Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Countryfox

Also in the news

By Countryfox, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

bovril

bovril

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

:dunno: I think this discussion has come up before both concerning BLM and climate change activists being "hypocritical" in what they do.

 

If the point of this all is just to point out that they're hypocrites, then fair enough, is probably true. If the point is to point out they're hypocrites *and in so doing invalidate the cause they are activists for* (which frankly I think the OP was attempting) then it's utterly fallacious because whatever these people do or don't do changes nothing about the facts of the matter concerning global temperature increase and institutionalised police malpractice against people of colour in the US.

 

They may be hypocritical, but that doesn't stop them being correct, so it's better not to be taken in by spurious arguments from people who would much rather have the status quo continue because it suits them, the future and other people be damned.

Surely when the argument is that the capitalist system must be demolished, then the hypocrisy here invalidates the argument.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Strokes

Strokes

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

Does anyone say there isn't a problem?  It seems to me the argument is around the solution to that problem.  Its been done to death really, but taking guns off law abiding people doesn't stop a criminal having a gun.  The kind of person who would flip and kill people probably isn't the person who would hand over their guns to the feds either.

Just take guns off everybody, there isn’t any need for them in a society.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Just take guns off everybody, there isn’t any need for them in a society.

Cool plan.  How do you remove guns from people when you don't know who has one (or ten), and even when you do millions of them refuse to give them up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Innovindil

Innovindil

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Cool plan.  How do you remove guns from people when you don't know who has one (or ten), and even when you do millions of them refuse to give them up?

One gun at a time. The way all good plans come together. No one expects them all to disappear overnight. It would likely take decades, centuries maybe. But if it's important, which I think it is, then you start somewhere. Every single gun destroyed is one less people can be killed with eh. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Strokes

Strokes

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Cool plan.  How do you remove guns from people when you don't know who has one (or ten), and even when you do millions of them refuse to give them up?

It’s a lot easier to remove guns from society if they are all illegal as opposed to none of them or some of them.

Im trying to think of an example society where this works well, can you think of one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zear0

Zear0

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Just take guns off everybody, there isn’t any need for them in a society.

When in doubt, quote The Simpsons...

 

But I have to have a gun. It's in the Constitution.

Dad, the 2nd Amendment is just a remnant from revolutionary days. It has no meaning today.

You couldn't be more wrong Lisa. If I didn't have this gun, the King of England could just walk in here any time he wants and start shoving you around. Do you want that?.

 

I worked in American for 5 years in deepest darkest Ohio.  My experience with the locals leads me to genuinely believe if they ever proposed restrictions on gun ownership it would make the recent Capitol riots seem like a minor scuffle, it'd be uprising.  It's a very poor comparison given one is a device to kill and another is a drink (but the closest I can think of), but it'd be like implementing prohibition here.  Not a chance.  Gun ownership is so engrained in their culture, it's an affront to the majority to even consider restrictions let alone removal.  Completely agree it's senseless and they should be restricted, but I personally can't see it ever changing as there really isn't an appetite or desire to do so.

 

A side example worth sharing.  When I first moved to America, my work colleagues told me to get a gun.  When I asked why, they said the moment a local crim gets word you're unarmed, they'll just knock on your door, shoot you and rob your house.  I didn't, and still don't believe that's true, and is probably anecdotal, but that's the view many have which is so different to here.  As Jon says above, when your not armed and everyone else is, it's a very hard position to take to relinquish your weapons.    Unfortunately we're stuck in this cycle.  Gun violence, temporary outrage, promise of reform, nothing happens, further gun violence.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Does anyone say there isn't a problem?  It seems to me the argument is around the solution to that problem.  Its been done to death really, but taking guns off law abiding people doesn't stop a criminal having a gun.  The kind of person who would flip and kill people probably isn't the person who would hand over their guns to the feds either.

Well yes, the GOP and their NRA backers do.

 

Or at least they block any kind of solution to the problem, whether it's to do with gun control or better provision for mental health, which basically amounts to the same thing.

 

I would agree that taking guns from everyone in the US is a task tough to the point of being impractical, though.

 

1 hour ago, bovril said:

Surely when the argument is that the capitalist system must be demolished, then the hypocrisy here invalidates the argument.  

The BLM movement in the US isn't advocating as one movement with total agreement for the dismantling of the capitalist system, and they'd be making a mistake if they were; it's much harder to prove statistically that such a system is bad than to prove that there is institutionalised police malpractice against people of colour in the US.

 

I'm sorry, but also I think this is missing the point and perhaps I wasn't clear enough in the beginning. This isn't about the accuracy of accusations of hypocrisy, it's about the very mention of them being used as a tool, through ignorance or malice, to direct attention and discussion from the very real issues that various movements highlight and so invalidate them and get in the way of progress on them. Look what happened here, for instance: all it took was one article from a New York Murdoch rag posted and suddenly everyone is talking about that and not about people of colour in the US being mistreated on an institutional basis and what could be done about it.

 

I have seen this bad faith smokescreen raised far too often on far too many issues by far too many people wanting the world to continue as it is because it suits them, so now I'm assuming that practically anyone making a "hypocrisy" argument about the people in such movements without qualifying their remarks with a position on the issue itself and how it might be helped (important part, that) are doing exactly that.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
yorkie1999

yorkie1999

Posted
Posted
Just now, MPH said:


 

So they buy a house 9ft from the A446 and complain about the noise and pollution?

 

 

 

Surely those are the things you consider BEFORE  you buy your house?

Must have been quiet on the 7 occasions they went for a viewing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MPH

MPH

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Must have been quiet on the 7 occasions they went for a viewing.

I think it said they went on Saturday mornings... would they not have considered what it would be like during the week? Especially peak hrs during the work week?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, MPH said:

I think it said they went on Saturday mornings... would they not have considered what it would be like during the week? Especially peak hrs during the work week?

They wouldn't be the first people in the world to buy for the house and overlook the location or convince themselves it would be fine.  I wonder how the other houses along that fence are faring.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Well yes, the GOP and their NRA backers do.

Or at least they block any kind of solution to the problem, whether it's to do with gun control or better provision for mental health, which basically amounts to the same thing.

Exactly, their answer is more guns.  Its nonsense, but they don't say that mass shootings aren't a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Dunge said:


I reckon that might still be salvageable if they plant a row of tall trees.

They might be able to argue that the developer failed to put in a good enough acoustic fence if they can find something in the planning terms.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
Just now, Jon the Hat said:

Exactly, their answer is more guns.  Its nonsense, but they don't say that mass shootings aren't a problem.

I would have thought a point of view that encouraged more guns for a populace without thought on who gets them is tacit acceptance that they're going to be used more and therefore tacit acceptance of mass shootings, therefore considering the idea at least acceptable and not problematic, regardless of what pious spiel they say to cover for it...but that's just my own thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
foxile5

foxile5

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Cool plan.  How do you remove guns from people when you don't know who has one (or ten), and even when you do millions of them refuse to give them up?

Or the people for whom guns form a huge part of their identity. Hunters, recreational shooters, sportsmen. 

 

It's totally ingrained in their culture beyond just being 'present'. 

Edited by foxile5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...