PhuturePriest Posted April 14, 2014 Author Share Posted April 14, 2014 Hey, if Im gonna get killed by something Id love for it to be creative. Way to kill the creative spirit FP. I usually joke about anything, but being part Irish, I don't really like joking about nail bombs. They've killed hundreds of innocent people in Ireland, and it's not really a humorous topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted April 14, 2014 Author Share Posted April 14, 2014 This is why I don't regularly participate in Debate Table discussions. I have trouble getting my beliefs across that doesn't sound like I'm flighty or flaky. I've always had that problem for as long as I can remember and am often misunderstood because of what I say. Don't worry about that. I do stupid things all the time when debating. It's just the nature of the beast for me. :P I'm not as graced with incredible debating skills like Winchester is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnlySunshine Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 A real pacifist does not seek to control others, or to have others control others. Government will use violent means to enforce gun control. So you are either not actually a pacifist or you are for controlling people. See my most recent post before this one. I'm bowing out because I obviously cannot get my point across without using the wrong terminology. :blush: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I usually joke about anything, but being part Irish, I don't really like joking about nail bombs. They've killed hundreds of innocent people in Ireland, and it's not really a humorous topic. I promise guns have killed more innocent people across the entire globe and the nail bombs have of irish people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted April 14, 2014 Author Share Posted April 14, 2014 See my most recent post before this one. I'm bowing out because I obviously cannot get my point across without using the wrong terminology. :blush: I think (and correct me if I'm wrong) that a good generalization of your beliefs is that you believe in peace and making any sacrifice necessary to obtain it, even if that means the government taking away everyone's guns. Is that right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 See my most recent post before this one. I'm bowing out because I obviously cannot get my point across without using the wrong terminology. :blush: I don't think you were that misunderstood. I believe you were trying to have it both ways, being a pacifist and supporting aggression at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted April 14, 2014 Author Share Posted April 14, 2014 I promise guns have killed more innocent people across the entire globe and the nail bombs have of irish people. So obviously we should take away everyone's guns and have only the government have them. Because that always works out great. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Lenin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Il-sung Fun fact: governments have killed more people collectively than anything else in the world. Mao Zedong killed 100 million of his people, and he's just one dictator. Vladimir Lenin killed 40-60 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnlySunshine Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I think (and correct me if I'm wrong) that a good generalization of your beliefs is that you believe in peace and making any sacrifice necessary to obtain it, even if that means the government taking away everyone's guns. Is that right? I'm trying to disengage from this thread but I'll answer this question as best I can. I believe in making peace if possible. But I also believe in making practical decisions, as well. When politicians said they wanted to pull out of the war in the Middle East ASAP, I thought that was incredibly stupid because it's still not safe. We're already over there and must finish the job of securing the US citizens and the citizens overseas if possible (though I know that's not 100% possible). So I guess what I'm trying to say is, I don't believe civilians should own firearms. They should be restricted to law enforcement and military. Not all war is preventable (Civil War and our involvement in the WW2 was useful to free slaves and prevent the Nazis from doing more damage, among other things). Hopefully, this clears up any confusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnlySunshine Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I don't think you were that misunderstood. I believe you were trying to have it both ways, being a pacifist and supporting aggression at the same time. That's not what I was saying at all. I really wish I'd never jumped in here. See my post in response to FP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilllabettt Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 So I guess what I'm trying to say is, I don't believe civilians should own firearms. They should be restricted to law enforcement and military. Do you have a philosophical rationale for that belief, or do you embrace it just cuz it feels good to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 So obviously we should take away everyone's guns and have only the government have them. Because that always works out great. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Lenin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Il-sung Fun fact: governments have killed more people collectively than anything else in the world. Mao Zedong killed 100 million of his people, and he's just one dictator. Vladimir Lenin killed 40-60 million. All Im saying is that guns kill people. So I dont know why youre in favor of one type of lethal weapon and not of others. In the end, people die. And it sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 (edited) That's not what I was saying at all. I really wish I'd never jumped in here. See my post in response to FP. Yes, you simply do not wish to see it that way. An aggressor wants to control other people or have others control them, you advocate just that. There is certain property you do not believe others should own, and you support forbidding them ownership of that property, and control of those that do. You are an aggressor in the name of peace. Edited April 14, 2014 by KnightofChrist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted April 14, 2014 Author Share Posted April 14, 2014 All Im saying is that guns kill people. So I dont know why youre in favor of one type of lethal weapon and not of others. In the end, people die. And it smells of elderberries. Guns also serve us by aiding us in getting our food. Bombs can't do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnlySunshine Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Yes, you simply do not wish to see it that way. An aggressor wants to control other people or have others control them, you advocate just that. There is certain property you do not believe others should own, and you support forbidding them ownership of that property. You are an aggressor in the name of peace. I already admitted that I did not use the proper terminology. Now drop it, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Guns also serve us by aiding us in getting our food. Bombs can't do that. I dont believe we should have a world where guns are such an important means of getting food. That is just raising a huge red flag. Are humans so degenerate now that we are killing each other for basic necessities? The problem isnt with guns, its with people. We shouldn't need guns to get food. We should be trying to find the source of our need for guns and snuff that...instead all people are doing is glorifying this inanimate object as if it is the sole means to freedom and happiness. I think it just goes to show you how fucked up the world is. Thats just my opinion though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now