Invasion of US Capitol building

[D_W]

I think the discussion about guns is simplistic, because it suggests there are just two extremes. This Wikipedia table is interesting, giving estimates of guns per 100 of the population: Estimated number of civilian guns per capita by country - Wikipedia

Naturally the US heads the table at 120/100, which confirms that US residents really like guns. England and Wales is towards the bottom at 4.6/100.

But way higher than England is Canada at 34.7/100, Finland at 32.4/100 and Switzerland at 27.6/100, all notoriously more peaceful countries than England. Meanwhile lawless, drug-gang ridden Mexico comes in at only 12.9/100.

All of which just tells us that correlation does not equal causation, which we knew already.

Finland and canada both have long hunting traditions (much of canada lived like the rural US for a while, though I'm sure they're urbanizing now, too). Not sure if there's a military reason behind finland's numbers, but back when I was hunting and reloading, I read a forum that had a database for load data and several of the members were Finnish. Posts about moose hunting and then hanging the meat (kind of gross looking when it's not your meat) were frequent.

 

[Jacob]

But Robin, TN has already explained that killers will just use knives instead! Don't you realise, if a Sandy Hook type killer rushed in and sprayed the classrooms and corridors with knives, whilst shouting "bang" very loudly, just as many kids would have died. Never forget, people kill people, not the guns. SIMPLES.

The cunning Proud Boys killed a cop with a fire extinguisher on the 6th! How many school kids could you massacre with a fire extinguisher? (asking for a friend)

 

[RobinBHM]

alcohol is at least 6 times as deadly, and the non death destruction is far greater

You are engaging in whataboutery.

"There's no point trying to tackle diabetes, because cancer kills more people"

Can you see the flaw in your argument?

 

[RobinBHM]

But Robin, TN has already explained that killers will just use knives instead! Don't you realise, if a Sandy Hook type killer rushed in and sprayed the classrooms and corridors with knives, whilst shouting "bang" very loudly, just as many kids would have died. Never forget, people kill people, not the guns. SIMPLES.

Yes it's the good old knives trope.....it ps commonly used by the NRA as an argument.

 

[Jacob]

You are engaging in whataboutery.

"There's no point trying to tackle diabetes, because cancer kills more people"

Can you see the flaw in your argument?

Gun deaths and road deaths per annum in USA are scale of magnitude similar. So obviously there is no point in doing anything about either of them?

 

[RobinBHM]

and the threat of getting shot is imminent

I wonder why in America the police make you get of your car with your hands over your head........

 

[Jacob]

I wonder why in America the police make you get of your car with your hands over your head........

Or why they so often accidentally shoot a black person because they thought he might have a gun?

 

[RobinBHM]

All of which just tells us that correlation does not equal causation, which we knew already.

The raw data on ownership per capita needs detail for nuance.

Mexico...full of poor people less likely to afford a gun.

Canada....There is no legal right to possess arms in Canada. It takes sixty days to buy a gun there, and there is mandatory licensing for gun owners. Gun owners pursuing a license must have third-party references, take a safety training course and pass a background check with a focus on mental, criminal and addiction histories

 

[RobinBHM]

Or why they so often accidentally shoot a black person because they thought he might have a gun?

Yes indeed

 

[Trainee neophyte]

Maybe you haven't spotted that the general anti Trump feeling is shared by the majority of Americans, who are not generally regarded as alt-left, or even left at all. Also very likely shared by a majority of people all around the world! Haven't noticed any alt-left expressions in this thread either

v
By majority do you mean more than half? Or do you mean almost everyone? 77,083,679 voted for Biden, allegedly, but 72,159,215 still voted for Trump. 72 million people supported him sufficiently to vote for him - hardly a colossal victory for Biden, Justice and the American Way, is it? You seem to be inferring (and if you have watched the BBC and read the Guardian I quite understand why) that Trump is universally reviled and despised by virtually everyone in the world except a few lonely nutters and racist loonies. Not the case. In the same way that every single American is not a gun - toting, raw beef munching redneck. But you just don't want to let reality get in the way of a good, anti-US, anti-right diatribe.

 

[RobinBHM]

, I'd sure like to see a priority on the things that are a bigger threat and leave more for the rest of society to pick up. That's just being rational

USA has mass shootings every year.
10k deaths by guns, 25k injured.

Police face the risk of being shot routinely.

You might class that low priority, not me.

 

[RobinBHM]

v
By majority do you mean more than half? Or do you mean almost everyone? 77,083,679 voted for Biden, allegedly, but 72,159,215 still voted for Trump. 72 million people supported him sufficiently to vote for him - hardly a colossal victory for Biden, Justice and the American Way, is it? You seem to be inferring (and if you have watched the BBC and read the Guardian I quite understand why) that Trump is universally reviled and despised by virtually everyone in the world except a few lonely nutters and racist loonies. Not the case. In the same way that every single American is not a gun - toting, raw beef munching redneck. But you just don't want to let reality get in the way of a good, anti-US, anti-right diatribe.

Oh well done, there's at 3 in that post

Ad hominem
Appeal to extremes
Strawman

Are you actually able to debate without logical fallacies?
I guess honest debating would cramp your style

 

[Jacob]

v
By majority do you mean more than half? Or do you mean almost everyone? 77,083,679 voted for Biden, allegedly, but 72,159,215 still voted for Trump. 72 million people supported him sufficiently to vote for him - hardly a colossal victory for Biden, Justice and the American Way, is it?

A majority in terms of their electoral process, as you could find out for yourself, and easily understand, perhaps.

You seem to be inferring (and if you have watched the BBC and read the Guardian I quite understand why) that Trump is universally reviled and despised by virtually everyone in the world except a few lonely nutters and racist loonies.

I didn't say that at all

Not the case. In the same way that every single American is not a gun - toting, raw beef munching redneck.

I didn't say that either

But you just don't want to let reality get in the way of a good, anti-US, anti-right diatribe.

What, you think Trump won the election? What is anti USA about empathising with the winners of the USA elections?

 

[Trainee neophyte]

Oh well done, there's at 3 in that post

Ad hominem
Appeal to extremes
Strawman

Are you actually able to debate without logical fallacies?
I guess honest debating would cramp your style

So majority = 50% plus one person? It does, but the response would be "so what?" I was trying to point out that quite a lot of Americans (72 million confirmed by votes) don't share young Jacob's view. That's a quantified, actual number, but there may be other Americans who didn't vote, who also don't despise Trump. I don't have any data for that, but it isn't completely out of the realms of possibility.

Feel free to write off 72 million plus people as being completely out of touch and therefore irrelevant - what could possibly go wrong? No need to worry about them - they don't count, apparently. I know that Trump lost, but he didn't lose by a landslide, and inferring that he did is, to my mind, incorrect (dishonest, in fact). Perhaps you could explain to me why it isn't.

The "strawman" was just for fun, and the ad hominem is only there if you are a snowflake. I may have done it again. Oops. Is that dishonest? I do apologise.

 

[Jacob]

So majority = 50% plus one person? It does, but the response would be "so what?" I was trying to point out that quite a lot of Americans (72 million confirmed by votes) don't share young Jacob's view. That's a quantified, actual number, but there may be other Americans who didn't vote, who also don't despise Trump. I don't have any data for that, but it isn't completely out of the realms of possibility.

That's democracy for you. Thats how it works. It's the similar here, even less fair - there's a large majority of actual UK voters who do not vote tory. Hence talk of FPTP, transferable votes, alliances etc

Feel free to write off 72 million plus people as being completely out of touch and therefore irrelevant - what could possibly go wrong? No need to worry about them - they don't count, apparently. I know that Trump lost, but he didn't lose by a landslide, and inferring that he did is, to my mind, incorrect (dishonest, in fact).

Nobody inferred that.

 

[TRITON]

Got to love the left - so accepting and welcoming of differences of opinion.

Jesus was left wing, Hitler was right wing.

 

[D_W]

USA has mass shootings every year.
10k deaths by guns, 25k injured.

Police face the risk of being shot routinely.

You might class that low priority, not me.

It's odd that it's a priority to you enough to distract you from something going on in your own country. I can't make you feel warm and fuzzy if you take something very unlikely to affect you and fear it all the time and take a whole gaggle of things that are likely to kill you at some point and ignore them or consider the death to be a different kind of dead.

 

[D_W]

Jesus was left wing, Hitler was right wing.

Where this runs of the rails is when people try to describe Jesus as being a large government adherent vs. generosity at the individual level. Hitler also has nothing in common with "Right wing" in the united states, which is limited government with limited powers.

It's convenient for people who like to cede decisions to centralized government to try to claim they're the Jesus type and everyone else is the Hitler type.

I can guarantee you nearly none of the group (no more than the rest of the population) that went through the capitol is the "Fascist type". They're a limited government type. Some were probably part of what we'd call a "legislating morality" faction. I don't like that, but their gimmick is limited government intervention except to mandate some level of morality (not religion, but laws based on moral standards that they fail to recognize are just religiously based). Fascist and communist governments generally try to separate people from their morality because it gets in the way of redefining ethical standards.

 

[D_W]

The raw data on ownership per capita needs detail for nuance.

Mexico...full of poor people less likely to afford a gun.

Canada....There is no legal right to possess arms in Canada. It takes sixty days to buy a gun there, and there is mandatory licensing for gun owners. Gun owners pursuing a license must have third-party references, take a safety training course and pass a background check with a focus on mental, criminal and addiction histories

There's no lack of ability to afford a gun in mexico. GDP is $10K per capita there. Anyone living in a rural area would appreciate having a gun because one shot could translate to several hundred dollars worth of meat. (and before average income got so high here, meat was something you didn't eat in excess due to the cost).

There are surplus military rifles that can be converted or used as-is to hunt (not machine guns, think bolt action WWI and II rifles, especially russian or japanese) for around $100 each at retail here. They're not bought that often because they're junky, but they were common in the states 40 years ago. You would hear someone (usually older) say they hunted with an enfield, a "swiss" or a mauser. I never had any idea what those were, but a lot of the older fellows had sporterized mausers or K-swiss or british jungle carbines because they were thrifty. Take all of the metal bits and pay someone to put them in wood that looks like a hunting rifle, or if you're really poor, don't - just use as-is.

The reason there are so few in mexico is because of the legal penalties for having one.

 

[Jake]

Oh well done, there's at 3 in that post

Ad hominem
Appeal to extremes
Strawman

Are you actually able to debate without logical fallacies?
I guess honest debating would cramp your style

It's almost like he's trained in it and unquestionably has absorbed a lot of arguments and argumentative techniques from those who have.