Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
"Still jerkin yur gerkins over one accident eh? "
If one person is killed due to such stupidity, it's one person too much (yourself excluded, obviously).
The fact that this has happened at least twice in recent years, and that this has involved 8 or 9 year old children, makes this especially egregious. Marginalizing an incident like this really reinforces the as#@&%e-factor.
Edit:
"Some dude anywhere owns 20 rifles or somesuch? Chances are good that dude is a whack job."
Fixed that for ya, DMT.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
If one person is killed due to such stupidity, it's one person too much (yourself excluded, obviously).
And you propose to do exactly WHAT about this incident... to prevent even ONE more like it from EVER happening? Even one such death is "too much," so, clearly, we as a nation must do WHATEVER will keep it from happening again!
So, if you could make any law(s), exactly what would the law(s) look like?
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
Something along the lines of it's illegal for anyone of ~14 y/o or under to operate Uzis or similar type weapons. The specific age and type of weapon is somewhat negotiable.
Or at the very least, making it illegal for a business to allow ~14 y/o or under to operate such weapons.
It just doesn't seem very unreasonable, except to whacknut My-'Liberty'-Is-More-Important-than-You' types.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
It just doesn't seem very unreasonable, except to whacknut My-'Liberty'-Is-More-Important-than-You' types.
Nope... totally reasonable.
So, should there be a law keeping morbidly obese kids away from the all-you-can-eat buffet line? Like in bars, you know: "You've had enough kid!"
If not, then why not?
|
|
xtrmecat
Big Wall climber
Kalispell, Montanagonia
|
|
I disagree Apogee. I have a grandson that has owned his own guns since his fifth birthday. By age seven or eight he could safely do an Uzi with his father or I.
He'll, he knows more about guns and gun safety than 90 % of the posters on this and the appreciation thread, and he's only ten years old now. Probably can outshoot the same amount.
I'm sure you cannot fit him into your whackjob class now, or can you? Just a normal Montana boy that grew up peeing in the backyard and playing in the dirt.
Burly Bob
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
OK, Bob...if you aren't good with a blanket law that regulates ages & weapon types, how about conducting a business that is based on this?
"So, should there be a law keeping morbidly obese kids away from the all-you-can-eat buffet line? Like in bars, you know: "You've had enough kid!"
Ever hear of 'false equivalency'? You are creating one right now. They usually get thrown out as a way of distracting from the central issue.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Good on you, Burly. As I think you know, I lean your way. Responsible parents are worth their weight in gold, particularly in the present nanny-state mindset!
"Liberals" always want to legislate the nanny-state down and down to the every lower lowest common denominator. Individual values be damned. There's nothing that can't be fixed with a good law.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Ever hear of 'false equivalency'? You are creating one right now.
Oh, trust me, I know exactly what it is, and I know that I'm not creating one now.
YOU are the one arguing the BS line: "If it can save even one life," as you argue that even this ONE incident simply demands a legislative response.
And it is EXACTLY equivalent that far, far more lives are ruined and prematurely ended (in generally horrible fashion) by the parental irresponsibility that turns kids into mini-planets. You seem to have nothing to say about that, and I'm just wondering why you are not all "up at arms" about that sort of parental irresponsibility.
I mean, if "saving just one life" means new laws are DEMANDED by a "responsible society," then I want to know where and why you draw ANY lines.
If you think my equivalency is false, then here's your golden opportunity to explain what makes it false... and that will have the wondrous side-effect of explaining why you draw legislative lines where you do.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
F*#k your generalizations & stereotypes, madbolter.
If everyone was concerned with the safety & well-being of others on the highways, speed limits probably wouldn't be necessary.
If everyone could post a 5 million $ bond to cover their longterm care when they become head injured in a motorcycle accident, helmet laws would be pointless.
Etc, etc.
The problem with this?...REALITY.
The world just doesn't work that way, and while there just enough idiots & selfish as#@&%es out there on the highways (or as parents) that some kind of regulation becomes necessary to minimize the likelihood that their dumbass decisions hurt someone else.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
The world just doesn't work that way, and while there just enough idiots & selfish as#@&%es out there on the highways (or as parents) that some kind of regulation becomes necessary to minimize the likelihood that their dumbass decisions hurt someone else.
It sure seems to me like the incidence of this sort of thing is already pretty dang "minimized." And YOU don't get to back off to "minimized." YOU said that there should not be even ONE such incident, and there must be laws to keep this from ever happening again.
You do NOT want "minimized." YOU argue that there should be CONTROL over stupidity. You argue that legislation is "reasonable" to achieve such control. Given RARE incidents like this, people like you are QUICK to propose new legislation to slam the barn door shut afterward. But human beings are AMAZINGLY adept and finding RARE and wonderful ways to display their stupidity.
Your solution? More laws, damn it! More laws!
Now WHO is not living in the REAL world?
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
If everyone could post a 5 million $ bond to cover their longterm care when they become head injured in a motorcycle accident, helmet laws would be pointless.
Unlike you liberals, I don't WANT a nation in which "everybody" is somehow responsible to provide long-term care for some guy who takes chances with his life. I believe in a world of personal responsibility: You pays your money, and you takes your chances.
You know, like climbers!
If you love helmet laws, then you should LOVE and be stumping for no-free-solo laws! No long-runout laws! Grid-bolt, so that stupid people that aren't well-qualified to lead trad won't go out and hurt themselves... at taxpayers' expense.
You can't have it both ways. The liberal, nanny-state mindset DEMANDS more and more laws, because that "state" of affairs makes us ALL responsible for stupidity and negligence. Return to a nation of individual responsibility (with community/church charity for tough cases), and you'll find that you immediately need far fewer laws.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
" I believe in a world of personal responsibility: You pays your money, and you takes your chances."
Me, too. I just wish the world actually worked that way.
And shove your generalizations and stereotypes up yer arse, madbolter.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
Well, I'd agree with madbolter in respect to the question of the types of regulation and laws that should exist in the first place, and where the line is drawn between self-regulation & implemented law.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
Equating hiking with the use of an Uzi by 8 year olds.
Seriously.
SERIOUSLY?.
You GunNutz® are either desperate for fecking Nutz.
|
|
TradEddie
Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
|
|
So, should there be a law keeping morbidly obese kids away from the all-you-can-eat buffet line? Like in bars, you know: "You've had enough kid!"
If not, then why not?
No, because allowing fat kids to eat too much at the buffet line doesn't facilitate the murder of 10,000 healthy kids.
TE
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
Hmmm,.. back after a few days, and the voices are familiar.
Aren't we lucky that in (most of) the U S of A (most of) our kids don't need to know how to handle weapons.
I made a general example of an Israeli girl.
That instructor blew it. I agree with extremecat, and even know a similar 10 year old.
I have more practical experience with an Uzi than anyone on this forum and I can't think of a good argument for their continued existence.
Uh,......... you sure about that Jim?
Open bolt, cheap to produce,.... Entebbe?
Got any betting money in your retirement fund there guy?
Oh, and locker, don't tell anybody but the Duke isn't holding an Uzi. It is a Mac 10 with a suppressor.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
What apogee is saying...
It seems like a no brainier that children should not be allowed to play with Uzis: except to the Ayn Rand-government-is-always-evil delusional no brainers who make stoopid "arguments" otherwise.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
I have no idea if children should be allowed to do x, y, or z. However, small children should not be allowed to play with Uzis.
Guntards who have a problem with that can swallow a donkey shlong for all I care.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Guntards who have a problem with that can swallow a donkey shlong for all I care.
LOL ......
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!