15 Dec '12 18:25>6 edits
This thread is tangential to the guns??? topic. The pro-gun people see that the problem is with only people (as opposed to guns), and that without guns people will just find other ways to kill people (presumably with the same ease and efficiency as that afforded by guns)
If that is correct (i.e. there exists a sequence of arguments and counter counter arguments on their side such that any rational person would be forced to agree with them that *only* people are the problem) then exactly how do we arrange for a world where everyone gets along, don't want to kill other people, and it is ok for all responsible people to hold killing machines (which begs the question - why would we need them in such a world!???)?
If you cannot see such a world as attainable, such that there will always be an subset of all humans that want to and will find a way to kill people, then how can we possibly accept that
gunsReveal Hidden Content
If that is correct (i.e. there exists a sequence of arguments and counter counter arguments on their side such that any rational person would be forced to agree with them that *only* people are the problem) then exactly how do we arrange for a world where everyone gets along, don't want to kill other people, and it is ok for all responsible people to hold killing machines (which begs the question - why would we need them in such a world!???)?
If you cannot see such a world as attainable, such that there will always be an subset of all humans that want to and will find a way to kill people, then how can we possibly accept that
gunsReveal Hidden Content
which are explictly designed for killing (as opposed to knives - designed for cutting things, basball bats - designed for hitting baseballs, cars - designed for transporting humans long distances
(which empower those with a mindset to kill to go out and kill in large numbers) are not a part of the problem!? 😕