Should we provide the homeless with shotguns?

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I don't think it was really necessary for the Newsweek article to mention that arming homeless people with shotguns was the idea of a libertarian. Ideas that dumb pretty much must be libertarian.

You haven't been listening to politicians from mainstream parties recently, have you?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Nice try. Cars are no more or less necessary than guns are.

What utter nonsense.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Cars are no more or less necessary than guns are.

I have had and needed or benefited from owning a car since I first bought one.

I have never had or needed a gun.

Another big difference between the two is that we do everything in our power to minimize car deaths. Cars are designed to withstand impacts as much as possible, made with seat belts and air bag, traffic lights and street reflectors are used, guard rails are placed where needed, people have to take and pass tests of their vision, their knowledge of driving laws, and initially, their competence behind the wheel, speed limit signs are everywhere, police do random checks for drunk drivers, and the like to bring the number of casualties to a minimum.

With guns, almost nothing is done to minimize the carnage.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Nice try. Cars are no more or less necessary than guns are.

And one line rebuttals restating the original assertion are strong and worthy counterarguments and not admission of retaining an unsailable position...

...here in that river in Egypt.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I have had and needed or benefited from owning a car since I first bought one.

I have never had or needed a gun.

Another big difference between the two is that we do everything in our power to minimize car deaths. Cars are designed to withstand impacts as much as possible, made with seat belts and air bag, traffic lights and street reflectors are used, guard rails are placed where needed, people have to take and pass tests of their vision, their knowledge of driving laws, and initially, their competence behind the wheel, speed limit signs are everywhere, police do random checks for drunk drivers, and the like to bring the number of casualties to a minimum.

With guns, almost nothing is done to minimize the carnage.

Car still leading the death count even with all that.

People continue crying about the evils of guns but not cars, even when facts concerning mortality rates stare you in the face.

I wonder why.

 

[Twilight Hue]

And one line rebuttals restating the original assertion are strong and worthy counterarguments and not admission of retaining an unsailable position...

...here in that river in Egypt.

Hey just stating the truth. In New York cars are considered luxuries.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Hey just stating the truth. In New York cars are considered luxuries.

No they aren't. The lowest car ratio is in NYC and still around half the people own them. But that number goes up significantly once you get outside urban centers, and around 85% of the entire country uses a car to get to work. Most cities import their food staples. Cars are in no way dispensable by the majority of the population the way guns are. Our modern infastructure relies too heavily on it and their removal would cause massive damage.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No they aren't. The lowest car ratio is in NYC and still around half the people own them. But that number goes up significantly once you get outside urban centers, and around 85% of the entire country uses a car to get to work. Most cities import their food staples. Cars are in no way dispensable by the majority of the population the way guns are. Our modern infastructure relies too heavily on it and their removal would cause massive damage.

Cars are indeed considered luxuries also in the government eyes as well.. you won't find welfare making anyone's car payments and insurance. I freaking live here in NYS.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Cars are indeed considered luxuries also in the government eyes as well.. you won't find welfare making anyone's car payments and insurance. I freaking live here in NYS.

I can tell. I can also tell you have a horrible problem with tunnel vision and projecting your experience on to other people. In places without tight urban centers, which is the vast majority of the country, cars are the only way the majority of people keep from being homeless. And aid (both charitable foundations and government grants) programs to get homeless cars, so they can better reach the job market, grocers and have shelter are readily available.

I love how you have to push out to further and further extremes to attempt to make your point. All it does is make the point look more and more desperate.
A small percentage of the US population doesn't need cars=justified guns, which no civilian needs.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I can tell. I can also tell you have a horrible problem with tunnel vision and projecting your experience on to other people. In places without tight urban centers, which is the vast majority of the country, cars are the only way the majority of people keep from being homeless. And aid (both charitable foundations and government grants) programs to get homeless cars, so they can better reach the job market, grocers and have shelter are readily available.

I love how you have to push out to further and further extremes to attempt to make your point. All it does is make the point look more and more desperate.
A small percentage of the US population doesn't need cars=justified guns, which no civilian needs.

I'm not desperate whatsoever because the facts are on my side of the debate.

I think you're dead wrong on a variety of points but it's clear that's what debate is for.

A good example would be what's going on in New York City itself. Cars are not necessities and are more of a nuisance. I'm talking personal ownership over things like municipal transports, utility work vehicles, emergency transport and such.

It's time to ban personal cars in New York City

Plain flat out, cars are simply not necessities that people must have because they simply are not. There are plenty of places in the world as well where the case in fact stands on this and people survive which is the whole point here. In fact you'll be healthier for it.

Anyways I'll let you have the last word, I know you want to. *Grin*.

I only brought up cars in the first place because of the comparisons with guns as it pertains to death tallies respectively.

I think the anti-gun crowd has warped priorities when it comes to deaths.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I'm not desperate whatsoever because the facts are on my side of the debate.

I think you're dead wrong on a variety of points but it's clear that's what debate is for.

A good example would be what's going on in New York City itself. Cars are not necessities and are more of a nuisance. I'm talking personal ownership over things like municipal transports, utility work vehicles, emergency transport and such.

It's time to ban personal cars in New York City

Plain flat out, cars are simply not necessities that people must have because they simply are not. There are plenty of places in the world as well where the case in fact stands on this and people survive which is the whole point here. In fact you'll be healthier for it.

Anyways I'll let you have the last word, I know you want to. *Grin*.

I only brought up cars in the first place because of the comparisons with guns as it pertains to death tallies respectively.

I think the anti-gun crowd has warped priorities when it comes to deaths.

I have essentially already replied to this. But sure, I'll summarize it for you.
1. The world does not revolve around your experience, New York City is an outlier case not the majority. As I already said, 85% of all Americans need their cars to get to work places and to get goods and services.
2. New York does not equal New York City. The majority of people outside of the city limits still commute long distances to the city because it's where the job hub is. In most states people drive at least 45 minutes to an hour to get to their job, with some places, like California which supports the majority of US infrastructure, it's more like 2 hours.
3. Nobody is prioritizing by death counts. They are prioritizing by unnecessary loss of life which is easily preventable. Trying to say that we can't address one loss of life issue without addressing something with a higher death tally is the starving children in Africa fallacy.

 

[fantome profane]

I'm not desperate whatsoever because the facts are on my side of the debate.

I think you're dead wrong on a variety of points but it's clear that's what debate is for.

A good example would be what's going on in New York City itself. Cars are not necessities and are more of a nuisance. I'm talking personal ownership over things like municipal transports, utility work vehicles, emergency transport and such.

It's time to ban personal cars in New York City

Plain flat out, cars are simply not necessities that people must have because they simply are not. There are plenty of places in the world as well where the case in fact stands on this and people survive which is the whole point here. In fact you'll be healthier for it.

Anyways I'll let you have the last word, I know you want to. *Grin*.

I only brought up cars in the first place because of the comparisons with guns as it pertains to death tallies respectively.

I think the anti-gun crowd has warped priorities when it comes to deaths.

Just to clarify, when you are talking about America without cars you do not mean also without trucks. Is that correct?

Without trucks bringing in food and supplies 90% of the population of New York would not survive the first winter.

 

[savagewind]

I knew it! This planet is crazy.

Some countries have taken the guns away from their police people and the U.S.A. is thinking about distributing them to anyone? Hahaha What's wrong with the media to give that idea a second look?

And.

As one group is paying people to hand in their guns, the other group is distributing them for free. I suppose some people would pretend they are homeless to get a free gun and/or bullets. I do wish the media would get on the ball more sooner than later.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Just to clarify, when you are talking about America without cars you do not mean also without trucks. Is that correct?

Without trucks bringing in food and supplies 90% of the population of New York would not survive the first winter.

I was careful to mention utility use of vehicles. commercial, emergency etc. I was focusing primarily on private ownership as opposed to infrastructure as it applies summarily with private ownership of firearms.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I knew it! This planet is crazy.

Some countries have taken the guns away from their police people and the U.S.A. is thinking about distributing them to anyone? Hahaha What's wrong with the media to give that idea a second look?

And.

As one group is paying people to hand in their guns, the other group is distributing them for free. I suppose some people would pretend they are homeless to get a free gun and/or bullets. I do wish the media would get on the ball more sooner than later.

Well more back on topic of the OP. I think the proposal was made more for attention purposes then anything else. At least I hope anyways. Not all homeless people are bat**** crazy though. *Grin*

I think the reason why people are so passionate, is that guns are included in the Bill of Rights for which we know our freedom has been won through the use and employment of firearms. To take that right away would be a vulnerability for which tyranny can take advantage of.

A fair number of Americans are just not comfortable with that possibility.

I think there could be some compromise made as attitudes and circumstances change as well as the efficiency of weaponry, but it shouldn't come through any infringement of human rights that have been outlined by the founding fathers.

 

[savagewind]

Where is a homeless person going to store his gun away from someone else?

We'll give you the gun, but you have to promise never to sleep again. Do you still want it?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Where is a homeless person going to store his gun away from someone else?

We'll give you the gun, but you have to promise never to sleep again. Do you still want it?

All those crazy senators.....

I have a better proposal. Give the homeless political offices.

 

[Revoltingest]

I knew it! This planet is crazy.

Some countries have taken the guns away from their police people and the U.S.A. is thinking about distributing them to anyone? Hahaha What's wrong with the media to give that idea a second look?

And.

As one group is paying people to hand in their guns, the other group is distributing them for free. I suppose some people would pretend they are homeless to get a free gun and/or bullets. I do wish the media would get on the ball more sooner than later.

Just so you know.....
The guy proposed it said he did so for shock value.
(He couldn't raise nearly as much money as his opponent.)
People sure do run with crap found on the internet.

The OP was red meat for liberals.
Here's something to set gun owners a'salivate'n....

I choose to not go all a'twitter over such fringe noise.

 

[savagewind]

Yes. You @Revoltingest and I just did that mind share. Not, mindshare.
It means I was thinking the same thing. He was not being serious. Of course. Haha
But, he did help me (though he doesn't know it) to run a good race with you today.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes. You @Revoltingest and I just did that mind share. Not, mindshare.
It means I was thinking the same thing. He was not being serious. Of course. Haha
But, he did help me (though he doesn't know it) to run a good race with you today.

You'd be winning overwhelmingly if I didn't have some bug which has
me planted in me green leather chair posting absurities on the internet.