When? An Op Ed about violence and the god concept.

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15756
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
When? An Op Ed about violence and the god concept.

It is obvious as to our current event, so in keeping this in mind, I am making a general criticism about WHY god as a concept is a broken claim.

Before any theist reads any further, this is strictly about a concept as a claim, much like one would review a book or movie. I do hate ALL claims of the invisible brain theory as to cause of life. If it makes no sense to most that the sun is a god, why would life or nature, either the good or bad that happen, need a super hero vs a super villain to explain?

Now, I still to this day have yet to see a credible refutation to Epicurus and his problem with evil. And it turns my stomach knowing that real heros like Victoria Soto did the demonstrable, the provable and the valued. Yet our species time after time, be it enslavement of blacks, genocide of native Americans, 6 million Jews murdered, 13,000 drowned in the Japanese Tsunami, yet as a species we still allow our brains to concoct and swallow fictitious super hero in some false sense of hope to make sense of life.

Now, as hard as it may be to read the following, READ IT, and after reading it please give me one good reason WHY you think there is a cosmic man with a cape?

26 human beings were turned into Swiss Cheese. 20 were kids, many probably shot in the head. That would mean their skulls were exploded like Gallaghar smashing a watermelon. That would mean their brains and or guts splattered on the floor and walls.

No sane person if 100% of the time, had the power to stop harm to their loved ones, much less kids, would allow such. It makes even less sense to me when a fictitious "all powerful" god is inserted. What does make sense to me is that a disturbed person got a hold of guns and riffles and murdered kids.

 

No sane person would hire a baby sitter if they said "I sat 99 kids. 33 I shot a molester before they got to the kid. 33 I allowed the molester to molest the kid, but shot him before he left the house. And 33 I let the molester molest and murder the kid and let the molester go".

Why am I being so harsh, especially in such trying time? Because I am tired of the horrors in life being used to prop up what is clearly superstition. If we are going to, as a species reduce harm and find answers to reduce harm, then we cannot afford to cling to the past anymore than it would make sense to still believe the earth is flat.

You do not need a belief in Allah or Vishnu or Thor or Jesus to feel pain. You do not need a super hero vs a super villain to know what happened at that grade school, or murder in general, or war in general, or death in general, is something no human wants affecting them.

Some would accuse me of being insensitive to this moment. So when is the moment? To me demanding my silence in the face of absurdity as an answer as to why such horrors exist would be to excuse the Dark Ages and witch hunts. It is to excuse the subjugation of woman and forcing them to wear Burkas. It is to excuse the false beliefs of the past like epilepsy being a demon rather than a natural brain defect. It is to excuse all superstitions in the face of clear reality.

Those poor kids died for the same reason 700,000 kids worldwide die from drinking dirty water. They died for the same reason a robber murders someone for money. It isn't that we want those things to happen, no sane person  does. Bad things happen because they do and we'd be better served in order to reduce the risk of bad things happening by scrapping such superstitions and look to study the environments that lead to such conditions so that we can prevent the bad things in life as much as possible.

Reality isn't a utopia, and it can be quite cruel and violent. But sugar coating it with claims of the unprovable and personal predilections of wishful thinking will not and has never solved what in reality is our collective human existence in problem solving.  To accept reality does not mean we lack empathy and emotions, it merely means that we should not conflate reality into Superman vs Lex Luthor.

20 kids and 6 adults died in a horror most of us will not face. But just like we do not think the volcano is an angry god, the good and bad in life are better suited to study, rather than inserting comic book answers into a harsh reality, if we wish to resolve the problems in our finite existence.

Victoria is who we should honor, not Jesus, not Allah, not Vishnu. She was real and she did the ultimate compassionate act and will not come back and did so not looking for attention or intent to create a club for people to worship her. It is one thing to mourn. It is another to seek false solace in books and claims and tribalism written in a scientifically ignorant past. 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ubuntuAnyone
Theist
ubuntuAnyone's picture
Posts: 862
Joined: 2009-08-06
User is offlineOffline
We want answer, no doubt. I

We want answers, no doubt. I think it is very much a part of the human experience to ask "why".  The reality, however, is this: no one can answer why such things happen. Theists can't. Atheist can't. No one can.

Perhaps the reason why is that evil is senseless -- it defies reason and rationality. It creates conundrum that no amount of rational though could ever makes sense out of. One may as well attempt to understand how 2+2 = green, -- it's as fruitless an endeavor as trying to understand evil and why it happens.

Even if one can reduce one's problem down to a faulty circuit in the network of electromagnetic impulses in one's grey matter, it still wouldn't explain the arrangement of individuals who were victimized by such carnage nor would it offer and solace to those who have to grieve their losses. It simply leaves a gaping hole that will receive nothing short of a hollow echo of the questions being asked.
 

“Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.”


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1831
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
It is my personal belief

It is my personal belief that justifying atheism emotionally is actually a lower position than justifying theism emotionally.

 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Lee2216
Theist
Lee2216's picture
Posts: 328
Joined: 2010-11-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Now, I still

Brian37 wrote:
Now, I still to this day have yet to see a credible refutation to Epicurus and his problem with evil. And it turns my stomach knowing that real heros like Victoria Soto did the demonstrable, the provable and the valued. Yet our species time after time, be it enslavement of blacks, genocide of native Americans, 6 million Jews murdered, 13,000 drowned in the Japanese Tsunami, yet as a species we still allow our brains to concoct and swallow fictitious super hero in some false sense of hope to make sense of life.

My question to you is how does life make sense without God? If we suppose God doesn't exist then all we have is mindless natural materialism. If that is the case, why do we as human beings doing good things and evil things? Are these just random chemical reactions in our brains that cause these things or is there a reason behind a good deed done or an evil deed done. If materialism is true, then reason itself is impossible. If the mental processes are nothing but chemical reactions in the brain, then there is no reason to believe anything is true.

Brian37 wrote:
No sane person if 100% of the time, had the power to stop harm to their loved ones, much less kids, would allow such. It makes even less sense to me when a fictitious "all powerful" god is inserted. What does make sense to me is that a disturbed person got a hold of guns and riffles and murdered kids.

I agree Brian, no sane person would allow their loved ones to be harmed if they have the power to stop it. So, I presume your asking the "If God is so powerful and loving why does He allow these terrible things to happen" question. Which is a great question. As a Christian, I don't have a definitive answer as to why He allows evil things to happen other than to say He gives man a free will to choose. Could the bible be possibly true that after death immediately comes judgement so therefore He allows evil things to happen so some people will turn from their sin and repent? Could it be that the bible is true and there is a real place called  heaven so maybe he took those children to a much better place than this evil world? Scripture does say that God's ways are not our ways and His thought are not our thoughts. God is not some insensitive jerk according the bible. He mourns and weeps over those who are perishing and weeps with those who are full of sorrow.

 

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. Romans 1:20


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15756
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Ktulu wrote:It is my

Ktulu wrote:

It is my personal belief that justifying atheism emotionally is actually a lower position than justifying theism emotionally.

 

Stop it. This is utter nonsense. Human beings display passion, why should atheists be any different and why not use that passion to promote something positive other than superstition?

So it is your position that we should paint ourselves as being emotionless robots? Don't they already think that anyway?

Passion is not the issue. Facts are and facts should be something humans should be passionate enough to want to find.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


GodsUseForAMosquito
Moderator
GodsUseForAMosquito's picture
Posts: 404
Joined: 2008-08-27
User is offlineOffline
 Hume's is-ought fallacy is

 Hume's is-ought fallacy is significant here. Essentially, he states that in any line of reasoning that starts with how things do happen, eventually and imperceptibly the statements will move to how things ought to happen. Hume's position is that this jump is always unjustified.. You cannot get to an ought from an is. 

 As atheists,  we need to have a certain understanding of what is, and not postulate what ought to be from that,  otherwise we risk falling into this trap. 

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15756
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:My question to you is

Quote:
My question to you is how does life make sense without God?

You can make sense of lightening without inserting Thor as the cause. You can also explain the sun as it is really made up without believing it is a thinking being. And you also go through life rejecting the god claims of others.

Does Posiden as a cause make sense to you when it comes to hurricanes? Or does heat and moister and atmosphere explain hurricanes better?

Now, the only difference between you and I is that I reject one more god claim than you do. It makes much more sense that people make up gods as a mental placebo just like the god claims you reject, I just go one step further.

Humans make up gods is a natural explanation vs an actual god being real. You live without believing the sun is a god like the Egyptians falsely believed for 3,000 years, so you should know what living without a particular god feels like, you already reject that one. I just reject one more than you do.

You CAN live without believing in a god just like you live without believing in Allah or Vishnu or Thor or Posiden.

 

Human psychology explains quite naturally why people believe absurd things.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ubuntuAnyone
Theist
ubuntuAnyone's picture
Posts: 862
Joined: 2009-08-06
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Human

Brian37 wrote:

Human psychology explains quite naturally why people believe absurd things. 

But it can't explain absurd things...

“Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.”


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15756
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
ubuntuAnyone wrote:Brian37

ubuntuAnyone wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Human psychology explains quite naturally why people believe absurd things. 

But it can't explain absurd things...

What are you smoking? People used to believe that there was an ocean god Posiden. People used to believe the sun was a god. Those are absurd claims and there is a literal evolutionary and neurological reason humans concoct and believe stupid crap.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ubuntuAnyone
Theist
ubuntuAnyone's picture
Posts: 862
Joined: 2009-08-06
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:What are you

Brian37 wrote:

What are you smoking? People used to believe that there was an ocean god Posiden. People used to believe the sun was a god. Those are absurd claims and there is a literal evolutionary and neurological reason humans concoct and believe stupid crap.

You missed the point. I was talking about the absurdity of evil. People still very much believe in that, and they still are trying to make sense out of it. Or are you going to say that it doesn't exist because you can't make sense of it?

Even so, early attempts to make sense of the world around oneself does not mean that their beliefs were absurd or otherwise.... paradigm shifts happen all the time.

“Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.”


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15756
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Lauri Wasserman Dann(for the

Lauri Wasserman Dann(for the gun nuts who think we shouldn't try to prevent any guns ending  up in the wrong hands). Look her up.

 

Quote:
On 20 May 1988, the 30-year-old Dann walked into a second grade classroom at Hubbard Woods School in Winnetka, Illinois carrying three pistols and began shooting children, killing an eight-year-old boy - Nicholas Corwin - and wounding five others before fleeing. She entered a nearby house where she shot and wounded a 20-year-old man before killing herself

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Criminology-Forensic-Psychology-3379/f/LAURIE-WADE.htm

 

And this was NOT done with a semi automatic. Nor are most gun deaths be they domestic murder, gang violence or suicide. So it is NOT just big clips or semi automatics, it is also about having good public policy and laws keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally disturbed NO MATTER how big or small the gun is.

"SECOND AMENDMENT" scare tactics are NOT going to work because it is NOT the issue. The issue is our continued culture of lack of good public policy.

The Va Tec shooter bought his guns. This past week's killer did not. Laurie Dann didn't have an assault riffle and still shot and killed an innocent kid.

What sickens me is that we as a society seem to have short term memories. I graduated high school in 1985. My yearbook mentioned all the notable events of the past school year which covered 1984 because our school year started in September and ended in June the next year.

That year my YEARBOOK mentioned the McDonald's massacre just south of San Diego California. Mentally disturbed James Huberty shot and killed dozens. I think it is truly sad that a highschool yearbook mentioned a mass shooting. I can't imagine what the Columbine HS survivors went through.

That is not mentioning the Kent State clock tower shooter back in the 60s. Nor the Lubie's Cafeteria in Texas, where handguns were used.

And again, still not taking into account the 32 deaths a day 365 days a year on average where people die from gun deaths.

It is not how big or how small the guns are, it is OUR CULTURE of do nothing and the same "any rule suggested makes you a fascist".

So to gun nuts, how much gun death needs to happen before you will accept it is a problem?

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Lauri

Brian37 wrote:

Lauri Wasserman Dann(for the gun nuts who think we shouldn't try to prevent any guns ending  up in the wrong hands). Look her up.

 

Quote:
On 20 May 1988, the 30-year-old Dann walked into a second grade classroom at Hubbard Woods School in Winnetka, Illinois carrying three pistols and began shooting children, killing an eight-year-old boy - Nicholas Corwin - and wounding five others before fleeing. She entered a nearby house where she shot and wounded a 20-year-old man before killing herself

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Criminology-Forensic-Psychology-3379/f/LAURIE-WADE.htm

 

And this was NOT done with a semi automatic. Nor are most gun deaths be they domestic murder, gang violence or suicide. So it is NOT just big clips or semi automatics, it is also about having good public policy and laws keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally disturbed NO MATTER how big or small the gun is.

"SECOND AMENDMENT" scare tactics are NOT going to work because it is NOT the issue. The issue is our continued culture of lack of good public policy.

The Va Tec shooter bought his guns. This past week's killer did not. Laurie Dann didn't have an assault riffle and still shot and killed an innocent kid.

 

Exactly what public policy would have stopped any of these? You are quite right that "assault rifles" are rarely to blame and even an old fashioned revolver can be deadly. That is exactly what I have pointed out tirelessly. It seems to me you have two options- ban ALL guns and hope that somehow you can effectively keep them out of criminal hands (although many banned products are easily obtainable, why would guns be different?) or it would be awfully nice if in any of these situations one of the teachers was trained and armed.

What would you propose? Specifically please.

And I have no problem with keeping guns out of "wrong" hands, the problem is with identifying which hands are wrong before a person commits a crime. We have this stupid thing of "innocent until proven guilty" remember that? Which also by the way leads to thousands of criminals getting let free to commit more crimes. If we had a "you might be guilty go to jail for life" policy crime would be much lower. If we allowed all illegally obtained evidence in trials, didn't give defendants rights and quarantined poor areas violent crime would probably be virtually non-existent. I don't want to live in that kind of country. Do you? If your sole goal is to create a society with no violent crime a totalitarian police state has by far proven to be the most efficient means of doing so.  

I have a big problem with keeping guns out of the right hands. (mine, yours, and all the hundreds of millions of responsible Americans). 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:What sickens

Brian37 wrote:

What sickens me is that we as a society seem to have short term memories. I graduated high school in 1985. My yearbook mentioned all the notable events of the past school year which covered 1984 because our school year started in September and ended in June the next year.

That year my YEARBOOK mentioned the McDonald's massacre just south of San Diego California. Mentally disturbed James Huberty shot and killed dozens. I think it is truly sad that a highschool yearbook mentioned a mass shooting. I can't imagine what the Columbine HS survivors went through.

That is not mentioning the Kent State clock tower shooter back in the 60s. Nor the Lubie's Cafeteria in Texas, where handguns were used.

And again, still not taking into account the 32 deaths a day 365 days a year on average where people die from gun deaths.

Good job. Yeah, this shit has been happening forever. You might want to go back further and you will see it happened before guns too. Batshit crazy people kill for shits and giggles. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

It is not how big or how small the guns are, it is OUR CULTURE of do nothing and the same "any rule suggested makes you a fascist".

What rule are you proposing? So far the only rules I have heard proposed in US politics are things like the "assault weapons ban" which we had, and we still had mass shootings. As you pointed out, in many examples the weapons used were not rifles let alone "assault rifles". So obviously, such a ban does not solve the problem. We were told the background check would solve it. We have a background check, obviously it has not solved the problem. So what rule do you suggest? 

So far the only person on this site who has suggested something that might help is GodsUse, which for such a law to pass would clearly require amending the Constitution and afterwords probably significant physical force to remove the weapons already in existence. I wouldn't support it for the reasons I outlined over there. Is that what you support? 

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15756
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

What sickens me is that we as a society seem to have short term memories. I graduated high school in 1985. My yearbook mentioned all the notable events of the past school year which covered 1984 because our school year started in September and ended in June the next year.

That year my YEARBOOK mentioned the McDonald's massacre just south of San Diego California. Mentally disturbed James Huberty shot and killed dozens. I think it is truly sad that a highschool yearbook mentioned a mass shooting. I can't imagine what the Columbine HS survivors went through.

That is not mentioning the Kent State clock tower shooter back in the 60s. Nor the Lubie's Cafeteria in Texas, where handguns were used.

And again, still not taking into account the 32 deaths a day 365 days a year on average where people die from gun deaths.

Good job. Yeah, this shit has been happening forever. You might want to go back further and you will see it happened before guns too. Batshit crazy people kill for shits and giggles. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

It is not how big or how small the guns are, it is OUR CULTURE of do nothing and the same "any rule suggested makes you a fascist".

What rule are you proposing? So far the only rules I have heard proposed in US politics are things like the "assault weapons ban" which we had, and we still had mass shootings. As you pointed out, in many examples the weapons used were not rifles let alone "assault rifles". So obviously, such a ban does not solve the problem. We were told the background check would solve it. We have a background check, obviously it has not solved the problem. So what rule do you suggest? 

So far the only person on this site who has suggested something that might help is GodsUse, which for such a law to pass would clearly require amending the Constitution and afterwords probably significant physical force to remove the weapons already in existence. I wouldn't support it for the reasons I outlined over there. Is that what you support? 

 

Had and got rid of that ban for your information.

I will support a CLIMATE change in the form of multiple prong laws such as mental evaluations ON TOP of quality of home life(meaning abuse and addiction issues). Ending secondary market sales such as internet and gunshow loopholes which makes 40% of gun sales practically untracable.

And even most gun owners who merely have handguns and hunting riffles do not understand the nuts like that woman who think military style weapons are a right. There is absolutly no reason you need a high volume clip, for either a riffle or handgun.

Any hint of instability in the form of mental illness, drug addiction, or domestic abuse should disqualify you.

And maybe some sort of technology on the manufactures part to make any gun or riffle user specific like fingerprint recognition.

And please tell me where I said a ban on all guns? I was saying we have a problem and doing nothing is not an option.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Lee2216 wrote:My question to

Lee2216 wrote:

My question to you is how does life make sense without God? If we suppose God doesn't exist then all we have is mindless natural materialism. If that is the case, why do we as human beings doing good things and evil things? Are these just random chemical reactions in our brains that cause these things or is there a reason behind a good deed done or an evil deed done. If materialism is true, then reason itself is impossible. If the mental processes are nothing but chemical reactions in the brain, then there is no reason to believe anything is true.

Strawman.

You are attempting to classify everyone that does not follow your book of perverse morals and archaic, draconian mentality as a materialist.

You are also overlooking how many evil deeds have been done in the name of your god.

You are also attempting to cheapen the human experience as "just chemicals in the brain"

Sentient beings have a central nervous system, do they not ?

Sentient beings have the ability to feel emotional sensations, do they not ?

These things can be seen and found through CAT scans and testable, observable experience.

What more do you need ? Where do you think things like heat, cold, hunger, pain, and such come from ?

It can't come from a soul, by Christian logic, since the soul is immaterial.

Lee2216 wrote:

 Which is a great question. As a Christian, I don't have a definitive answer as to why He allows evil things to happen other than to say He gives man a free will to choose. Could the bible be possibly true that after death immediately comes judgement so therefore He allows evil things to happen so some people will turn from their sin and repent? Could it be that the bible is true and there is a real place called  heaven so maybe he took those children to a much better place than this evil world? Scripture does say that God's ways are not our ways and His thought are not our thoughts. God is not some insensitive jerk according the bible. He mourns and weeps over those who are perishing and weeps with those who are full of sorrow.

 

IOW. What you are really saying is that you don't really know, then you say that god's thoughts are not our thoughts, which means that you would have to be as clueless as everyone else.

Face it, religion is just another way of people trying to make sense of things that do not make sense.

It's easier to use clear cut lines like good/evil, rather than realize that people who commit crimes are deranged, out of touch with reality, delusional, and are not some agent of Satan in disguise, but a twisted fuck that was unable to make any type of reasonable decisions.

No, I don't feel any sympathy for the shooter, but I have yet to see anyone make the argument that the shooter could have been a sane, rational and thinking person. If someone can make that argument, I would like to hear them present that a sane, rational and thinking person could just go and shoot kids.

That is what the the REAL tragedy of all of this is.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
ubuntuAnyone wrote:But it

ubuntuAnyone wrote:

But it can't explain absurd things...

To some element it can.

Read about certain serial killers and it seems like all of the elements in place were there at a young age.

Pathological history in the family, abusive home, propensity and demonstration of violence at a young age, sadistic tendencies, etc. etc.

Whether this is nature vs. nurture has not been totally resolved and may never be fully resolved.

Perhaps it is a combination of both.

Why do some people from abusive homes grow up non-violent, with no sadistic tendencies or predispositions to cruelty and others do not ?

Perhaps the answer could lie in something as simple as brain chemistry.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Had and got

Brian37 wrote:

Had and got rid of that ban for your information.

I know we did. And Connecticut still has that ban, and obviously it didn't work. My point exactly. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

I will support a CLIMATE change in the form of multiple prong laws such as mental evaluations ON TOP of quality of home life(meaning abuse and addiction issues).

We already do, it is called the NICS and it checks everything you said plus more.

Quote:

 

Section 922(g) of the Gun Control Act prohibits certain persons from shipping or transporting any firearm in interstate or foreign commerce, or receiving any firearm which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, or possessing any firearm in or affecting commerce. These prohibitions apply to any person who:

 

18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (1)

Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year

 

18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (2)

Is a fugitive from justice

 

18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (3)

Is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance

 

18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (4)

Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution

 

18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (5)

Is an alien illegally or unlaw-fully in the United States or who has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa.

 

18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (6)

Has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions

 

18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (7)

Having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced U.S. citizenship

 

18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (Cool

Is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner

 

18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (9)

Has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence

 

18, U.S.C. §922 (n)

Is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year

Furthermore, any police, psychiatrist, or even a family member can put a flag on someone in the NICS which will cause further review before any approval is granted.

Quote:

In addition to local, state, tribal, and federal agencies voluntarily contributing information to the NICS Index, the NICS Section receives telephone calls from mental health institutions, psychiatrists, police departments, and family members requesting placement of individuals into the NICS Index.

So a psychiatrist can call and say "hey, I don't think this guy should be able to buy a gun" then the NICS will get back to them, collect the relevant information and make a decision. Or if someone feels threatened they can call and at the very least it will make it so it takes a long time for the person to purchase a gun. Now I don't have any information on how often shrinks call in, maybe it is something that needs to be addressed among psychiatrists to make sure they are in fact reporting people who are legitimate threats, but the law is there and the system is in place. 

 

 

 

Brian37 wrote:

Ending secondary market sales such as internet and gunshow loopholes which makes 40% of gun sales practically untracable.

Since background checks can be done near instantaneously now I don't really have an issue with this. With CCW laws, most states require a far more extensive background check to get a CCW permit so I think that a CCW permit should be allowed as identification in lieu of the background check. This will keep the system from getting overloaded by requests and allow people to go to gunshows and not worry about some problem with the background check because they can do it before they go. Occasionally, background checks come up with false rejections and can take up to three days, which at a gun show is a problem because they won't be there in three days. Allowing people to iron out any problems beforehand by getting a background check before the gunshow allows for a smoother transaction. As long as something like that is in place, and it is perfectly possible within the current framework, I have no problem requiring an NCIS check for private sales. (17 states in fact already do, including Connecticut, your "40%" number is completely made up) 

 

Brian37 wrote:

And even most gun owners who merely have handguns and hunting riffles do not understand the nuts like that woman who think military style weapons are a right. There is absolutly no reason you need a high volume clip, for either a riffle or handgun.

How large were the clips used in this shooting? Do you know? Define "high volume". The guns used in this shooting were regular handguns and probably had a capacity of 12 or 14 rounds which is pretty standard because that is how many rounds you can fit inside the handle. There are extended clips made for pistols, I don't know if this shooter had one or not. It is rather absurd to worry about clip size though, it only takes a second to change clips so I don't see a difference between a shooter carrying two 30 round clips or five 12 round clips. When your victims are unarmed a few seconds isn't going to make a difference. It is easier and faster to change clips in a pistol than it is for you to switch dvds in your tv.

 

Brian37 wrote:

Any hint of instability in the form of mental illness, drug addiction, or domestic abuse should disqualify you.

Anything specific you would recommend beyond what the NCIS already does? 

 

Brian37 wrote:

And maybe some sort of technology on the manufactures part to make any gun or riffle user specific like fingerprint recognition.

Already exists. All guns have a serial number on them and it is a serious federal offence to remove it or possess a gun that has had it removed. Additionally, all barrels have slight flaws which make pretty unique imprints on the bullet. It is quite possible to determine which gun a bullet was shot from with a high degree of accuracy. Which is why if you are planning on getting away with murder, don't use a gun and certainly don't use your gun because it gives the police that much more evidence to figure out who you are. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

And please tell me where I said a ban on all guns? I was saying we have a problem and doing nothing is not an option.

You haven't said ban all guns. You have specifically said that you do not support that which is why I have asked you repeatedly what your solution is. Every solution you listed here is pretty much already law so obviously, none of it is a solution. The only thing that is a bit different is this obsession with clip size, which is completely irrelevant to preventing violence. For most murders, only a couple bullets are fired. For mass murders like this they generally use standard clips, they generally use standard model guns and usually use pistols. I believe that is because people who commit mass murders like this have a budget and standard pistols are cheap, while "assault rifles" with all the tactical additions and an extended clip are expensive and much harder to conceal. As far as I can tell, Lanza did not have an extended clip but the news media are terrible at their job and have not said exactly what guns were used, just the brands.

So do you have any suggestions that might have stopped this particular shooting? Because nothing you listed here is relevant to this particular case. Or do you agree with me that sometimes you can't prevent shit from happening?

Like I said, I think it would have been great if Victoria Soto had a gun and instead of using her body to shield her students, she could have shot the fucker. Of course, if you allow teachers to have guns it is probably only a matter of time before some teacher is the one who snaps and kills their own students. But the only way to stop these kind of situations is either ban all guns and hope that nuts are not smart enough to find one or have someone in the situation who is capable of defending themselves and others.

 

edit: the NCIS quotes came from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/general-information/nics-index 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Lee2216
Theist
Lee2216's picture
Posts: 328
Joined: 2010-11-23
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:You

harleysportster wrote:
You are attempting to classify everyone that does not follow your book of perverse morals and archaic, draconian mentality as a materialist.

Everyone's belief classifies them. If one doesn't believe in the supernatural then by truth they're materialists.

harleysportster wrote:
You are also overlooking how many evil deeds have been done in the name of your god.

Are you responsible for the evil deeds done by your children?

harleysportster wrote:
You are also attempting to cheapen the human experience as "just chemicals in the brain"

No, the atheistic worldview cheapens the human experience.

harleysportster wrote:
Sentient beings have a central nervous system, do they not ?

Sentient beings have the ability to feel emotional sensations, do they not ?

These things can be seen and found through CAT scans and testable, observable experience.

What more do you need ? Where do you think things like heat, cold, hunger, pain, and such come from ?

It can't come from a soul, by Christian logic, since the soul is immaterial.

And where did the central nervous system come from? God, who created it so we would not stick our hand in the fire to long. He gave us hunger pains so we wouldn't starve to death. How much does love weigh? How about reason and logic. How much do they weigh? Can you see them?
 

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. Romans 1:20


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Lee2216 wrote:Everyone's

Lee2216 wrote:

Everyone's belief classifies them. If one doesn't believe in the supernatural then by truth they're materialists.

Are you responsible for the evil deeds done by your children?

No, the atheistic worldview cheapens the human experience.

And where did the central nervous system come from? God, who created it so we would not stick our hand in the fire to long. He gave us hunger pains so we wouldn't starve to death. How much does love weigh? How about reason and logic. How much do they weigh? Can you see them?
 

Assertion, Special pleading, question begging and another assertion.

Evidence = 0

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Lee2216
Theist
Lee2216's picture
Posts: 328
Joined: 2010-11-23
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:If

harleysportster wrote:
If someone can make that argument, I would like to hear them present that a sane, rational and thinking person could just go and shoot kids.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gunman-behavior-shootings-indicates-planning-control-former-fbi-180620270.html

Let's call it what it is....SIN! This kid was certainly using reason and critical thinking skills and was not insane.

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. Romans 1:20


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
Lee2216

Lee2216 wrote:

harleysportster wrote:
If someone can make that argument, I would like to hear them present that a sane, rational and thinking person could just go and shoot kids.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gunman-behavior-shootings-indicates-planning-control-former-fbi-180620270.html

Let's call it what it is....SIN! This kid was certainly using reason and critical thinking skills and was not insane.

 

Let's call it what it is - TRAGIC!

Let's not judge - lest we be judged.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Lee2216

Lee2216 wrote:

harleysportster wrote:
If someone can make that argument, I would like to hear them present that a sane, rational and thinking person could just go and shoot kids.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gunman-behavior-shootings-indicates-planning-control-former-fbi-180620270.html

Let's call it what it is....SIN! This kid was certainly using reason and critical thinking skills and was not insane.

Right, reasonable people go around shooting kids all of the time, it is part of the process of using critical thinking and logic.

The definition of insanity by law is only about the premeditation.

Albert Fish, in 1930s New York, was found sane and electrocuted at Sing Sing.

He was found sane after a jury listened to hours of courtroom testimony about him methodically abducting, molesting, killing and then EATING his victims.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:And even most

Brian37 wrote:

And even most gun owners who merely have handguns and hunting riffles do not understand the nuts like that woman who think military style weapons are a right.

 

  A right ?  Show me in the Bill of Rights what specific amendment guarantees the rights of people to drink alcohol or use tobacco products ?  Across America these two legal products kill people every day of the year.

 

 

 

Brian37 wrote:
There is absolutly no reason you need a high volume clip, for either a riffle or handgun.

 

  Who actually needs to smoke cigarettes ?   Who actually needs an automobile with a 500+ horse power engine ( or greater ) when there's a speed limit ?  People die from both causes.  Want to regulate what's already regulated ?

 

   

Brian37 wrote:
Any hint of instability in the form of mental illness, drug addiction, or domestic abuse should disqualify you.

 

  Then that would disqualify multitudes of police and military personnel.  I assume you are familiar with the fact that the suicide rates for police and military personnel exceeds that of the general population and that suicides in the military are at an all-time high ?

 

Brian37 wrote:
And maybe some sort of technology on the manufactures part to make any gun or riffle user specific like fingerprint recognition.

 

   Beyond already answered that. 

 

Brian37 wrote:
And please tell me where I said a ban on all guns? I was saying we have a problem and doing nothing is not an option.

 

   Even if you did ban all guns what will you do after the next gun attack ?   What will you ban then ?

 

 

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


ubuntuAnyone
Theist
ubuntuAnyone's picture
Posts: 862
Joined: 2009-08-06
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster

harleysportster wrote:

ubuntuAnyone wrote:

But it can't explain absurd things...

To some element it can.

Read about certain serial killers and it seems like all of the elements in place were there at a young age.

Pathological history in the family, abusive home, propensity and demonstration of violence at a young age, sadistic tendencies, etc. etc.

Whether this is nature vs. nurture has not been totally resolved and may never be fully resolved.

Perhaps it is a combination of both.

Why do some people from abusive homes grow up non-violent, with no sadistic tendencies or predispositions to cruelty and others do not ?

Perhaps the answer could lie in something as simple as brain chemistry.

This seems to be the "what" -- isolating who is likely to be a nut job and who isn't. That still doesn't explain evil though -- not even close.

“Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.”


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1951
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Conversations do return to a cyclic recurring of lg. questions:

 re:: Conversations do return to a cyclic recurring of larger Questions:

ubuntuAnyone wrote:

cj wrote:

Am I angry?  You bet.  There is no sort of reason, rhyme, or cause that justifies that kind of cruelty. 

That's enough to piss me off too. It doesn't necessarily make me pissed off at a deity, rather the bastard that raped the 5 year-old and the crack-addict mom who allowed it to happen. Then I ask, what am I doing as a person to  (a) help the victims and (b) to make the world a place where such BS doesn't happen.

In short, If I asked "God, why did you let that happen to that little girl?", I'm afraid he'd ask me the same thing...

Atheistextremist wrote:

ubuntuAnyone wrote:

cj wrote:
UbuntuAnyone,

In short, If I asked "God, why did you let that happen to that little girl?", I'm afraid he'd ask me the same thing...

 

 

Ubuntu, you are not all seeing, all knowing and all powerful. If bad shit happened in front of you, there's no question as to whether or not you would know what to do. The god concept on the other hand; knows, is empowered to act, does not act. 

  . .

 

 


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Alright. Look at it from

this perspective to see what you can reason out.

By no means do I intend a negative response. I am after an analysis and possible understanding.

Q- How would you respond if the shooter had been an Atheist. And a Theist brought into the mix the God idea. What would you say in rebuttal or a counter to that claim.

I may already know your answer basically. But let's see what you say after some thought. This is not about kicking someone's guts out (You'll notice on this site I've haven't done that) I'm taking your OP seriously.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers

Knowledge trumps faith

Lies are nothing more then falsehoods searching for the truth


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
There is no good and no

There is no good and no evil, they are only opinions. There is no god, no devil, no other super humans to protect us. It is up to us as a society, a global society, to protect the life of the common person.

Religions and the worship of their false gods has limited and diminished humanity for centuries. It is time for a change to take place and it all began with what appears to be the senseless deaths of 26 people who deserved more from their fellow humans.

Mandatory testing of all citizens is needed. Fully automatic weapons and vast stockpiles of ammunition must cease. All weapons, except for one revolver and one bolt action rifle should be allowed at any home.

People caught committing crimes with a weapon of any kind should be sentenced to death with one chance for one appeal. Any one committing a crime and killed the other individual should be sentenced to death with out the chance for appeal.

 


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:People

digitalbeachbum wrote:

People caught committing crimes with a weapon of any kind should be sentenced to death with one chance for one appeal. Any one committing a crime and killed the other individual should be sentenced to death with out the chance for appeal.

 

 

         Thank you digital for saying this.  It is a window into the true feeling of many so-called progressives. The mask is coming off, so to speak. 

I saw a tweet on another website where a Democratic politician said that the president of the NRA should be executed.  I'll see if I can find it again and post it.  

 

  Also you said "committing crimes" with a gun > execution.   If the AWB is passed does simply possessing a semi-auto rise to that level ?

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.