Ex-Navy Seal Chris Kyle murdered at gun range

digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4895
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Ex-Navy Seal Chris Kyle murdered at gun range

www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57567323/ex-navy-seal-chris-kyle-murdered-in-texas/

Guess this should be interesting to see "why" the killer shot the two men.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13232
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving

Beyond Saving wrote:
Evidence? I showed you my stats, show me yours. Our crime rate is higher involving guns, drugs (you have much more relaxed drug laws than we do) and homicides...

In 2010, there were 554 homicides in Canada
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2011001/article/11561-eng.htm

Murder Victims, USA, 2010: 12,996
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls

Per capita: 554/32M < 12,996/320M.

Beyond Saving wrote:
1/3? Lol, you really like making shit up don't you?

No, but you do:

65 Million Americans With Criminal Records Face Unprecedented Barriers to Employment

NEW YORK, March 23, 2011 - More than one in four U.S. adults -- roughly 65 million people --have an arrest or conviction that shows up in a routine criminal background check

http://yubanet.com/usa/65-Million-Americans-With-Criminal-Records-Face-Unprecedented-Barriers-to-Employment.php

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5518
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Beyond Saving

Vastet wrote:
Beyond Saving wrote:
Except the stats say otherwise and by more than a little. The chances of you shooting yourself or someone else accidentally are less than 5/100,000 much lower than the chances of a criminal pointing a gun at you. You simply stating it doesn't make it reality and we have significant numbers of stats on these things because we track both hospital visits and crimes- unless you care to argue that there are a lot of people out there shooting themselves and not going to the hospital?
I'd like your sources, because I doubt very much they are credible.

Look at the end of my previous post I provided direct links. All the stats are available from the FBI for crime and from the CDC for hospital visits. 

 

Vastet wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:
Yes more people are victims of crime in the US- we have 10 times your population. How else would you calculate the odds of you personally being a victim of a crime other than comparing per capita rates?
Frequency and locale are far better indicators of likelyhood of running into crime. Unless you really think I'm more likely to get shot in a 5k pop town than a 5k pop segment of Detroit. Embarassing = you.

Exactly, and if your locale happens to be Canada vs. USA you are more likely to be the victim of a violent crime. Of course, in both countries you have a wide disparity in crime rates depending on locations, which is why I suggested that the decision of whether or not a person feels a need to purchase a firearm for personal protection should be an individual decision based on various risk factors, not a decision made by the government. 

 

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


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13232
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Look at

Beyond Saving wrote:
Look at the end of my previous post I provided direct links. All the stats are available from the FBI for crime and from the CDC for hospital visits.

That is insufficient information with which to say you are more likely to have a criminal point a gun at you than you are to be shot or shoot someone by accident.

Beyond Saving wrote:
Exactly, and if your locale happens to be Canada vs. USA you are more likely to be the victim of a violent crime.

Even if true, and I'm feeling too lazy to bother looking it up, you are more than twice as likely to get killed than I. I'd prefer a mugging to death, quite frankly.

Beyond Saving wrote:
Of course, in both countries you have a wide disparity in crime rates depending on locations, which is why I suggested that the decision of whether or not a person feels a need to purchase a firearm for personal protection should be an individual decision based on various risk factors, not a decision made by the government. 

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13232
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Your just having a gun

Your just having a gun increases the risk factors for everyone else, which makes it the governments business. Your rights end when they interfere with mine.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


blacklight915
atheist
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Yes you are,

Vastet wrote:

Yes you are, and yes they are fully responsible. You are a member of the ruling council of the strongest nation on Earth. Take some responsibility. 
I know, Americans never do, and that's part of why the world hates you.

I am an individual human being, not a piece of land or a group of people. I am not at all responsible for the actions of ruling officials I voted against. I am not a member of the 'ruling council' of anything. If the world hates me, it's because I have depression and Asperger's Syndrome, not because I live on a piece of land dubbed part of "The United States of America".

Does anyone else in this thread think I'm a country? That I'm responsible for the actions of every member of the United States government?

 


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5518
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Your just

Vastet wrote:
Your just having a gun increases the risk factors for everyone else, which makes it the governments business. Your rights end when they interfere with mine.

You just existing increases risk factors for everyone around you, life is risky and justifying government action solely on the basis of risk leads to an excuse for government to control absolutely anything it wants. Exactly which "right" of yours am I interfering with by owning guns? Where does that right come from?

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


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: Where

Beyond Saving wrote:

 Where does that right come from?

This reminds me of the famous George Carlin quote : "Personally, when it comes to right, I think one of two things is true. I think either we have unlimited rights or we have no rights at all. Personally, I lean toward unlimited rights. I feel, for instance, I have the right to do anything I please. But if I do something you don’t like, I think you have the right to kill me. So where are you going to find a fairer fucking deal than that? So the next time some asshole says to you, I have a right to my opinion, you say, oh yeah? Well I have a right to my opinion, and my opinion is you have no right to your opinion. Then shoot the fuck and walk away. "  Laughing out loud

  

 

“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


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13232
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915 wrote:I am not

blacklight915 wrote:
I am not at all responsible for the actions of ruling officials I voted against.

Yes, you are. How many times have you spoken to your representative? How many times have you canvassed the streets for petitions and the like? I bet you've never done anything more than vote. You have full access to your government. Ignoring that access and crying about your leaders and denying your responsibility is literally childish. The people getting killed in Iraq can't speak to your government. They certainly can't run for office like you can.

Every American is responsible for the actions or inactions of the American government. That's the way democracy works.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13232
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Vastet

Beyond Saving wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Your just having a gun increases the risk factors for everyone else, which makes it the governments business. Your rights end when they interfere with mine.

You just existing increases risk factors for everyone around you,

Prove it.

Beyond Saving wrote:
life is risky and justifying government action solely on the basis of risk leads to an excuse for government to control absolutely anything it wants.

Uh uh. You're carrying a weapon capable of killing or injuring someone, even without your consent or prior knowledge. It is only a weapon, it has no other function. Government should regulate and restrict weapons for the general safety of the population, which is their mandate.

Beyond Saving wrote:
Exactly which "right" of yours am I interfering with by owning guns? Where does that right come from?

My political and civil rights are provided by the constitution of Canada, which I support.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


blacklight915
atheist
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:How many times

Vastet wrote:

How many times have you spoken to your representative?

In 10th grade, I mailed to my representative an essay I wrote about immigration reform. I've also signed about a dozen online petitions that were sent to governors and representatives asking them to veto/vote against certain pieces of legislation. When my dad typed up a letter proposing (what he thought to be) effective and reasonable gun control laws, I edited it for him before he sent it to the representative of the district I live in.

 

Vastet wrote:

How many times have you canvassed the streets for petitions and the like?

I spent several dozen hours working for the Obama campaign in 2008. I was a somewhat active member of the libertarian group Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) for the past two years. Several times, I signed the petition put out by the group 'Students for Concealed Carry on Campus'.

 

Vastet wrote:

You have full access to your government.

Maybe I will type up some letters detailing my thoughts and email them to various people in the United States government. While the chances of me being listened to are probably miniscule, it just might be worth it.

 

Vastet wrote:

Ignoring that access and crying about your leaders and denying your responsibility is literally childish.

I have often been told I act like a child.

 

Vastet wrote:

They certainly can't run for office like you can.

I don't apply for jobs I lack the skills to effectively perform.

 

Vastet wrote:

Every American is responsible for the actions or inactions of the American government. That's the way democracy works.

Only if all Americans are capable of significantly influencing their government...

 

Maybe I'm just mentally handicapped, but...some of what you're saying just doesn't make any sense to me, Vastet. Other people in the thread, may I have your comments/opinions on this? I'd really, really appreciate it...

 


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13232
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915 wrote:In 10th

blacklight915 wrote:
In 10th grade, I mailed to my representative an essay I wrote about immigration reform

That sounds like a school assignment.

"I've also signed about a dozen online petitions that were sent to governors and representatives asking them to veto/vote against certain pieces of legislation. When my dad typed up a letter proposing (what he thought to be) effective and reasonable gun control laws, ~snip"

Ok, that's a start, but it's just the motions. You've made no major effort to change politics.
I'm going to pause here to point out you are hardly alone. Most people in democracies don't accept their responsibility to participate. So don't think I'm picking on you personally. You've done more than many do. More than I expected.

blacklight915 wrote:
I don't apply for jobs I lack the skills to effectively perform.

Considering the unqualified masses in American politics, that's just unlikely. You think you'd fuck up more than George Bush?

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13232
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915 wrote:Only if

blacklight915 wrote:
Only if all Americans are capable of significantly influencing their government...

Maybe I'm just mentally handicapped, but...some of what you're~snip

The people your government ignores are those who are mentally disabled and/or prisoners. You may have an illness, but I don't think you are disabled to the point you'd be ignored.

You've participated more than many do. But the whole point of a democracy is that the people have the power. The people elect the officials. The people are responsible for those officials. The people become those officials.

Only in a dictatorship can you point at the leaders and say its completely their fault. In a democracy, the people share the blame, and hopefully seek to rectify the situation via impeachment or through new elections or if all else fails, civil war.

Democracy is a government responsible to & for the people, who are responsible to & for the government.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


blacklight915
atheist
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:That sounds

Vastet wrote:

That sounds like a school assignment.

You're exactly right. However, we were only supposed to mail our essay if it was well-written, showed a thorough understanding of the subject, and offered clear, achievable goals. Mine did not meet these requirements, but I mailed it anyway.

 

Vastet wrote:

You've made no major effort to change politics.

Even if I once again felt inspired to change politics, I would almost certainly attempt to do so by becoming a member of an existing group--not by starting my own.

 

Vastet wrote:

Considering the unqualified masses in American politics, that's just unlikely. You think you'd fuck up more than George Bush?

In terms of just policy decisions, no. However, I do not work well under pressure, and I do not handle public dislike or public attention at all well, either.

 


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5518
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Beyond Saving

Vastet wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:
Exactly which "right" of yours am I interfering with by owning guns? Where does that right come from?

My political and civil rights are provided by the constitution of Canada, which I support.

That is nice, you can keep that right over there. Here in the US our Constitution promises the right to keep and bear arms. I really don't give a fuck what laws you have in Canada.

 

Vastet wrote:
blacklight915 wrote:
I am not at all responsible for the actions of ruling officials I voted against.
Yes, you are. How many times have you spoken to your representative? How many times have you canvassed the streets for petitions and the like? I bet you've never done anything more than vote. You have full access to your government. Ignoring that access and crying about your leaders and denying your responsibility is literally childish. The people getting killed in Iraq can't speak to your government. They certainly can't run for office like you can. Every American is responsible for the actions or inactions of the American government. That's the way democracy works.

What a quaint and idealistic view of democracy, also leads one to believe that you have never been active in politics because that is not at all how democracy works. I spent a rather significant portion of my life deeply entrenched playing political hardball. I worked as a fundraiser where I raised millions of dollars in campaign contributions, I have worked as treasurer for several candidates and even worked as a campaign manager. Yes, I have done the canvassing, the petitions, collecting signatures, the dinners, the speeches etc.

Even to this day, while I will not vote for any incumbent I still remain in contact with them and still make appearances because in the real world, a politician that hates you can make it very difficult to get permits (personal experience talking) so I go around and kiss the asses of those scumbags and stroke their egos. 

I left politics precisely because the people I helped get elected turned out to be the same type of scumbags I worked to throw out and I felt that I was responsible since without my help they may not have won election. It is absurd to claim that someone is responsible for the actions of someone else that they opposed. One can only be responsible for their own actions and responsibility can only be made accountable on the individual level- it is not shared. Many people can be at fault, for example, everyone who voted for Obama is at fault for voting for Obama if he does anything they do not like, but they are not "sharing" blame they are to blame for their vote and their vote alone.

And simply run for office yourself? Lmao. You are the one who argues with me about simply creating your own job. As someone who is very familiar with doing both, it is MUCH easier to create a job than it is to successfully run for political office. Very rarely can some random person just run for an office and have any chance of winning. If you have significant amounts of money it improves your odds, but more than one millionaire has pissed away a bunch of money trying to buy a political office.

The reality is that to have a decent chance you have to be well connected in the party apparatus and have the support of the people who take the volunteer positions in campaigns like treasurer, managers, fundraisers etc. With few exceptions those people will pick out their candidates a couple years before the election and unless there is some infighting going on between them, whoever they pick will become the nominee. The establishment does lose on occasion, but it is very rare- they hold an immense amount of power and most importantly have the ability to provide a lot of help in the general election or to provide no help.

So suppose you buck the odds and manage to get elected into office, are you going to make some huge change? Not a chance. If the party didn't support you going in, they are not going to support you after you win. You will find yourself shuffled to insignificant committees, legislation you try to introduce won't be brought to the floor- at least not in any kind of recognizable form and you will be thrown under the bus at the first opportunity. The parties have a lot of control over the legislative process and unless you are supporting the leadership of whatever party you belong to, your power as a legislator is non-existent outside of maybe voting against your party from time to time. If you vote against your party without their permission (yes, congressmen actually make deals with leadership on when they can or can't go against the party, the position of Whip was made for this very purpose to make sure that enough votes exist for the majority to win the vote and will allow certain members who might have a strong political reason why they should vote against the party, if there are enough votes permission will be granted in exchange for some favor.) Someone who votes against the party without permission will find themselves with a strong opponent in the primary who is backed by a lot of resources from the national party. 

Sure, you get a few people who manage to beat the trend and consistently get reelected despite being hated inside the party, like Ron Paul for example. They generally have extremely solid political connections in their local district and enough personal money to finance their campaigns themselves. However, these exceptions are generally easily dealt with by painting them as "crazy" and ignoring them. Really, how effective has Ron Paul been at getting anything done...? Not at all. 

Democracy provides the illusion that people have this great control, but since few people care enough to be intelligently informed and voting is based more on splashy advertising than serious discussion of any issues being supported by the inside club is far more important than having good ideas. Our politicians cycle in and out with different party names and changes to their rhetoric but at the end of the day, the system inherently encourages them to seize more power for themselves, rewards corruption and punishes honesty. 

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


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13232
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:That is

Beyond Saving wrote:
That is nice, you can keep that right over there.

I don't give a fuck about your constitution, which has been violated so many times in recent years that you can't even claim to have one.

Beyond Saving wrote:
What a quaint and idealistic view of democracy, also leads one to believe that you have never been active in politics because that is not at all how democracy works.

That's exactly how it works. And now we'll laugh at your deluded and blatantly wrong ideas, since there's nothing more to say.

Whether you like it or not, you're as responsible for Bush as every other American.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


blacklight915
atheist
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:That's exactly

Vastet wrote:

That's exactly how it works. And now we'll laugh at your deluded and blatantly wrong ideas, since there's nothing more to say.

Whether you like it or not, you're as responsible for Bush as every other American.

Since those "deluded and blatantly wrong" ideas are pretty much perfectly accurate, I think you'll be the only one laughing...

Have you considered being less harsh, Vastet?

 


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13232
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I'm as harsh as people make

I'm as harsh as people make me. Start your post off insulting me and my country and I'll be happy to return the favour.

"We" was the royal "we". It was always my intent to laugh alone. I know already that Americans don't know shit about democracy.

Also, popular opinion is not a valid argument. Just because 400M Americans want to jump off a bridge, I'm not about to join them.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


blacklight915
atheist
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:I know already

Vastet wrote:

I know already that Americans don't know shit about democracy.

The United States is hardly a perfect example of democracy...  It's technically a 'democratic republic', anyway...

 


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5518
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Beyond Saving

Vastet wrote:
Beyond Saving wrote:
That is nice, you can keep that right over there.
I don't give a fuck about your constitution, which has been violated so many times in recent years that you can't even claim to have one.
Beyond Saving wrote:
What a quaint and idealistic view of democracy, also leads one to believe that you have never been active in politics because that is not at all how democracy works.
That's exactly how it works. And now we'll laugh at your deluded and blatantly wrong ideas, since there's nothing more to say. Whether you like it or not, you're as responsible for Bush as every other American.

lol, can I have a hit of what you are smoking? Haven't had anything that good for quite some time. 

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


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13232
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I have an oz if you want to

I have an oz if you want to take a Canadian vacation. But sadly it probably isn't strong enough to open your eyes. Eye-wink

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 16416
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Beyond Saving wrote:Vastet

Beyond Saving wrote:

Vastet wrote:
How shocking. An armed and trained individual, who's gun didn't protect him. Listen to rightwingers talk and you'd think he could have defended himself.

 

Nice strawman. No one has argued that being armed and even being well trained makes you immortal, it just gives you better odds. 

What strawman? He had a gun and it DID NOT protect him. Otherwise he would not be dead.

AND FYI the original NRA was something I could have supported, not because I own a gun, but because it was an educational organization when it started, and not the corporate gun maker lobbyist it has become.

When an organization has an "enemy's list", yes, the NRA has an "enemy's list", with just about every Hollywood star on it, AMA on it, NURSE organizations on it, just about every Jewish group on it, the YWCA, and BEN AND JERRY'S ICE CREAM on it, I'd say this is not a safety organization anymore, but a bigoted hate group in the pocket of greedy gun manufactures.

You live in a bubble on just about every issue, when there is a real world out there that does not follow your script and you get lead by the nose by corrupt organizations by buying  into their fear mongering just like theocrats and fascists.

"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5518
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Beyond Saving

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Vastet wrote:
How shocking. An armed and trained individual, who's gun didn't protect him. Listen to rightwingers talk and you'd think he could have defended himself.

 

Nice strawman. No one has argued that being armed and even being well trained makes you immortal, it just gives you better odds. 

What strawman? He had a gun and it DID NOT protect him. Otherwise he would not be dead.

Like I said, no one ever claimed a gun would help in every situation. Just because a gun failed to help here (we still don't know he was armed but for the sake of argument we can pretend he was) does not mean that a gun is never useful. In a specific situation, a gun is nothing but some pretty metal, in other specific situations it will save your life. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

AND FYI the original NRA was something I could have supported, not because I own a gun, but because it was an educational organization when it started, and not the corporate gun maker lobbyist it has become.

You don't even know what you support. Are you ready to tell us exactly what kind of gun laws you support? So far, the only new law I have seen you take a stand on is supporting banning large magazines- still completely at a loss on how that is supposed to save a single life. So do you support banning the gun that killed Chris Kyle? Or not?

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


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4147
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:What strawman?

Brian37 wrote:

What strawman? He had a gun and it DID NOT protect him. Otherwise he would not be dead.

  You can find stories where people in car wrecks wore seat belts and still died.   Does that mean that seat belts are useless ?  Same thing for cars with air bags.  Guess what ? we have the FAA and airplanes still sometimes plummet to the ground and kill every one on board.  Stop making statistically unsupportable claims.  Nothing is effective100 percent of the time.