Raging Against Self Defense: A Psychiatrist Examines The Anti-gun Mentality

[Laivasse]

Just adding to your points, that's all :cheers:

 

[Mechagodzilla]

I don't like guns because I may be shot.

"Impossible! No-one could have a desire to kill, so your fear is irrational guilt over your own desire to kill."

That's stupid. It is a fact that anyone can commit an act of violence with little reason. Strangers or even neighbours.

"The assumption that people want to harm you is completely illogical."

But that's why you wanted guns in the first place: to protect against randomly violent people.
Does this mean that you're "projecting" too?

"Uh.. you're in denial!"

No I'm not.

"A-HA!"

Look, I just don't want people shooting each other.

"That's the sort of thing a MURDERER says. You're not a MURDERER, are you?"

No, I said I don't want people to get hurt.

"Help! Police! This man wants to rape me!"

What? Look, I'm jewish. That's against my religion and everything I believe in.

"You're a JEW?! Oh lord, help me!"

What the feck?

"You filthy jews are pretending to be victims just to give us good (white) gun owners a bad name. That is wrong and evil!
Help! I am a rape victim, because this jew wants to rape me and steal my freedom!"

Wait, but you just said acting like a victim is evil and wrong.
And you're acting insanely racist.

"Racism? You can't claim to be a victim of racism! That's just a typical jewish scheme to grab money from whites."

Look, you're just tossing out questionable bits of circular logic and patronizing, insulting comments.
I'm going to walk away now.

"You think you jews had it bad with that holocaust? I can't even carry a handgun into a kindergarten!"

"Hey, come back. I'm sorry. I know you jews love your pity, so I sincerely pity you."

"Come on, I am treating you like a pitiful victim! Why aren't you happy?"

"I am a psychologist! You should respect me!"

"Wha-what if your wife was being raped?!"

"I'm trying to help you think good!"

"Hello?"


"Hello?!"

 

[Yuri]

It just seems as if whenever I make some sort of written point, somebody agrees with me but gets my point across much more betterized.

You like ways that speak me?




My views on the subject:

I think everyone should be given a gun at birth. Their skin should either be genetically altered or operated upon to keep a M9 Beretta on their person at all times, fully loaded. It should be kept there, on every person, until they die. Now that's safe!

 

[JNightshade]

Hahaha, I don't like where that would lead. Abortion debate x gun control debate = full out war.

 

[Laivasse]

"You think you jews had it bad with that holocaust? I can't even carry a handgun into a kindergarten!"

 

[CptStern]

an interesting experiment ...stick all the people with guns on one island, arm them to the teeth, and stick everyone else on another island with just hand tools

which island would you feel safer in?

 

[Yuri]

You've been watching Battle Royale too much, Stern

 

[CptStern]

heh havent seen it but I know what it is ..I think that's the best way to settle disputes

 

[Yuri]

You should see it, I think you'd love it

 

[CptStern]

ya I think I would too ..my wife however ...no. She gets scared during Law and Order

 

[short recoil]

an interesting experiment ...stick all the people with guns on one island, arm them to the teeth, and stick everyone else on another island with just hand tools

which island would you feel safer in?

Do the people on the gun island get hand tools as well?
If they do i'd go on the gun island.

 

[Nat Turner]

an interesting experiment ...stick all the people with guns on one island, arm them to the teeth, and stick everyone else on another island with just hand tools

which island would you feel safer in?

I'd feel safer on the 100% gun island if there are policemen with guns on the second.

 

[HunterSeeker]

Hmm let me put it this way, if there where policemen with guns on the gun island but no policemen with guns on the gun-free island I would likely feel safer on the gun island. If there where armed policmen on the gun-free island I would go there in a flash unless they all have the t-virus or something.

 

[Nat Turner]

If there where armed policmen on the gun-free island I would go there in a flash unless they all have the t-virus or something.

rofl, good luck.

They'll probably make you dig ditches for the rest of your life, while they stand around and watch.

 

[Yuri]

rofl, good luck.

They'll probably make you dig ditches for the rest of your life, while they stand around and watch.

Who's the paranoid one?

Christ you're a psycho.

 

[Nat Turner]

Who's the paranoid one?

Christ you're a psycho.

If you put a bunch of people on an island and only give some of them guns, obviously the ones with the guns will dominate the others. I don't care if they call themselves "police". There's no paranoia involved, it's common sense.

 

[CptStern]

I'd feel safer on the 100% gun island if there are policemen with guns on the second.

no guns on gun free island

short recoil: no tools ..only guns ..nah you can have tools ...some of you may not have a chance to actually use them though :E bet food scarcity wouldnt be an issue either ..just thin the ranks a bit

 

[Nat Turner]

no guns on gun free island

short recoil: no tools ..only guns ..nah you can have tools ...some of you may not have a chance to actually use them though :E

After carefully considering this, I think I'd still prefer the gun island. I'm not trained in martial arts so I'd prefer to be on even footing with a gun. I've played paintball a bunch too, which I'm pretty good at, so it might even give me an advantage.

 

[short recoil]

If you put a bunch of people on an island and only give some of them guns, obviously the ones with the guns will dominate the others. I don't care if they call themselves "police". There's no paranoia involved, it's common sense.

There was a social experiment/reality tv thing in the UK a while back.
Basically it was set in a prison like environment, where some people were prisoners, at will of the other set of people, the gaurds.

The gaurds could control everything, when they ate etc etc etc.

It showed just what humans are like when given power out of the blue, the people being the guards were mean bastards.
There were little of the predicted "complex social bonds" formed and just people in power doing what they wanted.

short recoil: no tools ..only guns ..nah you can have tools ...some of you may not have a chance to actually use them though :E bet food scarcity wouldnt be an issue either ..just thin the ranks a bit

I asked because hand tools are much more useful than guns for living on an island, but if you have guns as well then you have a lot more to work with, it would be advantageous to live on the gun island for several reasons.

1. The fact everyone has guns means there is a security net, you all know everyone has a capability to kill, you all have respect.
2. You could use them to hunt animals and defend against animal attacks.
3. You could raid the other island, kill all the men, rape the women (then kill them) and eat all their food (yeah i'm joking)

 

[Nat Turner]

There was a social experiment/reality tv thing in the UK a while back.
Basically it was set in a prison like environment, where some people were prisoners, at will of the other set of people, the gaurds.

The gaurds could control everything, when they ate etc etc etc.

It showed just what humans are like when given power out of the blue, the people being the guards were mean bastards.
There were little of the predicted "complex social bonds" formed and just people in power doing what they wanted.

Yeah I think I read about that. Is it the one that went way out of hand and had to be shut down?

 

[short recoil]

Yeah I think I read about that. Is it the one that went way out of hand and had to be shut down?

That's the one they did before, on your side http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment
LOL.

EDIT: ooohhh over 2 k posts now.

 

[theotherguy]

There was a social experiment/reality tv thing in the UK a while back.
Basically it was set in a prison like environment, where some people were prisoners, at will of the other set of people, the gaurds.

The gaurds could control everything, when they ate etc etc etc.

It showed just what humans are like when given power out of the blue, the people being the guards were mean bastards.
There were little of the predicted "complex social bonds" formed and just people in power doing what they wanted.



)

That's zimbardo's famous Prison Experiment. It showed that people take the role they are given. It's illegal nowadays so I bet the reality show was a rather dumbed down form of the experiment. Some people were seriously injured in the original and most had psycological problems for several years.

If given the choice between the two islands I would most instinctively choose the one without guns. This is, of course, assuming that there is no contact between the islands. The reason for this? If everyone has guns, the person with the most guns makes the rules, and the person with the most friends has power. Accidental shootings would be common and all would result in anarchy. If you don't like me, you shoot me. My family shoots you, your family shoots mine, my clan shoots your family, your clan shoots my clan and soon the island is thrown into chaos. Having the power of instant death with no controls except for "the other guy can shoot me" would result in anarchy, chaos and despair.

However, if the island had police it would be a bit easier to contain. Even so, if everyone has guns then the policemen are rendered worthless when presented with more criminals than they can handle.

On the other island, killing someone would require a bit of skill, and you would have to get up close and stab them several times. Naturally this would make killing less common. And yes, killing someone "in self defense" would still count as killing (even if its not considered murder) If the attacker did not have a gun and neither did the defender, the defender would have a greater chance of escaping. Sure, clan warfare might still result, but it woudl be much more limited and death would be less. Without advanced military technologies the people would develop rituals with fighting, since large groups of people fighting with hand weapons would need to get rather close to one another to fight. Ritualistic fighting as opposed to total war causes much less death.

Now, if police were put on this island with guns I beleive it would increase the safety of the island tremendously. If these police were united under a fair democratic government and were ordinary citizens put through a test and given the job then corruption would be very limited. There IS a difference between policemen with guns and citizens with guns. Why? The policeman's goal is keeping of order. While civilians would shoot at anything that is a threat, policemen would rely on other measures unless they are in imminent danger of being killed. A civilian is more likely to pull a gun and blow the brains out of a criminal as soon as he sets foot in his house. A policeman would try to subdue a criminal through negotiation, supression in numbers and non-lethal weapons. A civilian doesn't care wether or not he kills a criminal, while a policeman's goal is to put a criminal in jail. For the same reason as zimbardo's prison guards, the policemen, when given the role of a keeper of the peace and given the goal to put criminals in prison, they would preform it to the best of their ability.

 

[Nat Turner]

Accidental shootings would be common and all would result in anarchy. If you don't like me, you shoot me. My family shoots you, your family shoots mine, my clan shoots your family, your clan shoots my clan and soon the island is thrown into chaos. Having the power of instant death with no controls except for "the other guy can shoot me" would result in anarchy, chaos and despair.

No, that premise is flawed. People don't get murderous like that unless they're sure they won't face consequences. The real world isn't a first person shooter.

And it's already a system of anarchy, it doesn't become one.

 

[CptStern]

1. The fact everyone has guns means there is a security net, you all know everyone has a capability to kill, you all have respect.
2. You could use them to hunt animals and defend against animal attacks.
3. You could raid the other island, kill all the men, rape the women (then kill them) and eat all their food (yeah i'm joking)

why bother hunting when you can just raid your neighbour and take his food? if you kill him so much the better: more food/resources for you. By making it a level playing field you're giving everyone and anyone the exact same level of power regardless of their fitness to wield it

I think it would be a mexican standoff 24/7

 

[Nat Turner]

why bother hunting when you can just raid your neighbour and take his food? if you kill him so much the better: more food/resources for you. By making it a level playing field you're giving everyone and anyone the exact same level of power regardless of their fitness to wield it

I think it would be a mexican standoff 24/7

... until everyone gets hungry and wishes to help eachother build a productive village.

 

[CptStern]

there's always people that want more than their share

sooner or later there's bound to be a power struggle. Same goes for the no gun island ..only less deadly

 

[Nat Turner]

there's always people that want more than their share

There's always generally good people too who will work together to live happy lives. They are much more common. If you said that everyone on the island is a felon, then I might agree with you. But your predicted outcome is very unrealistic. Nearly free-for-all gun battles are extremely rare.

 

[CptStern]

I added:

"there's always people that want more than their share

sooner or later there's bound to be a power struggle. Same goes for the no gun island ..only less deadly"


even if the law abiding (morality?) citizens are the majority there's always those that would step outside of the law..the island is a microcosm of society, it'll reflect both the bad and the good

 

[Nat Turner]

I added:

"there's always people that want more than their share

sooner or later there's bound to be a power struggle. Same goes for the no gun island ..only less deadly"


even if the law abiding (morality?) citizens are the majority there's always those that would step outside of the law..the island is a microcosm of society, it'll reflect both the bad and the good

Yeah so chances are there maybe will be 1 or 2 bad people, who for being so stupidly selfish, will likely be killed or imprisoned. The existence of guns doesn't make people act differently. I'm not sure if you realize this, but rates of violence were much higher before guns were invented than they are now. I'm not saying the advent of guns into various societies changed this, but I'm just pointing it out. Violence can exist at high levels in societies without guns.

 

[NotATool]

If you are able to contact this author, tell him about this neat little website that has a detailed lists of logical fallacies: http://www.iep.utm.edu/f/fallacies.htm

Make sure he doesn't skip: Straw-Man, Ad Hominem, Appeal to Snobbery, Biased Sample, Hasty Generalization, False Dilemna, Guilt by Association, Jumping to Conclusions, Group Think, Non Sequiter, Smear Tactic, Unrepresentative sample, and Willed ignorance.

It's quite rare for anyone to commit so many fallacies in a single paper, I guess some people are just talented like that.

 

[CptStern]

Yeah so chances are there maybe will be 1 or 2 bad people, who for being so stupidly selfish, will likely be killed or imprisoned. The existence of guns doesn't make people act differently. I'm not sure if you realize this, but rates of violence were much higher before guns were invented than they are now. I'm not saying the advent of guns into various societies changed this, but I'm just pointing it out. Violence can exist at high levels in societies without guns.

yes I realise that but guns help facilitate violence

 

[Raziaar]

I don't like guns. At least, not in the sense of normal people having em. Police? Definitely. Militaries? Definitely. All the citizens? Nah. Gun violence scares me to no end.

I love guns in games and stuff though, I even have a replica firearm for airsoft.

 

[Yuri]

If you put a bunch of people on an island and only give some of them guns, obviously the ones with the guns will dominate the others. I don't care if they call themselves "police". There's no paranoia involved, it's common sense.

If there is a police force, obviously you are insinuating that the island has some sort of government. I was assuming that the government was not totalitarian, and was democratic in some way. When you said "only police with guns" I figured that this island was completely ridden of all citizenship ownership of weapons besides the police, or the exectutive branch of government.

Having said this, I would feel completely safe in my democratic nation with a strong executive branch.

Obviously, if you give a few random dudes guns on an island, and some of them no guns... it will be completely different. But the word "police" was used, which suggests an entirely different scenerio.


And one thing confuses me here. Some people (not assuming its you, Nat, this just reminds me) seem to believe that if they don't have their trusty sidearm, then the US will turn into some sort of death-patrol totalitarian militant state. Sorry, but I don't think your dinky handgun will save you from a militant overthrow of our pseudo-democratic nation. Seeing as how "they" have an army equipped with tanks, missiles, rocket launchers, explosives, jets, a navy, and all sorts of crazy ass shit that citizens cannot own under and circumstances.

Thah gov'mant ain't gonna take mee!!

That's one view of gun ownership that I've seen. The whole "protection from criminals" thing makes a lot, lot more sense to me, although I still disagree.

I love guns in games and stuff though, I even have a replica firearm for airsoft.

What kind?

 

[Raziaar]

What kind?

It's a Swiss Sig 552 Commando. Mounted up on my bedroom wall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sig_552_Commando

 

[Yuri]

That's not Tokyo Marui, is it? Probably like CYMA or Well.

I've got a M9 Silver Beretta and a bunch of random crap guns

Airsoft is so much cooler than real guns. I wish we could brandish them in the streets without getting shot by ten neighbors, five policemen and one dog... Damn Japanese have such a much better time

 

[Raziaar]

That's not Tokyo Marui, is it? Probably like CYMA or Well.

I've got a M9 Silver Beretta and a bunch of random crap guns

Airsoft is so much cooler than real guns. I wish we could brandish them in the streets without getting shot by ten neighbors, five policemen and one dog... Damn Japanese have such a much better time

It is a Tokyo Mauri.

 

[Teta_Bonita]

Its not Psycho-logical, its logical.

You don't need a gun to defend yourself.
Your more likely to be murdered if guns are legal.

Why would you want guns.

But without guns, how will you go about with your violent communist revolution that you're probably secretly planning? :O

 

[Yuri]

It is a Tokyo Mauri.

:O Envy!

Sorry I assumed there, then, I just figured you weren't all that into airsoft for some random unknown probably sleep deprived reason.

 

[Raziaar]

:O Envy!

Sorry I assumed there, then, I just figured you weren't all that into airsoft for some random unknown probably sleep deprived reason.

It cost me like, 300 bucks. AEG <grins> Too bad it spends all its time mounted on my wall. I dont really find the time to play or anything.

 

[Solaris]

But without guns, how will you go about with your violent communist revolution that you're probably secretly planning? :O

Oh no, we have guns. I just don't want the general public to have them. Makes a coup that little bit easier