Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rolan7]

Why hasn't anyone here discussed the LGBT or terrorism angle? It's not like those parts aren't important. In fact they are probably just as important as the gun part. Or would a conversation about all three defy an easy argument?

The issue with the LGBT angle is just that... Well this is so typical with how they are generally treated it kind of goes without saying. It is unfortunately something we are still going to just expect.

Minorities, especially ones not well favored, just are targets... and there is pretty much nothing more we can do (well more we can do on the protection angle).

This.  What more can be said?  Some groups are standing beside LGBT people, and that's good and all, but we'll see how it affects the continuing fight for equal rights - much less equal perception.

The Terrorism angle I think people just don't want to touch because the USA is becoming increasingly Islamphobic and no one got time for a debate. Either that or no one honestly believes that Islam is an evil religion that breeds bad people who is willing to argue it.

It's a touchy issue.
Their book has a lot of fucking evil.  Along with many decent things, but aren't we supposed to hold such holy books to a higher standard than that?  A drunk college student rambles some good shit and bad shit, is he just as holy and insightful as the Koran or Bible?
Most Muslims don't want to kill me, but they at least partially follow a book which says I'm evil.  Sooooo... what am I supposed to think about that!?

Anyway, I really don't mind that the discussion here has hasn't been about gays.  There's no discussion - Islam condemns gays.  It's simple.

The gun stuff is still mostly hot air, but so would be "I stand with the gays".

[Shadowlord]

Their book has a lot of fucking evil.

So does the Bible.

Most Muslims don't want to kill me, but they at least partially follow a book which says I'm evil.

So do Christians and Jews.

There's no discussion - Islam condemns gays.  It's simple.

Islam, or selected quotes from the Koran? Because so does the Bible but I don't see people saying the same thing for Christianity.

[Solifuge]

Why hasn't anyone here discussed the LGBT or terrorism angle? It's not like those parts aren't important. In fact they are probably just as important as the gun part. Or would a conversation about all three defy an easy argument?

It's hard for me to think of what can even be said. Dogma of any form, when people treat it as an unquestionable thing, and thus treat actions done in it's name as unimpeachably moral and just... when used as such, Dogma can certainly be used to make horrible things happen. Nothing about Dogma is innately horrible, but it has this weakness. Honestly, we all have this weakness to some degree; it's a facet of being Human and believing anything.

Every one of us, whatever our philosophies and experiences and opinions, must be sure that we treat our own feelings and knowledge as fallible. This goes for people who treat Science as unimpeachable as well. We can approach truth always, but we can't know it. When confronted, we have to be able to think to ourselves that we may be mistaken.



...unless you meant talking specifically about certain religious extremist groups incensing others to kill people on the basis of whom they love or what they believe. In which case, all I have to say is to respond to them with love too. Every fundamentalist I've known, underneath xenophobia or cruelty... underneath these they act fundamentally out of a fear of others, of death, and of the uncertainty of the world. To them, their faith is a community of allies, and a rock in a storm. The only way to combat dogmatic violence is to help individuals discover that, contrary to what those preaching their Dogma may say, we are not their enemies. We are all weathering the same stormy mortal world together, and as terrifying as it may seem it is also beautiful and meaningful, and that we can better face it when we stand together.

[Rolan7]

@Shadowlord
The Bible condemns me too, sure, just not nearly so explicitly.  It's actually pretty arguable.
The Koran is painfully specific.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Islam, or selected quotes from the Koran? Because so does the Bible but I don't see people saying the same thing for Christianity.

Again with the dishonesty. You all want to act like there's this secret liberal cosmopolitan majority of Muslims who are totally alright with homosexuality and religious freedom, but that just isn't the way it is. Every major school of Islamic jurisprudence agrees that homosexuality is a crime and that unrepentant homosexuals should be executed. Almost every Muslim in the world, vast majorities both in and out of the west, agree with this stance.

Sooner or later you are going to have to accept that every other culture in the world is not some group of downtrodden low-key universal humanists who would agree with you under different circumstances, but do in fact have their own philosophical basis that is entirely mutually exclusive of yours.

[chaoticag]

It's a touchy issue.
Their book has a lot of fucking evil.  Along with many decent things, but aren't we supposed to hold such holy books to a higher standard than that?  A drunk college student rambles some good shit and bad shit, is he just as holy and insightful as the Koran or Bible?
Most Muslims don't want to kill me, but they at least partially follow a book which says I'm evil.  Sooooo... what am I supposed to think about that!?

Anyway, I really don't mind that the discussion here has hasn't been about gays.  There's no discussion - Islam condemns gays.  It's simple.

The gun stuff is still mostly hot air, but so would be "I stand with the gays".

Sorry to hear that Rolan, but it's not something I'd say is universal among interpretations. Here's Imam Daayiee Abdullah speaking about it, somewhat. Beyond that, at least in America around 40% of muslims are accepting of lgbt folk compared to a 27ish for evangelical christians.

And well, in terms of personal experience my dad was obviously torn up about it, though he didn't speak much. He was saying that there's really no excuse for killing people for living their lives. Beyond that, All my sisters are still Muslim, despite 2 of them being gay and the other bi. I think I'm the odd one out of the family being the only one that really left islam, while my sisters stayed. So yeah, it's complicated to say the least.

[Shadowlord]

Islam, or selected quotes from the Koran? Because so does the Bible but I don't see people saying the same thing for Christianity.

Again with the dishonesty. You all want to act like there's this secret liberal cosmopolitan majority of Muslims who are totally alright with homosexuality and religious freedom, but that just isn't the way it is. Every major school of Islamic jurisprudence agrees that homosexuality is a crime and that unrepentant homosexuals should be executed. Almost every Muslim in the world, vast majorities both in and out of the west, agree with this stance.

I'm not being dishonest, and I'm offended that you're accusing me of doing so. I think you might be making a sweeping generalization, but I, for one, do not know almost every Muslim in the world, so I can't be sure. (Ooh, I've been ninja'd, good)

Spoiler: almost certainly controversial (click to show/hide)

To the best of my knowledge, the Muslim god is the same god as the Christian and Jewish one, and I, for one, could never worship that god even if I thought it was real, owing to it being more genocidal and despotic than even Adolf Hitler - just on the basis of what I read in the Old Testament of the Bible. Take the supposed worldwide flood which it is written killed all humans except Noah's family, and all but two members of every animal species. Or God's killing of all firstborn children of Egypt. Etc.

[Rolan7]

That actually does help me feel less scared, thanks...

[chaoticag]

That actually does help me feel less scared, thanks...

Sadly we live in scary times for all it feels sometimes. Glad to hear your heart is at least a little more at ease though.

[Insanegame27]

RE: Gun control.
First I'm going to make myself painfully clear. I am a Christian. I am an Australian. I am neutral towards the whole LGBT argument; I wouldn't feel comfortable sleeping in the same room as one, but I wouldn't discriminate. OK, now that's out of the way.
A total gun ban is not the solution. Let me point out some examples of when banning something completely has worked out. Off the top of my head I got nothing. Compare that to what didn't work out: War on drugs, alcohol (oh the bootleggers), war on terror.
The solution is not a gun ban, but reasonable gun control measures. The Orlando killer had an AR15. Do you know what an AR15 is? This is an AR15. A military grade assault rifle. MILITARY HARDWARE. If you tell me that there is any reason a civilian needs a fucking military-grade weapon designed for a military assault, I am going to call bullshit. There is absolutely no reason that anybody needs a fucking assault rifle unless you're in the military. Protection? Tell me: what are you going to do in a home invasion? Ask the burglar to wait fifteen seconds to open your gun safe and pull out your assault rifle? What then? Shoot him? What if you get mugged in the streets? "Oh, sorry Mr Mugger, let me just go home so I can get my AR15 to defend myself with."


Absolute bullshit. Something like a taser or even a bright flashlight is enough to defend yourself with. This here is a true story. Someone tried to mug me once. I had a fully-charged torch on me. 500 lumens. In my pocket. From two meters away, I shone that right in his eye and turned on the strobe function. He was stumbling around long enough for the cops to show up.


This shows that to defend yourself you don't need something which can kill. You don't need a FUCKING ASSAULT RIFLE. Here's the thing: I have had family members who served and are currently serving. The most important thing that they say to me is this: Cuns are not cool. Guns are not toys. Guns kill. Imagine your whole life, then look into someone else's eyes and think that they've been through just as much as you, maybe even more. Every person in the world has family who are expecting a brother, or father, or uncle home. Knowing that, and all that, and knowing it'll be on your conscience all your life. If you don't have the guts to do that and then pull the trigger, then you're human. You have to live with knowing that you've been the reason a father doesn't return home, the reason a mother no longer has a son. It's truly crushing.


Guys, guns aren't cool. Guns kill. 50 dead, 53 wounded. That's 103 families averaging 20 people per family (parents, brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts, nephews, nieces), plus 10 personal friends for each victim. That's 3090 people directly effected by this massacre. Think on that number. 103 is a number you'd expect from a military assault, not one person. 3090 people have been victimised for no reason.


You tell me that you need an assault rifle for any other reason than defending the country in the county's armed forces.

EDIT: My bad, it was a Sig Sauer MCX, not an AR... who gives a shit what gun it is, the concept is the same. You do not need a fucking semi-automatic assault rifle to protect yourself. The only reason you need a firearm is to put livestock down.

This is stated largely by my personal friend NuclearBomber
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87be9kpCCgY

[Erkki]

People who pull the trigger kill. Firearms are just tools. Bad things happen when such tools and people willing to kill get combined. This guy was ready to kill with what he had available, just like so many others. There would be no gun control debate had he killed the same 50 people with a suicide bomb vest, detonating in the middle of the dance floor, would there?

Gun control failed.

Yes, I need a high capacity semi-automatic rifle. I don't have one right now, but I need one. They're pretty darn expensive and good optics cost more than what I earn in a month. I have a position in the wartime organization in the Army and it is my duty to be available for national defense and, health permitting, be in the reserve until I turn 60 years old. I have legal right to get such a rifle and practice using one and/or take part to the many sports where such weapons are used. I can also store it at home.

Since 1945 not once have reservist rifles been used in crime, and there have been at any given time at least a hundred thousand of them. In responsible hands, guns don't kill.

EDIT: My bad, it was a Sig Sauer MCX, not an AR... who gives a shit what gun it is, the concept is the same. You do not need a fucking semi-automatic assault rifle to protect yourself. The only reason you need a firearm is to put livestock down.

I think the point about that was that in some US states AR-15 style products cant be legally fit with high capacity magazines... And the line is thin. Theres a huge number of guns that are more or less the same in function and even looks, and one can buy 60-round drum magazines for some, and 10-round magazines for others. The mag wells even are standardized so that your typical .223 rem magazine fits most semi auto rifles of the same caliber. Two hour drive away in the neighbor state the laws are different again. It's madness, changing a magazine with some practice takes less than 2 seconds, with 10 round magazines he'd have still killed over 30.

[Insanegame27]

I'm talking about personal defence. Why the hell would you need a high-capacity semi-automatic rifle when a bolt-ac does the same job?


I'll try from a different angle. How many of the people who were killed or wounded at the nightclub owned guns? How did protection work out for them?


What the fuck is wrong with America? How many more people have to die? How many people have to live with no father, or no brother, because people refuse to change? This is not a rhetorical question, I want a fucking number. At what point do you start thinking, "hey, maybe guns aren't necessary"? How big does the next mass-killing have to be? I don't give a shit whether or not they're LBGT or what race or anything. How many HUMAN LIVES must end at once before you people will realise? It took australia 35 deaths and 23 wounded. That's 57 families affected.


Here is what I was talking about. Guns do not work for defence. By the time you get one out of a safe, enough time has passed for anything to be done.

Spoiler: Detailed and not for the fainthearted (click to show/hide)

Graham Sutherland, who had just been shot at in his car, reversed back up the road and drove to the service station close by, where he tried to inform people what was happening. Bryant drove up to the service station and cut off a white Toyota Corolla that was attempting to exit onto the highway. Glenn Pears was driving, with girlfriend Zoe Hall in the passenger seat.[14] Bryant quickly exited the car with his rifle in hand and tried to pull Hall from the car. Pears got out of the car and approached Bryant. Bryant pointed the gun at Pears and pushed him backwards, eventually directing him into the now open boot of the BMW, locking Pears inside.[14]


Bryant then moved back to the passenger side of the Corolla as Hall attempted to climb over to the driver's seat.[14] Bryant raised his rifle and fired three shots, killing her.[14] Many people around the service station saw this and ran to hide in nearby bushland. The service station attendant told everyone to lie down and he locked the main doors. He grabbed his rifle, but by the time he could retrieve some ammunition and load his gun, Bryant was back in the BMW and gone. A police officer arrived several minutes later and then set out in pursuit of Bryant.


Zoe Hall was the 32nd victim killed.

Similarly, if a gun was on-hand in the place that Bryant first opened fire in, would they have had enough time to get it from a safe?
"All of these events, from the first bullet that killed Ng, took approximately 15–30 seconds, during which twelve people were killed and ten more wounded"
No, they wouldn't've. Guns do not work for protection.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)
A fucking THREE-YEAR-OLD was murdered.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre
SIXTEEN CHILDREN and one teacher.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

First I'm going to make myself painfully clear. I am a Christian. I am an Australian. I am neutral towards the whole LGBT argument; I wouldn't feel comfortable sleeping in the same room as one, but I wouldn't discriminate. OK, now that's out of the way.

[stunned silence intensifies]

[LoSboccacc]

really, all this talk about protectionism etc needs to be split up in bigger buckets.

there's gun terrorism attack like this one, there's directed gun violence, mostly in the form of passion crimes, then there are the generic turf wars between tugs, then there's the robberies and home invasion etc.

gun control would likely address a minority of these situations, and would only remove the means, but not the causes, which would NOT reduce crime.

ban guns and watch people stealing fertilizer. what next, ban fertilizer? http://intelwire.egoplex.com/2004_08_02_exclusives.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing#Gathering_materials

ban all the quays? secure them all up to milsec?

sure let's ban gun, who cares if problems are caused by poverty, racism, bigotry and emancipation, making it illegal to have a gun will hide all the problems away.

next up, we could ban forks to solve world hunger.

[Insanegame27]

First I'm going to make myself painfully clear. I am a Christian. I am an Australian. I am neutral towards the whole LGBT argument; I wouldn't feel comfortable sleeping in the same room as one, but I wouldn't discriminate. OK, now that's out of the way.

[stunned silence intensifies]

I lost my train of thought there and couldn't remember it in its entirety. Something about formalities to eliminate bias was my thoughts


For instance, Islam as a religion is not evil. The Bible - the Christian Bible - calls for Christians to stone gays in the Old Testament. I don't know an awful lot about the Quran, but I think there's passages in there which call to do the same thing. Yet in the New Testament of the Bible, Jesus dies on the cross for our sins, negating all previous calls to violence. I don't know what the Quran equivalent is, but I can safely assume there is one.


It is not religions at fault. Hitler was an extremist Christian. Yet we don't look at Christians and assosciate them with Hitler. So why do we do it with Muslims and Terrorists? We shouldn't. Think of it like a hymn. No matter what religion, what time, what day, the message is always 'God is great but We are shit.' That's all it boils down to. Enough with theology. There is cold, hard facts. Evidence. If you think that guns = protection, if you think that if you own a gun you are safe, if you think that you need a god damn assault rifle to protect yourself, then you are wrong. The military and the police are there to do that.


And for fuck sake stop quoting the second amendment. People Quotemine the second amendment so much. Here it is in its glorious entirety: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." A well-regulated militia, AKA the United States Armed Forces. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is referring to the people in the militia. The second amendment gives the right for a state to raise a militia in times of need and arm them. That is their right, to keep and bear arms in times of need when the state declares so.
Just today someone pro-gun told me "But you cant change the second amendment." I got a dictionary, helped them find the word amendment in it. "A minor change" Amendment literally means change.


At this point I'm just rambling.

really, all this talk about protectionism etc needs to be split up in bigger buckets.

there's gun terrorism attack like this one, there's directed gun violence, mostly in the form of passion crimes, then there are the generic turf wars between tugs, then there's the robberies and home invasion etc.

gun control would likely address a minority of these situations, and would only remove the means, but not the causes, which would NOT reduce crime. All of the situations outlined above commonly involve guns. It would remove the means, it would reduce DEATHS.

ban guns and watch people stealing fertilizer. what next, ban fertilizer? http://intelwire.egoplex.com/2004_08_02_exclusives.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing#Gathering_materials
A 5-year-old can make potassium-nitrate/sugar explosives. That will never change. That is impossible to stop. It is ALSO unrelated to gun control. Gun control is not about banning something entirely. Gun control is about making sure that people who have guns are sane and responsible. It is also about making sure that aquiring a gun in the first place is only possible for sane and responsible people. It is about not issuing guns designed for MILITARY USE to CIVILIANS

ban all the quays? secure them all up to milsec?
Where I come from, A quay is another word for dock, so I'm thoroughly confused here.

sure let's ban gun, who cares if problems are caused by poverty, racism, bigotry and emancipation, making it illegal to have a gun will hide all the problems away.
One problem at a time. Things are being done to solve poverty, racism, bigotry. Emancipation is a word meaning freedon, so IDK what tangent you're on there. Having a gun will not solve those problems.

next up, we could ban forks to solve world hunger.
I'm not new to sarcasm or satire, but man, that really broke the meter of the sarcasm-o-meter. We're not looking at gun control to fix world hunger, we're looking at gun control to fix gun problems in the same way we're looking at foreign aid to fix poverty and world hunger.

The only reason I can see that people are burring up about is 'But we want gunz, cuz gunz cewl.' Guns are for the military. Full-stop, no more needed.