figure.
Interestingly and importantly, they sort of know now that those meds help everybody, which is why it's hard to keep Adderall on the shelves. And the medication was never meant to be used alone. It was supposed to be used in conjunction with behavioral therapy. My point being that they still don't have many effective ways of treating ADD-yet another mental health issue.
Oh yeah, Sancho, School House Rock rocks!
Saw a doco once about a boy who went ape when fed potatoes.
By the way, as OP this is exactly how I'd hoped the thread would go.
Education is part of the whole and that animated video of Ken Robinson's lecture was just amazing. However DISCIPLINE is anpther factor, when do we start with that? How is that learned/taught, the self discipline to curb yout natural inclinations and engage with society as it is, NOT how you'd like it to be.
Update: A shooting in a Californian school. Two shots fired, one student badly injured, then the gunman was persuaded to give up his weapon.
Perhaps the significance of this was that he was armed "only" with a shotgun, that's two shots (usually.) If he could've squeezed off 30 rounds in a few seconds, who knows how high the body count would be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJdhA...&feature=share
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TEBy6KPjVw
^Two videos of Piers Morgan vs RATIONAL gun owners as opposed to a paranoid maniac.
prendrelemick: In America, as far as I'm aware, they are allowed shotguns with much higher capacity than here in the UK. And if the guy had chosen NOT to give up his weapon...?
By the sound of it and sorry to say they sound like they cannot get enough of it. Guns are pests and the only way to them is to scrape them off completely but I guess that is one true impossibility. Once one knows the way to a gun one could never erase it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Volya
Guns are suicidal and have a negative effect on people in general. It is not good.
So whether the Alex Jones method is used or that of those shown here, the result is still the same i.e. Piers Morgan getting shot down in flames. It must be particularly galling for the self-proclaimed occupiers of the moral high ground to see those ignorant rednecks refusing to knuckle under to their intellectually superior and righteous position on the issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Volya
That's a variation of an old trick down south: do an awe-shucks country-boy routine to lull the pretentious New Yorker into state of self admiration, and then take him for all he's worth. Works every time. My mother, a big-city girl from Chicago, learned that trick the hard way at a used car lot in Aiken, South Carolina.
Volya is correct, and rednecks prefer high-capacity pump shotguns. There's even such a thing as a semi-automatic shotgun (sometimes ya just gotta say, WTF!?).
There's an attitude I'd like to see changed here and I think the gun-control advocates could work with it: it's the assumption that a gun guy is a tough guy. This is just my observation, but of the people I know who habitually carry a handgun, every one of them is a coward.
I'll say it again, Guns are for Cowards. (soldiers, the police, and possibly mothers protecting their babies excepted)
I've got some add campaign ideas:
"Hey there, little feller, that's a mighty big pistol yer packin'."
or
A normal citizen has a conversation with a gun goon:
"Hey, gun guy, how come all your friends call you 'Raisins'?"
"Donno. For some strange reason, they gave me that nickname at the gym in the shower one day."
cacian: I'm sorry, but that's completely ridiculous.
And Sancho, I don't know any gun owners, so I can't really judge, but that does seem like a generalization. I wouldn't call owning a gun for self-defence 'cowardice'.
I don't normally watch news, so this is my first encounter with Piers Morgan. Perhaps there is something about him that is annoying you and Emil, but I don't see it in these two videos.Quote:
Originally Posted by Volya
In the debate with Ben Shapiro, a side issue seemed to be "bullying". I agree with Morgan that Shapiro seemed more like a "bully" than Morgan did. Part of this bullying was the way Shapiro framed the banning of assault rifles as a left-right political issue. This is more of a public health issue on the order of banning cigarettes in public buildings. As Morgan noted, even Ronald Reagan, a former, conservative US President, wanted these weapons removed.
Both Shapiro and Joshua Boston argued that US citizens should have assault rifles to protect themselves against the government, however, I don't see any way that these weapons could protect anyone from a government gone mad, regardless of what one sees in some action movies. Using them would amount to suicide not revolution. Defense against such a government would have to be more clandestine.
Watching the previous video with Alex Jones made me wonder if he has assault weapons. I think we should be more worried about people like Jones with these weapons than some hypothetical demonic government.
Agreed, I've always thought the tyrannical government argument was just a weak excuse for more guns.
Well now, that's just it. Just about every other idea on how to defend yourself against violence is better than packing a piece - avoiding the bad part of town, for instance - or running away - or kicking your attacker, right in the nuts. There're lots of clever ways to thwart an attacker without ventilating him. But once you have a pistol, it becomes your go-to option, and its effects are generally irreversible. If you kick somebody in the package, by contrast, he'll get over it. And you can reason with him while he's curled up in the fetal position on the sidewalk: "Now what was that you were saying about wanting my wallet?"Quote:
Originally Posted by Volya
I don't know if you-all over there have followed the George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin case, but essentially what happened was one night a young black guy gets to trash-talking a neighborhood-watch guy and the neighborhood-watch guy pulls out a gun and shoots him dead. He's claiming self defense. He should be claiming lack of moral fiber.
I'm not entirely sure where I stand on the matter of being able to carry a pistol around. But I think you should be allowed to own guns - even semi-automatic 'assualt' guns - in your house. In most cases I'd guess the criminal is carrying some sort of weapon, be it a knife or a crowbar. And if you're old, or weak, or ill, you won't stand a chance. A gun is the most efficient way you can stop the intruder taking your stuff, or worse.
EDIT:
YesNo, Piers is definitely the bully there. In all the debates I've seen with him on gun control, he has claimed or implied that by wanting to own guns they're condoning the mass shootings that occurred and that they don't care about the children who died. It is also somewhat of a left-right political issue, given that those who are more right-wing tend to favour gun-ownership, and those on the left are more pro gun-control (in general, obviously there will be exceptions).
Well sure, the old and feeble have earned the right to act in a cowardly manner. (Also, as mentioned above, mothers protecting their babies) But a young, able-bodied man who needs a concealed weapon to feel safe when out and about, should just stay home instead, and knit a sweater or something.
Wow, folks are still firing away on this.
Now come on Sancho, I might be afraid of the missus, but I'm not afraid of a paper target at 300 yards, or beer cans, pumpkins or a feral hog if the need came about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sancho
For what it's worth, a refresher on this gun toten member's persepctive on owning a gun. see post 14, 54, 139 and 250.
EDIT - clarify - "toten" means I own three guns, but I do not carry on my person. They are for the reasons posted previously. Besides the 03-A3 would be spotted a mile away.
Sancho, you might appreciate 250.
Busted!Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilliatt Gurgle
Awe shucks, Gill, I like plinking too. And after 28 years in various branches of the military, I've accumulated a number of firearms. Although, I'm not sure where they are and I'm pretty sure they're all rusty by now. The last time I actually shot a weapon was on an Army range down in Houston a couple of years ago - the taxpayers paid for it, and yes, I shot expert in rifle and pistol.
Also I'm pretty sure I'm a coward.
I got the gist of your message Sancho; how would one honestly react if they were carrying outside the home.
Inside the home, I would like to think that I would be in a better poistion to evaluate the situation before taking the ultimate step.
Besides, I would have exhausted many prior steps in deterring a home invader before firing a weapon assuming I had enough warning i.e. sounds of breaking in.
Hitting the lights, yelling, dog barking (the dog is old and hard of hearing that's why I put it third), firing a warning shot if need be (just make sure you know where the bullet is going)
Of course, one major first step is to seek out a "safe"(er) place to live if you can afford to as you mentioned above, which we did back in the mid '90's.
I think that although people might say carrying in public should be allowed because muggers might have guns or knives, if you are being held at gun/knifepoint, I don't think you'll have time to draw your gun before they get you first. And if you draw your weapon before then, you might be drawing it on an innocent person.
Another argument for allowing people to carry is to prevent mass shootings - presumably the carrier will whip out his gun and shoot down the shooter. However although this may work, you need to weigh up whether or not in total it will save lives or cost more.
I feel reasonably confident that I could defend my home without a firearm, however I would feel more confident if I did have one, because an intruder may have a knife and without a ranged weapon the odds are whether or not you manage to neutralize the attacker, you'll still get cut. Another reason would be if there were multiple intruders.
While I agree that people should have a basic right to own weapons, and keep them within their home, there is good reason to think that guns are probably not very effective at making people safer.
Arthur Kellerman, an epidemiologist, produced a very extensive study of homicide cases in Ohio and Tennessee, and found that people who owned guns were more likely to be murdered than those who did not have guns. In fact, a gun in the home was apparently as much of a risk factor in being murdered as living with a convicted felon. Kellerman's argument to explain why this heightened risk factor exists is that gun ownership in the home drastically increases cases of domestic violence related murder, combined with a negligible impact on protecting people from criminal activity (most people are murdered by someone they know).
I have three shotguns in the house, but they are locked up and beyond practical use for emergency burglar shooting.
By the way I found out yesterday I've been carring an illegal weapon for years. I have a little Opinel penknife, the best pocket knife I've ever owned, simple ,light, excellent steel, BUT because it locks open it is illegal to carry in a public place in the UK.
You don't need a ranged weapon - anything will do - chair, toilet brush, bottles of perfume from the extensive stock in the bathroom, shower gel, shampoo - imagine that lot raining down on an intruders head. It's not called "head and shoulders" for nothing. (Ranged weapon? - been playing on the x-box again? : )Quote:
Originally Posted by Volya
If they have a gun, barricade the door/ stairs - hard to hit what they can't see - hopefully.
I can understand attitudes to guns. The best fun in the Territorial Army was the shooting, particularly the SLRs we had at that time and the General Purpose machine Guns. (I also got to fire 108mm Howitzers which was fantastic fun). But then, that was in very controlled conditions. The knowledge that this stuff can kill a lot of people makes the fun dangerous in itself in a mixing business and pleasure way.
The thing with domestic ownership is how handy with it are you as well. In a stressful situation are you likely to shoot yourself, family or the other? The army has very strict rules for live firing ranges and still people get killed and wounded. When I was in the TA we were told we'd be imprisoned if we misused or were negligent with any weapons.
It's a difficult situation in the US. I don't think more will help, but will a reduction or stricter control be popular enough?
Paulclem, if they have a knife then I don't want to be within stabbing distance. I doubt you'd have enough to time to barricade a door. When I'm older I think I'll get a crossbow rather than a gun, since you don't have to go through all the fuss of paperwork and licensing and it seems like it can do just as well for defence as any other gun (for sale in the UK).
I personally don't think banning guns or mass-ownership of guns has the largest effect on crime rates. There are other factors that are much more important, which is really what the government should be focused on tackling.
PS
X-box? Nah, PS3 all the way ;) (but I honestly don't play it that much - why bother leveling up on computer games when you can be leveling up on life)
I imagine during a high stress situation, you would really want a steady hand with a cross bow...
You misunderstand me - you rain all the shampoo/ perfume bottles and the liquid from bleach/ toliet cleaner/ bathroom spray/ mould spray etc on them. No need to get close if you're up stairs. Two gun Volya with the bathroom spray in one hand and the mould spray in the other. Most unpleasant on the skin and eyes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Volya
As for barricading a door - get the mattress off and get yourself behind it. Stuff the sheets under the edge of the door so it sticks - by the way - an easy eway to lock a door if you don't want intruders. Come n Volya - where's your imagination!! I jest.
Much better with the bleachy spray.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
I was reading some time ago about a gun that was quite rare. It was a small calibre handgun that was about 4.5 inches long and lethal at close quarters. So just the thing to carry in one's pocket for the careful owner in a liberal democratic society. As someone who has been attacked by members of our wonderful inclusive society, I only wish that I'd had that weapon with me at the time because, whatever the 'liberal' authorities had done to me, the evil trash would have been deservedly six feet under. This is not a note of bravado but something that has been reasoned through and a statement of fact.
I wouldn't imagine it's any more difficult than using a gun - point and pull the trigger. Although I dare say it takes longer to reload than a gun.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
Paul, well I can see how it's a viable option, but personally I think I'd prefer something with a bit more 'oomph' to it, the bottle of perfume might just make them more angry. But each to his own I suppose :)
Another option is to just get a big dog. We have a fairly large dog, she's a loveable cuddly girl really, but I guess she might look more intimidating to a stranger. I know a lot of people on our road have dogs, largely due to the fact that they're mostly old rich pensioners who are lonely, but the high proportion of German Shepherds among them suggests it may also be to scare off any burglars.
EDIT: One other point about gun laws. Although gun laws aren't going to stop all criminals, it would seem that it means they're used less often. From what I'm aware the majority of criminals in the UK use knives not guns.
You probably wouldn't have one loaded though - string slackening.Quote:
Originally Posted by Volya
I also think you are underestimating the power of domestic cleaning fluids. Have you ever got washing up liquid in your eye? I have, and it is very debilitating and painful. Just imagine what jojoba perfumed shampoo will be like, and that's before we get onto the toilet duck and bathroom spray. Even perfume is a most unpleasant irritant. Failing that, you could throw the dog down at them. Knife? Call that an effective weapon? (Sprays bleach mould and mildew remover) - now that's what I call an effective ranged weapon.
It has been more than 25 years since I actually handled a rifle anything other than dusting purposes. My father was a keen huntsman (huntsperson?) Even though it was not (and probably is still not) a common practice where we lived, he wanted me to be able to handle the rifle since we had 3 at home (also it might have been a ruse to get me clean them). I did go hunting with them but I decided it was not for me by the time I graduated from highschool when I was around 16 years old. I am glad I learnt how to shoot (not sure how much of that "learning" I have retained) but I don't have any burning desires to own one.
I really don't see the point.
Now that's what I call a deterrent!Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulclem
I know I'm starting to sound like the needle's stuck in the groove, but guns are just too quick, too easy, and too dangerous. I've heard statistics exactly like that one, Orphan. I've also heard that statistically guns kept in the home for the purpose of defense are far more likely to used for suicide than to thwart a burglar. But using that line of argument is like trying to convince somebody that winning the lottery will be ruinous to them: "Yeah, I know, people are statistically less happy after they win the lottery than before - but I'm willing to take that chance."Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
Here are a few more stat's that pop up from time to time. I can't vouch for their validity:
A policeman wearing body armor is more likely to shot in the line of duty than a policeman not wearing body armor.
A bicyclist is more likely crash while wearing a helmet rather than not.
(Also, I hate to be curmudgeon, Paul, but was it a 105mm Howitzer? Perhaps an M-108, 105mm?)