U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-09-2018, 02:49 PM
 
18,121 posts, read 9,932,980 times
Reputation: 17619

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOV View Post
Not "Social Justice" as such, but we aren't doing a good job teaching young men about masculinity.

I DO think that it may have to do with the comparative slighting, in some circles of more technical, hands on pursuits.
I do think young males for the last 30 years have missed out on the behavior control that had been taught to males for thousands of years.

These days, it's all "express your feelings!"

No! Young men need to be taught to keep that crap bottled up and die of a heart attack at 55...but at least you never shot up a night club.

Quote:
I also think the internet has a lot to do with it...Kids now are able to find the "darkest of the dark" if they so desire. Remember, NeoNazi's or any other lunatic fringe group is there with open arms.
That is a problem, too. People do not understand the extent to which different groups of young people (and some not so old) have closeted themselves up in various Internet echo chambers that put them into a different world of us-versus-them-and-they-are-winning-unless-you-act-now!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-09-2018, 02:51 PM
 
Location: San Antonio
10,182 posts, read 18,185,249 times
Reputation: 9960
Quote:
Originally Posted by LesLucid View Post
Itís also true that removing guns does not remove violence, since violence is rooted in the behavior of people.
Removing guns sure as Hell removes gun violence. Iíll settle for that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 02:57 PM
 
Location: San Antonio
10,182 posts, read 18,185,249 times
Reputation: 9960
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveklein View Post
Appeal to the absurd isn't really a logical fallacy though. The razor example given is completely logical.

"If gun violence is a problem, we need to restrict guns." Okay.

You may think it is an appeal to the absurd to then say "Suicide by razors is a problem, so we need to restrict razors." But it really isn't. You MIGHT be able to argue there is a slippery slope fallacy here, but really, the logic actually checks out.

A true logical fallacy is one like a straw man, where a person argues against claim when such a claim was never made.
Agreed, the appeal to ridicule is at best an informal fallacy, thanks for the lesson.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 02:57 PM
 
2,413 posts, read 2,134,617 times
Reputation: 2595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishtom29 View Post
Removing guns sure as Hell removes gun violence. Iíll settle for that.
Is the goal to reduce gun violence, or violence?

If, hypothetically speaking, there was a ban on guns and gun deaths per year dropped by 10,000, but the number of people who were killed by knives, or poisoned, or beaten to death, or whatever went up by 11,000 have you really accomplished anything (other than arguably stomping all over the constitution)?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 03:07 PM
 
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
1,713 posts, read 646,590 times
Reputation: 3449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishtom29 View Post
Iím a liberal and I donít care how many people kill themselves, nor how. You commit the logical fallacy known as an appeal to the absurd. It sounds clever but wonít stand scrutiny.

If you consider gun violence a problem an inherent cause of the problem is a gun.


I'll type slowly here so maybe you can understand the analogy:


If a person is extremely depressed, they may try to commit suicide with a razor. The PROBLEM is Depression. The razor is merely the mechanism of acting out their warped solution.


In gun violence, the PROBLEM is some mental illness. The gun is just a mechanism. Removing guns will have no effect on the problem. They will still act out with some other mechanism. Cf- increased knife attacks lately in London.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 03:08 PM
 
18,121 posts, read 9,932,980 times
Reputation: 17619
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveklein View Post
Is the goal to reduce gun violence, or violence?

If, hypothetically speaking, there was a ban on guns and gun deaths per year dropped by 10,000, but the number of people who were killed by knives, or poisoned, or beaten to death, or whatever went up by 11,000 have you really accomplished anything (other than arguably stomping all over the constitution)?
Even if that number doesn't go up, morality is not a matter of statistics.

It's still immoral to remove one person's means of protecting herself against a man with a bat or a knife or his fists based on what some other person might do with that means. That's akin to throwing people out of the life boat.

If you want to run that risk for yourself, that's your judgment. If I don't want that risk, it's immoral for you to take my choice from me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 03:10 PM
 
4,846 posts, read 1,571,894 times
Reputation: 7940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
I do think young males for the last 30 years have missed out on the behavior control that had been taught to males for thousands of years.

These days, it's all "express your feelings!"

No! Young men need to be taught to keep that crap bottled up and die of a heart attack at 55...but at least you never shot up a night club.



That is a problem, too. People do not understand the extent to which different groups of young people (and some not so old) have closeted themselves up in various Internet echo chambers that put them into a different world of us-versus-them-and-they-are-winning-unless-you-act-now!
Men are competitive by nature. That outlet of competition has been stunted by feel good participation trophies, 'talk about your feelings' and being shamed for well, having the nerve of being a boy.

I remember kids fighting occasionally, and the next day they were best friends. Was it better than what happens today with use your words and the antibullying nonsense where if you DEFEND yourself you get suspended? Maybe. No one was shooting up schools even though there was easier access to weapons. Arguments were done in a day. Shake hands and friends the next. They learned boundaries, fair fights and how to make up the next day. Sure was a LOT less bullying then too. Not like today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 03:22 PM
 
4,063 posts, read 1,980,469 times
Reputation: 5260
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
Men are competitive by nature. That outlet of competition has been stunted by feel good participation trophies, 'talk about your feelings' and being shamed for well, having the nerve of being a boy.

I remember kids fighting occasionally, and the next day they were best friends. Was it better than what happens today with use your words and the antibullying nonsense where if you DEFEND yourself you get suspended? Maybe. No one was shooting up schools even though there was easier access to weapons. Arguments were done in a day. Shake hands and friends the next. They learned boundaries, fair fights and how to make up the next day. Sure was a LOT less bullying then too. Not like today.

It's an interesting angle.



I think that today's youth are exposed to a great deal more cultural ills and societal horrors at a young (sometimes tender young) age through TV, Cable, the Internet, and Video Games. Think about how many beheadings you watched before you were 30 ? Any ? Today's kids not only see this online along with other gory viral videos but they also play violent games where they shoot real people in a virtual world, they receive extreme pressure to grow up quickly and do the things adults do (sex included) before they are mentally ready. There are more than 300 million firearms in private hands in the USA (maybe more). Is there even such a thing as a public mental health treatment center in the US anymore that is not a jail?



Lump all that on top of the breakdown in respect for authority/police, family, church and the deployment of 10s of thousands into endless wars with no real mission statement in Iraq and Afghanistan and you have the foundations for shooters like in Thousand Oaks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 05:21 PM
 
Location: San Antonio
10,182 posts, read 18,185,249 times
Reputation: 9960
Quote:
Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto View Post
I'll type slowly here so maybe you can understand the analogy:


If a person is extremely depressed, they may try to commit suicide with a razor. The PROBLEM is Depression. The razor is merely the mechanism of acting out their warped solution.


In gun violence, the PROBLEM is some mental illness. The gun is just a mechanism. Removing guns will have no effect on the problem. They will still act out with some other mechanism. Cf- increased knife attacks lately in London.
Donít be a smart ass.

The important problem here, IMO, is when a personal problem, depression say, becomes the problem of a bunch of people because the depressed person, armed with a gun, has the ability to harm large numbers of people very quickly. Knives donít bother me as much as guns doótheyíre easier to run from for one thing. And one person armed with a blade is unable to kill as large a number of able bodied people as he could armed with a self loading rifle.

Now people can quibble about mental illness, which will never go away and is difficult to define and detect, or they can do something to help stop crazy people shooting people in masses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 05:28 PM
 
Location: San Antonio
10,182 posts, read 18,185,249 times
Reputation: 9960
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
...

It's still immoral to remove one person's means of protecting herself against a man with a bat or a knife or his fists based on what some other person might do with that means. That's akin to throwing people out of the life boat.

If you want to run that risk for yourself, that's your judgment. If I don't want that risk, it's immoral for you to take my choice from me.
Carry a revolver. There are few occasions in which youíll need a self loading rifle with a 30 round magazine to protect yourself.

I carry a 5 shot revolver. Andy Jackson killed Dickerson with 1 shot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top