I think we need a morons with guns thrad

[Kashmir]

Originally Posted by Crumb

Or perhaps you just need to be unwilling to bet your life on your own infallibility.

Better stop driving a car, then.

Or riding in one: you're trusting someone else to not make mistakes.

[Dingfod]

Originally Posted by Dingfod

One of these things isn't like the others...

Gun experts: It looks to me like the safety is off on the "heater" that guy is sporting, am I right? I see a red dot on the sides that indicates that to me.

[Vivisectus]

Yup. My training as well. Never suggested anything different, nor anything to suggest I'm not fully aware of basic gun safety, nor anything to suggest I have any issue with gun safety. Quite the contrary in fact.

As I've pointed out in pretty much every post on this, I don't advocate testing my argument, which itself isn't rational but rather more about indoctrination. But behaving based upon indoctrination, even when benevolent and healthy, isn't rational.

The fact everyone is having such issues with the actual point is demonstrating I'm right at every step. So far everyone is either blatantly misrepresenting my point, ignoring the most important premise, or defending the idea that it's entirely rational to fear a gun that has been carefully proven to be as harmless as a paperweight. That's defending indoctrination that runs counter to evidence.

I have this same fear, if anything probably more so than most of you. I can't even bring myself to support proving my own argument in practice much less do so myself. It's a functional and quite arguably healthy fear, but that doesn't mean it's rational. The real difference between my position and that of those who are having such trouble with this is that they can't accept they're doing something irrational, or that irrational can be healthy (an irrational fear of germs is another case).

It's a fact, and an obvious one, that a gun can be quite easily rendered as harmless as a paperweight--clearly and factually and demonstrably so. How could it still be, with definitive proof that a gun is currently in that state (and without ignoring that very simple, clearly true premise), rational to fear such a gun any more than a paperweight? You have to either prove that it's not possible to be certain a gun isn't loaded (a notion that requires magical thinking--the same kind of equivocation that believers use to argue that atheism isn't rational), or that a gun can still somehow fire a bullet when it's not loaded.

I think the issue is that we are mixing up 2 different things. One is day-to-day firearm practice. The other is a hypothetical situation where we have established beyond a shadow of a doubt that a particular gun has been rendered inert.

In the absence of such sureties in real life, it is very rational to fear even a gun you think is harmless, even when you have convinced yourself it is safe.

But, should you be given a gun that a gun-expert states he has personally unloaded before also removing the firing-pin, a procedure which was supervised by the Pope, the Dalai Lama, three representatives of the gun manufacturer and your mum, then indeed, we could see the aversion to point it at your head as irrational in that particular situation, even though it makes sense in general.

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by Kashmir

Better stop driving a car, then.

Or riding in one: you're trusting someone else to not make mistakes.

Indeed: you are just as dead when you stab yourself to death with a butter-knife. So we might as well keep our assault-rifles in the kitchen drawer.

[Dingfod]

I can tell you with some degree of certaintude that a semi-automatic rifle is not very good at spreading butter where you want it spread.

/voice of experience

[Miisa]

Originally Posted by Dingfod

I can tell you with some degree of certaintude that a semi-automatic rifle is not very good at spreading butter where you want it spread.

/voice of experience

If you were raised, as I was, to use a hunting rifle as a butter-spreader it isn't such a major adjustment to do the same with a semi-automatic quite well. It's all in the training, and clearly you didn't start using one young enough.

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by Dingfod

Gun experts: It looks to me like the safety is off on the "heater" that guy is sporting, am I right? I see a red dot on the sides that indicates that to me.

Looks like he's got something orange on him underneath the gun (in front of the holster where the trigger guard is). The red dot that's common but not universal as a safety indicator is usually on the slide in the back, under the safety lever, which is usually where you can flip it with your thumb while holding the thing (as in ready to shoot).

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

I think the issue is that we are mixing up 2 different things. One is day-to-day firearm practice. The other is a hypothetical situation where we have established beyond a shadow of a doubt that a particular gun has been rendered inert.

In the absence of such sureties in real life, it is very rational to fear even a gun you think is harmless, even when you have convinced yourself it is safe.

But, should you be given a gun that a gun-expert states he has personally unloaded before also removing the firing-pin, a procedure which was supervised by the Pope, the Dalai Lama, three representatives of the gun manufacturer and your mum, then indeed, we could see the aversion to point it at your head as irrational in that particular situation, even though it makes sense in general.

There it is!

More or less.

I'd argue it's still irrational to fear the business end of a gun you know isn't loaded, but that most of us would/do in fact feel that fear, even if it's at the level of relatively minor discomfort. But yeah, you've got it man! You actually read what I posted! Holy shit!

[Clutch Munny]

So, to be clear, that picture of the guy pointing the gun at his head: moron.

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by Clutch Munny

So, to be clear, that picture of the guy pointing the gun at his head: moron.

I'd say the odds aren't bad.

I found most of the commentary amusing. The humor's certainly not lost on me--I dubbed him "Mr. Wizard" myself--but some of the comments missed the humor mark, somewhat at least, because they were based upon a quite less than rational attitude themselves (that can easily go either way, though when it's funny it's generally because the joker has made himself the joke).

But then I also made the point that appearances may not be what they seem (at least in theory) ... etc.

[Clutch Munny]

Right. Also, it's irrational to worry about accepting a needle from an unshaven shoeless stranger on the street and jamming it into your arm, provided you have determined to a certainty that there is no real danger from doing so. Because appearances may not be what they seem. At least in theory.

Man, people who don't get what a good point that is are really stupid.

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by Clutch Munny

Right. Also, it's irrational to worry about accepting a needle from an unshaven shoeless stranger on the street and jamming it into your arm, provided you have determined to a certainty that there is no real danger from doing so. Because appearances may not be what they seem. At least in theory.

Man, people who don't get what a good point that is are really stupid.

Rather, people who actually think that speaks at all to my points in this sub-thread are really stupid (if you really think you want to go there) ... at least about this sub-thread--probably also the general issue behind it, but not for certain. It could also be they just have serious reading comprehension issues.

Guns and violence does tend to be the liberals' version of right wing fundagelical religious nonsense though, so ...

[Clutch Munny]

Originally Posted by SkepticX

in the dude's defense (presuming he made sure the thing wasn't loaded before taking on this photography project), without a bullet a gun can't do any more than any other chunk of metal.

Just because it looks scary and stupid doesn't mean it's scary stupid.

I'm not sure why you are incapable of following the very simple point I have made. Perhaps you have trouble reading? The fact is that accepting a needle on the street from an unshaven shoeless stranger and jamming it in your arm is utterly harmless, presuming you make sure it is harmless before doing so.

Some people just lose their minds with irrational fears and can't read posts! Just because that sounds like something a complete fucking moron would do doesn't mean that it would be unsafe in the circumstances where it was somehow guaranteed to be safe. This point I am making is definitely a point worth making!

[But]

Originally Posted by Dingfod

Gun experts: It looks to me like the safety is off on the "heater" that guy is sporting, am I right? I see a red dot on the sides that indicates that to me.

Bullshit, his metal jacket is peeling off, as you can see on his facial expression.

[But]

Originally Posted by But

Bullshit, his metal jacket is peeling off, as you can see on his facial expression.

By the way, I have one of these things for running practice, it's a real one that was hit by real bullets in a real war, the guy survived and sold it quickly on ebay, those ceramic plates can be replaced after all. But it's really heavy, good for weight lifting between steps!

[But]

But when I go running these days, I have an oscilloscope on one hand and a welding machine on the other, both really heavy, and UV resistant schraubglasses that I can use to look directly into the sun all the time, and people get out of the way for free! I don't need assault rifles with laser night vision shit or anything anymore.

[But]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

I own 5 guns (4 long guns and one revolver). I am not afraid of any of them.

Then give them away. To a madman. On the street. Loaded. But hold one to your other cheek while you do that. Look into both barrels. At that point, if you're still not afraid of dying, what the fuck do you think you're doing here, idiot?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Clutch Munny

I'm not sure why you are incapable of following the very simple point I have made. Perhaps you have trouble reading? The fact is that accepting a needle on the street from an unshaven shoeless stranger and jamming it in your arm is utterly harmless, presuming you make sure it is harmless before doing so.

Some people just lose their minds with irrational fears and can't read posts! Just because that sounds like something a complete fucking moron would do doesn't mean that it would be unsafe in the circumstances where it was somehow guaranteed to be safe. This point I am making is definitely a point worth making!

You seem to think you have made some kind of point, but until you address the very important difference between merely believing that the needle offered you by the unshaven shoeless stranger is harmless and being firmly convinced of the same, then something something strawman reading comprehension. A needle is nothing but inert metal, after all.

[Adam]

And also, did someone break But?

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by SkepticX

There it is!

More or less.

I'd argue it's still irrational to fear the business end of a gun you know isn't loaded, but that most of us would/do in fact feel that fear, even if it's at the level of relatively minor discomfort. But yeah, you've got it man! You actually read what I posted! Holy shit!

It just seemed too inane to be your actual point - a bit like saying that it is irrational to think it is dangerous to let a nuclear reactor be built and run by a 6 year old, as long as it is six year old who is really good at running and building nuclear reactors.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

...it is dangerous to let a nuclear reactor be built and run by a 6 year old...

You hysterical liberals and your nanny state regulatory regimes.

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

It just seemed too inane to be your actual point - a bit like saying that it is irrational to think it is dangerous to let a nuclear reactor be built and run by a 6 year old, as long as it is six year old who is really good at running and building nuclear reactors.

I know man ... you'd think.

And that's really turned out to be the main point I suppose. My original point is pretty damn non-controversial, yet there we went! and here we continue to go!

Par for the course though. It's as easy to have a genuine adult discussion about guns (actually violence, guns and) as it is about the finer points of religious doctrine, or about atheism vs. agnosticism ... or about HITLER!

Sorry ... someone had to do it.

[Ari]

Originally Posted by SkepticX

Also, where did you see anything about a gun being a paperweight or a complete equivalent?

Well when you compared it to a paperweight I thought you meant paperweight. Guess you really meant paperweight. My bad.

Originally Posted by SkepticX

The issue is the irrational fear of a harmless object

Who here said they had an irrational fear?
Hint, I think it's the same person who started talking about paperweights.

Originally Posted by SkepticX

Anyway ... frankly I think it's pretty clear to an objective observer that my point has been made, confirmed, and even indirectly demonstrated several times now.

Sure, we can pretend that. We are already pretending you have magical pre-photo vision. Can I have super powers too?

[erimir]

Originally Posted by Watser?

[SkepticX]

Originally Posted by Ari

Sure, we can pretend that. We are already pretending you have magical pre-photo vision.

Got a mouse in your pocket, I gather?