Comments by "Frenchie’s Philosophy" (@tsuich00i) on "VICE News"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
ScottHigh23 "People are the problem, not the guns" is a very bad argument for a number of reasons.
1. Guns make the problem worse, not better. A.) The "good guy with a gun" is not a phrase substantiated by the evidence- most people with the opportunity to intervene, either choose not to, or freeze up. The NRA boasts a number between 2-2.5 million acts of self defense. However, a study from the Violence Policy Center places that figure closer to 67,740, nothing close to what gun advocates have in mind. So as counter-intuitive as it seems (serious sarcasm here), Guns don't actually save lives. Go figure.
2. Guns came before gun culture. Remove the guns, and the culture dies. The examples you vaguely attempted to rebute are true, despite your incredulity. Countries like Japan, China and most of Europe, have removed guns from their public life, and as a result, have drastically reduced the normative acceptance of guns as valid security option, and thus, gun related homicides with it. This position is strongly supported by multiple studies, including, but not limited to, a 1993 New England Journal of Medicine report, documenting that a household gun increased the risk of a fatal accident by three times.
3. Gun related incidents are psychologically traumatic for even the most well prepared. So even if you think you know how you will respond, say from a training exercise, the result may differ drastically in a real life, uncontrolled, chaotic scenario. Related to this, is the "Weapon Effect", which, to quote the man who coined to term: “Guns not only permit violence, they can stimulate it as well. The finger pulls the trigger, but the trigger may also be pulling the finger.”
—Leonard Berkowitz, Emeritus Professor of Psychology, University of Wisconsin. Though his findings are disputed, there are numerous examples of unstable persons, acting on impulses with impunity, simply because a gun in their possession made it possible for them to do so. The Turner Diaries for example, has inspired criminal behavior related to a obsession with guns.
Lastly, Human nature is one thing, and as destructive as we might be, our primary nature is constructive- Man has mastered the environment, much of his mind, and imposed his will on his fellow man, creating the great countries of the here and now; erecting monumental marvels, inventing ingenious gadgetry, and inspiring through his creativity and talents, both physical and mental, to the credit of his kind. So to say that guns are somehow a "wild force" outside our control is utter nonsense- We brought it into the world, and we can take it out just as easily. Like the USPS, neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night may stop us doing what need be done- and if we see fit to eradicate the gun from our mists (as has already been done throughout much of the world), I haven't the slightest doubt our efforts shall prevail, for the human spirit is an inconquerable vessel through which anything is possible.
1
-
1
-
1
-
gainmelk France being my beloved home, I am mortified by the acts perpetrated against her.
But to one line in particular, I must object vehemently; "After all, we are all responsible for our own safety, regardless of where we live."
It is the State of whichever country we owe allegiance to that is chiefly responsible for the protection of it's Citizenry, and unfortunately, the police here failed us, but passing the burden on to the average Joe isn't about to make things better, and I stand by the data when saying you would see an increase as guns fill cabinet draws and line the pockets of the public, in violent and accidental crime, when normal people take it upon themselves to conduct their own self-defense and pursue vigilante justice.
As policing training, surveillance technology, and education improves, so to will the decline of gun violence, and indeed, the need for guns on both sides- Civil and Criminal- decline.
What is important to remember is that guns are capable of a great deal more than most minds can handle- the speed and ease at which one may execute one's will alone is cause for great concern, and the same sort of "empowerment" that it gives people to perhaps do good, is more often than not, misplaced, and dangerous. Guns are by design, intended to kill, and they do it very well. If they weren't and it wasn't a problem, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
As it stands today, we have access to military handy-downs that we treat like toys, and the only thing worse than an evil army, is when the public thinks and acts like one. I'd much rather stare down the barrel of the State, and accept certain doom, then be thrown to a mob who's blood lust knows no end.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Joseph Keenan You lost me when you said "the job of a mob". A mob is a mindless, meaningless rampage which has no place in civilized society.
And who said I supported the methods of the french revolution? I'm not even sure why you brought that up or what it has to do with..
The tribes of the Goths and Franks were a mob. The word "Berserk" for example, comes from Nordic tribes that would enter a fit of rage, possibly aided by hallucinogenic drugs according to some historians, who seemed to posses no sense of self preservation, and who's savagery was unparalleled- A mob mentality if I ever knew one. Refer to the "Sacking of Rome" for additional proof of my point.
Rebirth? Civilization is an everlasting wellspring from and through which it is eternal sustained. Society by it's nature, seeks stability and tranquility whenever and wherever it is possible. It is in no need for a "restart button" as you so grotesquely suggest.
What did the barbarians of Europe conclude upon conquering Roman? That they were much worse for wear without her. In fact, they regretted it almost immediately. It turns out life without lasting infrastructure, market economies, and sophisticated bureaucracies to tend to people's every need and whim, is'nt all it's cracked up to be.
So what did they do? Well at just about the exact moment the last Roman bleed out, they went about rebuilding Rome in whatever crude fashion they could pass off as "Romanesque", culminating in the great Empires of Europe some thousand years later, who paid homage In both form and function, to the Romans, which is evidenced by the architecture, art, and languages- not the cultural products of the Nords, Franks, or Goths mind you- abundant throughout the continent to this day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
jack black LOL Leaving it up to faith- historically, humanities most tried and true, and valued virtues... Because what could be better than explaining the unknown, by the even more unknown? (paraphrased, Aristotle)
Hell, Why bother thinking at all, when you can just belief whatever you want on a whim? Lord knows that has a high success rate...
While we're still entertaining your senseless suggestion, allow me to propose one of my own: Instead of doing any real work maximizing the efficiency and efficacy of our public policies, why don't we just put the ideas on a spinning wheel and choose what to do based on where the needle lands?! Because if where going to be sit here and play stupid all day, the least we can do is enjoy ourselves- and what could be more fun then probability? I mean, probability is at least twice as fun as faith!
yeah... You'll have to forgive me if I don't differ to the dismal decision making (or should I say lacking?) abilities of the average schmuck off the street when it comes to my well being.
1
-
atomgonuclear I take your point however, I think you are limiting the options available to us in the 21st century. Monitoring and surveillance equipment, facial recognition software that is beginning to be able to detect and recognize emotional expression (such as nervousness), as well as chemical detection devices (that can scan for specific types of radiation, gun powder residue, and so on) coupled with diligent record keeping of known and suspected criminals/terrorists are just a few of the advances that make crime prevention possible in the hands of a strong state.
The problem is a question of scale not implementation- these methods are already standard practice for the likes of the FBI and CIA and internationally in most first world intelligence services. The only downside is the cost, which is why these technologies remain relegated and apply only to a small, but growing portion of the population.
And with the advent of Drones, I suspect "personnel/personal-policing" will be made obsolete by a fleet of machines who do not share man's prejudices and susceptibility to error.
Now that I finished discussing my methods, it is important to address the fact that guns have not been shown to help in the case of a home invasion / rape: Findings from John-Hopkins Center for Gun Policy Research have revealed that Women who lived in a home with a gun are three times more likely to be shot themselves in this scenario then had they no gun at all. This has much to do with the fact that you are much more likely to be the victim of a crime of someone you know then a stranger, and if that someone you know knows where your gun is, the chances of it ended up in your hands is negligible, especially if the assailant is a man who can physically overpower you even if you do. So not only do guns make it not easier to protect yourself, they actually ADD to the danger of the situation. In light of the overwhelming data that shows this trend, it would be irresponsible to recommend a gun to anyone based solely on the off-chance it "might" help, when we know it almost certainly will make things worse.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1