Does every instance where someone is shot in the United States warrant its own thread?

[davepc]

This forum is supposed to be about the discussion of firearms policy and 2nd amendment issues. Lately its been nothing more then a police blotter.

That goes for stories about a defensive use of a firearm and for stories about murdered innocents alike.

Has the discussion on firearms policy here on DU stagnated to such a level that anything more sophisticated then 'here's a story about how someone was murdered, ban guns now!' or 'here's a story how someone fought off a bad guy with a gun, guns are good' gets no traction?

The signal to noise ratio in the gunegon is really out of whack right now.

[Skittles]

1. I wish there was a way to Hide this entire forum

[eqfan592]

4. lol, cute.

Ignore the issues instead of face them. Very cute. :P

[Skittles]

5. LOL - "face the issues" - in THIS forum???

:rofl:

[eqfan592]

6. Ahh, so not only do you intentionally keep blinders on...

...you're condescending as well. Maybe your idea of "facing the issues" is only talking to people who share your viewpoint on everything and ignoring anything to the contrary? Hmm, what other groups does this remind us all of?

[Skittles]

7. oh get off your high horse

I'm done, I feel slimy if I stay here long

[eqfan592]

8. High horse?

I'm not the one who wishes an entire group of people on the DU would just go away because I can't face what they have to say.

Nobody's holding a gun to your head to read the posts in this forum. But we're not just "going away" anytime soon.

[iverglas]

17. "Ahh, so not only do you intentionally keep blinders on..."

Maybe your idea of "facing the issues" is only talking to people who share your viewpoint on everything and ignoring anything to the contrary? Hmm, what other groups does this remind us all of?

http://www.fstdt.com/winace/pics/index.htm



Too strong ... I'm dying here ...

[iverglas]

16. hahahahaha

Ignore the issues instead of face them. Very cute.

Reading this are you, eqfan592?

Of course, ignoring people you disagree with isn't "ignoring the issues". Nooooo.

It's just refusing to engage in good faith discussion of them.

:rofl:

[Raskolnik]

19. And yet, you click on the little "Guns" link, and you click on the threads contained therein.

Why?

[Oregone]

2. Yes

[marybourg]

3. Only when they're shot by a gun. nt.

[eqfan592]

9. I do see your point, davepc.

I understand why this is happening, but I can't see if this is the most "useful" discourse that we could all be having. I haven't seen to many "fresh" ideas come into play as of late. I did hear that those of us who support gun ownership are akin to those who supported slavery, which was one I had never heard before, but that's about it.

The problem is that this issue IS very polarizing. Both sides feel they have the facts on their side. I have to wonder how many "fence sitters" we have on the DU, but I'd be interested in finding out.

[monmouth]

10. The 2nd Amendment needs a complete overhaul. The original

thought and wording for the most part are not applicable in today's world. And yes, I'll say it. Guns are a menace...

[gorfle]

11. Why not?

The 2nd Amendment needs a complete overhaul. The original thought and wording for the most part are not applicable in today's world. And yes, I'll say it. Guns are a menace...

In what way is it no longer applicable? Do you believe that we have reached the pinnacle of civilization and representative government such that we will never again have to take up arms against oppression? Do you believe that it is not possible for armed citizens to successfully take up arms against oppression?

I think we have seen several examples in modern history of technologically inferior forces triumphing over technologically superior ones. Vietnam vs. USA. Afghanistan vs. USSR. Mogadishu vs. USA. Iraq vs. USA. And ultimately we will probably see the Afghans prevail against the USA.

Yes, in all cases external powers aided and abetted the resistance, for example, the United States providing Stinger missiles to the Mujahadeen.

But small arms are the backbone of any infantry force. Ultimately, to hold ground you need boots on the ground, and the man in those boots is going to be holding a rifle.

[Raskolnik]

20. I give you credit for being honest enough to admit that amending the constitution is necessary,

as opposed to just ignoring the parts you don't like.

[gorfle]

12. It's grist for the mill.

Without anecdotes to discuss, there would be little discussion here, as the ideologies are pretty well defined.

[Tim01]

13. The anti 2nd amendment people insist on posting criminal shootings.

And then using that as justification for banning guns.

We don't have a lot of choice but to post the self defense shootings to show that guns can be used either way.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

22. Amen.

[Hangingon]

14. No.

[rrneck]

15. We tend to think in terms of our own experience.

Anecdotes (stories about other people) get us out of our respective bubbles. Thankfully, very few of us have ever had to defend ourselves with firearms or have lost someone to violence with firearms.

People talking to people about people are the oldest way to understand their behavior and that is how morality was originally developed. I imagine it's a lot more illuminating than pureed statistics or arcane discussions of constitutional law.

[Raskolnik]

18. I agree wholeheartedly. There could be a meta-thread pinned to the top for people to post those

instances, and it would save everyone a lot of trouble.

[AtheistCrusader]

21. No, it doesn't, its anecdotal bullshit, and it's knocked Firearm Policy discussion completely off

the radar.

[Redneck Socialist]

23. No, it's largely worthless crap

Argument by anecdote. It contributes nothing to the discussion on policy.

[Xela]

24. No. ntxt

ntxt