TimeTraveler said:
Gun control is CONTROL. Don't you get it!
As an anarchist sympathizer, and one who occasionally uses the title of “-anarchist”, one of the major problems I have with anarchism is, in fact, the inability of anarchists to explain just how their utopian idyll works. Hell, a rough outline would suffice. As near as I can tell, everyone is supposed to just get along because they’re smart enough to figure out that getting along is the path of least resistance. Unfortunately, people just aren’t that smart. Anarchism, then, runs into the same problem that I encounter with Communism: the individuals in the community need to understand the principles of conduct and order. These principles are fairly refined and, as Americans have shown
vis a vis Marxist philosophies, not as easily understood as the Marxists would imagine. The anarchists, however, haven’t even the patience to even
try.
Sad to think we’re not evolved enough yet, as a species, to do the right things for the species.
As to the general issue of “CONTROL”, well, that’s a concession of living in society. I reap the benefits of this alleged civilization, and I owe it something in exchange. If I am to participate in civilized society, what I owe it is my participation. That is, I can always opt out, seek some place in some mountain range somewhere, and treat any humans I come across as wild animals. I don’t have a thing for hair shirts or loincloths. I like being able to go to the store and buy microwave-ready foods. I like having a car, and roads to drive on. I like having
heat in my
home without having to scavenge and compete for firewood while it’s raining cats and balls outside.
Laws against rape are forms of
control. But it is not just the force of law that keeps me from rape sprees; it is not the fear that someone might be armed. It is, instead, the balance of what I get from taking part in civilized society: we don’t treat each other that way, and it’s nice to not have to look over my shoulder every second of the day.
So I can’t own a nuclear bomb? Fine. Why would I want to? What good would it do me? What good would it do my community? As I understand your argument, any form of regulation is unacceptable, so damn those bureaucrats that won’t let me have a nuke! Or maybe not. Why did the authorities bust that guy for manufacturing ricin? Now
that’s a deterrent: “Dude, don’t rob that house, he’s got chemical weapons!” Evil authority figures, eh?
We accept control; we choose to play along according to certain rules. This is the cooperative convention. Increasing our fear in order to justify the fact that we’re frightened is counterintuitive at least, if not illogical and, functionally, downright stupid.
What type of control are you going to bring next? Thought control?
No, but at some point society will cease being so accommodating to the stupid. It’s a waste of resources to continually run around in circles for no reason. Besides, thought control is already afoot: conservatives in Oregon got pissed off about a library book in 1990, and they haven’t stopped fighting for their right to censor ideas, publications, and living conditions; the Bush administration’s own Department of Education just got nailed in an audit for attempting to exercise too much content control in literacy programs; a conservative backlash describes a liberal conspiracy on college campuses, but the best they can come up with is mandatory thought control, apparently because it’s easier than writing responsible and supportable theses. Hell, Christianity is the foremost religion in the U.S. Islam is the fastest-growing. There’s two pronounced methods of thought control right there, and both are constitutionally protected.
Tell you what, pick up your rifles, go down to the FCC, and make a stand for the First Amendment. Tell them we ought to be able to show porn on CBS at 7:00 AM on Saturdays, or you’ll fight for your offended right to free speech. At that point, I’ll reconsider the utility of an armed, unregulated, undereducated populace composed of millions of individuals each seeking their own utopia at the price of blood and death.
Some people have the liberty instinct, they just don't like being controlled, and just the phrase gun control, to a person like this it becomes self defense control. The question is why? Why not control the criminals? Why do you want big, intrusive, controlling government to tell you how to live life, what foods to eat, how many hours to sleep, what to think, I mean christ, how much control?
Look, if a handgun and a shotgun aren’t enough to defend the self, why would I want that person having a nuke, or even a grenade launcher? If a person sees their inability to defend themselves with a belt-fed machine gun as an offense against their liberty, the question of why looks back to that person. Why is any regulation an offense? Because it’s just about the individual? Wrong: the rules pertaining to individuals must account for the collective at some point. Why not control the criminals? Because no formula yet employed has managed to eliminate crime from society. You may not want a big, intrusive, controlling government to tell you how to live life, but you seem to want the rest of society to solve all your frustrations with society. Nothing’s perfect: either hop on the bus or don’t. But if you refuse to get on the bus, don’t blame the driver for not stopping.
How many friends? Hundreds? Thousands? Most American's only trust 2 people.
If that many. I’ll trust anybody until they give me reason not to. Statistically, the result has been more favorable than being frightened until people “earn” my respect. Nonetheless, I do feel somewhat out of the norm because the number of people I can trust with my most intimate aspects numbers at least four or five, and the number of people I can trust with my life and wellbeing at any given moment is rather quite high. Had I gold fillings in my teeth, I wouldn’t swallow them if I had a heart attack: it’s not worth it to be that frightened of the paramedics who will work to save my life.
As to vague questions like, how many people can I trust to not overtly attempt to destroy our social organization, well, that number is taller than the number of people I can expect to overtly make the attempt. There are plenty of people pissed off at the U.S., for instance, but the number of folks who will actually run bombs at our buildings or try to mow us down is considerably smaller than the number of people who would, at least, try to help stop the bleeding. So that trust runs into the millions. Without that basic trust, civilized society could not exist, nor any allegation thereof.
You are just naive. I'd never trust a complete stranger. You can't trust a stranger at all, not even to serve you a drink or food without being suspicious.
Then trust abstractions. I live in the Seattle area, where Boeing does a lot of airplane construction and testing. Statistically, I am more likely to win the lottery than be hit by a falling airplane. I have yet to do either. I don’t generally buy lottery tickets, and I don’t worry about falling airplane parts, or even the blue ice that went crashing into some folks’ houses down in California. I can’t imagine being afraid of the
people who serve me a burger and fries. Jeez, when it comes to fast food I generally ignore the notion that I ought to be suspicious of the food itself, much less whether or not Raven and Jose on the cook line remembered to wash their hands after wiping their asses. Of course, a gun wouldn’t help me there, either. Am I supposed to be scared that they’re slipping dioxin into my pizza, or that I might catch some fecal disease from them? In the case of the latter, am I really supposed to shoot someone for being stupid? If we shot people for mere stupidity, who the hell would run for Congress? Who would sell an insurance policy to a dentist? Who would get religion?
Where do you get this shooting stuff from?
If you can’t figure that out, there’s no point in explaining. Seriously,
guns are fairly close to the center of the discussion here. After all, didn’t you chastise me at one point for what gun owners understand and people like me don’t? Maybe the manner in which you’re frightened seems perfectly logical to you. And maybe being afraid of long hair on men seems perfectly logical to the next guy. And maybe being afraid of one’s otherwise nice neighbors who happen to be too loud on a Saturday night simply because they’re Hispanic seems perfectly logical to my neighbor.
You are so naive! Trust should be earned, just like money. Do you give random homeless people free money or do you give them a job? Always give them a job over charity. Trust is not charity, it's supposed to be scarce, in limited supply, so that people will value it more when they earn it. You are de-valueing trust and you are messing up the economics of the web of trust. Trust is to be earned, verified, and leveled, you can use points, you can use credits, but it must be based on experience not feelings.
I don’t give
random homeless people free money. I give it to the ones that ask. As to giving them jobs: if I had the jobs to give, I would. Given how much people lie in order to win trust, it’s easier to just look for the lies and cross those folks off the list; in other words, it’s easy to earn trust: just don’t blow it. Devaluing trust? Messing up the economics of the web of trust? You’re the one artificially inflating the value of an inherent human trait, e.g. social cooperation, in order to justify the spread of fear. Stop screwing with the value of
logic. Hell, if someone gave you gold, would you throw it out because it didn’t match the drapes?
I live in America, the land where people like you are too naive to care about your own health, your own food security, your own water security.
Have fun building the aqueduct. And growing the corn. Putting out fires; yeah, a gun will help you there.
Nonetheless, you live in a part of America that needs a serious enema. At least, if people in your community are as frightened as you. Maybe we’re just in paradise up here in the Pacific Northwest.
My community is of two kinds of people, people who are criminals and people like you, and most people, just like you, want to support gun control, want to keep giving more and more power to fewer hands, want to decrease their own civil liberties, and they do absolutely nothing to protect the most basic of basics.
Ah, you’re a criminal? That would explain a good deal about how frightened you are.
I recognize that there is no community in most places, it's not safe here, it's not safe anywhere.
Judging by the tone of your rhetoric, I’m wondering when we made the transition from guns to environmentalism, or at least how a gun will ensure my water, food, and air quality. Or is this one of those things in which all you have left to do is tell me what a piece of crap you think I am?
You don't get it, you cannot avoid places, you have to live somewhere, and unless you are rich, or born rich, you don't get to choose where. It's simple, most humans arent decent, some are, and those who are decent actually are rare. You could be decent, but you also could be naive. You might actually believe that other people will always be there to protect you, but sadly thats not how the world is, it never was that way, and it wont be that way if you just sit around and wait for someone else to do everything to protect you. You don't care for guns? Fine, but instead of fighting for gun control, why don't you fight to control access to clean food and water? Why don't you fight to create security somewhere else? Why do you want to reduce security and then expect rational people to understand it? It has nothing to do with gun lobby, I don't work for a gun lobby, I don't own a gun, I just think it should be a right.
Ah. Interesting. That actually sheds some light on your perspective.
So you want to wait until there is chaos in the streets?
Might as well find other ways to avoid it instead of rushing headlong into the chaos. There’s no need to work to bring about chaos in the streets in order to justify myself. That’s what I don’t get about your sense of fear. Why gallop on to the apocalypse?
Do you want to own yourself, or do you want to be owned? Make a choice.
Hmm … I hate mowing the lawn. I’ll choose being human.
Finally you reveal your true colors. You just don't care. Thanks for making a statement like "so be it", it's one to be remembered.
You really don’t get it, do you?
Natural selection favors whoever controls the best weaponry of the time period. Thats how it always has been.
Not quite. Adaptability is the big tool. Weaponry, as such, is at best a portion of that.
That is completely irrational but yes most people don't care about existance so I don't really understand what their goal is.
Well, there you go, then. I’ll try to finish up later.
