On 1/29/2011 1:06 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> That's because a hundred or more years ago they a) fought duels in
>> public,
>
> I think the number of deaths by duel where both sides agree to shoot at
> each other is nominal, unless you have some evidence that it was common.
>
I would argue that the mere fact that it took a long time to load the 
damn things tended to either result in you being real clear you wanted 
to shoot someone, or having lots more time to change your mind. Sure, 
they where used a lot to kill people for various reasons, other than 
duels, but there was usually an "accepted" justification for it, or some 
sort.

>> b) didn't have a lot of rules about when it was and wasn't justified
>> to shoot someone,
>
> Of course they did.
>
Depends on what you define as rules. I would, again, argue that rules 
which operated on a) societal justifications, i.e., the person shot was 
*obviously* deserving of it, due to race, religion, nationality, etc., 
b) talking fast enough to convince people you had a reason, especially 
since it might not be possible to prove otherwise, and c) legal means to 
handily do away with any possibility of being arrested for shooting 
someone, all constitute a lack of effective rules. You literally just 
needed to find the right loopholes/claims and you could shoot damn near 
anyone.

>> and c) you didn't have whole organizations dedicated to BS like, "Guns
>> don't kill people, people do!",
>
> Because nobody was stupid enough to think otherwise. Guns were tools
> just like knives were.
>
Knives tend to have the trait that, unless you throw them, and even, in 
many cases *if* you throw them, they don't tend to kill people that 
where not involved in the altercation in the first place. Guns.. if you 
don't hit the intended target, and even, in some rare cases, if you do, 
you have no certainty they won't hit someone else instead. Kind of a 
damn stupid "tool". Its like complaining that people would like you to 
stop dropping matches every place, and saying, "But I never intended for 
all those buildings to catch fire!" The matches have a place and 
purpose, which doesn't involve improperly using them, and no one much 
cares if you have a pack in your pocket, since they don't tend to 
randomly light things one fire. Someone that carries them around for the 
*sole* purpose of, "I might need to light a fire.", tend to justifiably 
be presumed to be possible arsonists, especially if they tend to never 
*be* any place where they plausibly could *ever* need to do that, not 
law abiding citizens. Say that you, "may need to shoot someone.", even 
if you add in, "in self defense"... Well, lets just say its not what I 
would call a "compelling" argument either. lol

>> makes about as much sense as saying, "cars without working brakes
>> don't kill people, the people that drive them do.", oh.. and the crazy
>> idea that guns represent someone *other* than a very clear, specific,
>> and intentional, way to kill things.
>
> Guns are not likened to cars without brakes. How many policemen carry
> guns? How many policemen would drive a car without brakes?
>
Cars without breaks = guns in places most reasonable people wouldn't 
bring them, with more ammo than reasonable, semi-auto, when this is 
overkill just by itself, and a whole host of other issues, not the least 
being that we are ***not*** talking about a police officer, or anyone 
else that one might presume actually has the training, at least in 
principle, if not actuality, to know when, and how, to use one properly. 
So, no, a cop wouldn't drive a car without brakes. Half the people I 
know wouldn't even notice they didn't have any, until they tried to 
stop. They simply wouldn't bother to notice that a problem existed (and, 
by the same token, they wouldn't see anything odd with having an 
overdone gun, in the hands of a badly/untrained person, shooting 
inaccurately, at someone that might not even be an appropriate target). 
And that is just the non-criminals. The criminals, I would have some 
presumption, might have fired the thing often enough to know who they 
where shooting at, ironically.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message