What's new

Intelligent Conversation

RJC,

So true.....the down side is most of the criminals don't play by the rules.....they do what they want...when they want....
I personally think most honest and law abiding people live by a personal moral code or compass....if we have some adequate upbringing it's sort of inbred......

The bad guys for the most part don't have that set of rules....and to a large part don't have anything to lose.

Regards + HH

Bill




What it all comes to is,good people and good citizens do not need laws,criminals do.
 
What it all comes to is,good people and good citizens do not need laws,criminals do.
Thank you my Friend for such a straight forward assessment of the situation as it has always been.GodBless MerryChristmas Chris
 
I live by my morals and by constitutional law.They kind of go hand in hand.

Merry Christmas Bill
 
Thank you my Friend for such a straight forward assessment of the situation as it has always been.GodBless MerryChristmas Chris

Merry Christmas to you too Chris:occasion14:
 
RJC,

Even with a few dust ups good to see we can still find some common ground.....I wish I had the wisdom to stop the bad guys without turning the world into a police state.....unfortunately I think there's a lot of work to get there before the job is over......one step at a time and maybe well make some progress if cooler heads prevail.

All the best to you and yours for a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Regards + HH

Bill


I live by my morals and by constitutional law.They kind of go hand in hand.

Merry Christmas Bill
 
RJC,

Even with a few dust ups good to see we can still find some common ground.....I wish I had the wisdom to stop the bad guys without turning the world into a police state.....unfortunately I think there's a lot of work to get there before the job is over......one step at a time and maybe well make some progress if cooler heads prevail.

All the best to you and yours for a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Regards + HH

Bill

I'm not too worried about anything Bill.Its easy to assume that somebody means one thing when they actually mean another.Thats whats hard about talking on websites instead of face to face,you cant see emotions in a website,you cant read body language.If you met me face to face i'm not much of a talker,i'm a listener.I'm not one to waste my words talking about something i dont know about.Only fools talk about what they dont know about.If I know about something i'll talk your ear off.Even if people are skeptical about the truth thats happening to this country,i know its the truth.Get off the TV and main stream media,Broaden your horizons.I've always been open an minded person.I post what i post because its the truth.If anybody wants to tell me im wrong,they can prove it to me.I have yet to have a taker.

You and your family have a Merry christmas Bill
 
@Crispin ... I am familiar with Milgram. My next question would be: what causes antisocial PD? I suspect a correlation with some of the factors I mention in my previous post. I don't think it's simply an internal, isolated, or chemical problem, although I wouldn't discount those in a percentage of cases. Again, my opinion is that legislation on gun ownership will have greater potential social costs than potential benefits--especially right now. Highly politicized, reactionary legislation often has negative effects. To be clear, I don't feel all gun legislation is bad.

@ Red James ... You stated the following: "What it all comes to is,good people and good citizens do not need laws,criminals do." While I understand the sentiment, I feel the actual results of seemingly moral choice don't always pan out as such. Indeed, to make moral decisions requires a great deal of understanding about others, society, and the specific conditions of that particular decision. This decision-making process is sufficiently simple when constrained to small groups (see my brief discussion of Dunbar's Number earlier in this thread). The complexity of large groups lends to misunderstanding. Misunderstanding leads to bad decisions--intentional and otherwise.

A simple evidence of this relative morality is exhibited online. When economic activities take place face to face--even among previously unknown participants--cheating is far less common than when it takes place online. Otherwise honest people are more likely to cheat and steal online. Fact. Why? The phenomenon isn't fully understood, but it has to do with being socially disconnected from others. All forms of crime have social roots, including the violent crimes which are the subject of this thread.

Online financial dealings are not the only circumstance that appears to permit relative moral decision-making (see Blind Spots, below). Thus I would argue that, due to the very nature of our society, laws are necessary to maintain social order even among otherwise good, moral, and ethical people.

@all ... Some interesting books I'd suggest for this crowd:

Imagined Communities, Benedict Anderson (a discussion of nationalism and the impacts of our social assumptions)
Satisfaction Guaranteed, Barbara Strasser (a discussion of the social impacts of the marketing industry)
Captains of Consciousness, Stuart Ewen (another discussion of the social impacts of the marketing industry)
Blind Spots, M. Bazerman and A Tenbrunsel (a discussion of factors inhibiting and permitting ethical behavior)

-- Ammo
 
Assault weapon? If I literally punch, kick the living crap out of someone and get arrested for assault are my fists, feet considered a assault weapon?

Close in the eyes of the law, but no apple :tongue3: Assault actually starts verbally, once physical contact is made it becomes battery:tongue3: But I still get your drift :thumbsup: :laughing7:

What it all comes to is,good people and good citizens do not need laws,criminals do.

Close again, but no cigar :tongue3: People need laws to know their bounds. Remember, what you believe acceptable to society is not always in societies best interest :laughing7:

There were several interesting posts from Terry and Ammo, that pretty much covered the issues in a rational way :thumbsup:
 
Oh, by the way. My philosophy is not the best either because I'm more of an in the "Middle of The Road" type of guy.

I set my path down the middle so you best step to either side, or get plowed over :laughing7:
 
Ammon: There a variety of prevailing theories on what causes antisocial PD. Hervey Cleckly is considered to be "the man" in regards to research and working in the field. I can't recall the name of the experiment but I remember the jist of one that I feel well illustrates ASPD. I found this to be the most telling:
A group of controls was compared to a group of diagnosed ASPD. They were lead into a simulation where they had electrical wires hooked up to them. They were told that they would be given a painful, nonlethal, electric shock; and then, they were asked if they wanted the shock to be administered immediately or if they preferred to sit, wait over a 60 min period, and have the shock randomly given to them during that interval. The group of controls had a 90% response to give it immediately, ie..get it over with. The group with prediagnosed ASPD were fifty-fifty on waiting or immediately. It was a coin toss for them. Furthermore, the 10% of controls who elected to wait had elevated blood pressure, pulse, and appeared very anxious throughout the waiting period. The group of ASPD had no change in pulse/blood pressure, and appeared calm throughout. It is important to note that no electrical shocks were ever given.

When I examine "why people are the way they are" it almost always comes down to a combination of nature-nurture. Twin studies separated at birth have tremendously higher ratios of concordant psychiatric illnesses but never even remotely approach one hundred percent.

I believe there are two categories of people that get diagnosed with ASPD. The vast majority of the first category is what is found in prison populations. In this population it is extremely difficult to tell which part of the nature-nurture discussion they fall more heavily on. The second category is a much smaller precentage of the prison population and found predominantly operating in society. These people range from manipulative boyfriends with girlfriends in different states, to the business man that cheats grandma for millions, to the infamous "clown killer" John Gacy. These people have a tendancy to be very intelligent and charming. On first meeting them they are almost universally liked. They are unable to feel remorse and unable to anticipate punishments. In this population, I am convinced the overwhelming cause for their behaviors is genetic. I do not think it is a chemical imbalance. If it was a chemical imbalance then I would expect psychotropic medications to have some effect on them. I.e...depression, schizophrenia, bipolar, anxiety, PTSD are all chemical imbalances and can be treated with psychotropics. When treating a patient with ASPD, psychotropic medication have no effect. My personal belief, is that there is a 'broken circuit' caused at the genetic level that interferes with Dopamine processing in the limbic system, nucleus acumbens, and possibly the cingulate gyrus and anterior cortex. PET scans have showed some deficiencies in function but are largely nonconclusive. In general, I feel PET scans are not the tool necessary to study causality in the brain.

All: From reading these posts I have gained a better understanding of people's views. It is safe to say that everybody responding in this forum are moral people. It is safe to say that our variance of opinions is based on how to best protect our loved ones. It is also safe to say that nobody responding in this thread is arguing for a complete ban of all guns. We recognize that weapons have created a tragic problem for a very small percentage of society. Due to the sudden and devasting effect they can have, opinions on how to best manage these rare abuses vary widely. Most all of us agree that some legislation is necessary. The question is "How much?" I will continue to propose that we make changes in legislation and seek a better solution to this problem. I think Ammon is right, knee jerk legislation would be foolish and most likely not helpful. However, the most recent tragedy can be used as a focal point to help us move forward. I am one of the younger members of this discussion. Youth has a tendancy to seek change. Hopefully, as a society, we can continue civil discussion and move forward to address these problems calmy and rationally.

Merry X-Mas and Happy Holidays!
 
These people range from manipulative boyfriends with girlfriends in different states, to the business man that cheats grandma for millions, to the infamous "clown killer" John Gacy. These people have a tendancy to be very intelligent and charming.

We do have a name for these people, they are called sociopaths :tongue3:
 
Crispin,

Well thought out summary.....I'll pass over the first part of your post...because it's way over my head....lol.

Folks,

Being north of the border I don't have a vote on the issues....but would strongly suggest everyone digest what was posted and sleep on it and advise your government representatives of your views when they address what laws
they are considering.

Far left the public is disarmed and like lambs to the slaughter by the bad guys.....non starter.

Far right everyone's armed to the teeth and living in a virtual police state.....non starter also.

Somewhere up the middle with some balance seems to be the way to go.

Regards + HH

Bill
 
Far left the public is disarmed and like lambs to the slaughter by the bad guys.....non starter.

Far right everyone's armed to the teeth and living in a virtual police state.....non starter also.

Not to nit pick Bill but a disarmed public creates a police state,not an armed public.In Soviet Russia the public was disarmed,that was a police state,The public was disarmed in Nazi Germany,another police state
 
Close again, but no cigar People need laws to know their bounds. Remember, what you believe acceptable to society is not always in societies best interest

Wrong spart,people that have morals do not commit crimes.Common sense goes a long way in knowing ones boundaries.
 
RJC,

No arguments from me.....just pointing out that either of the 2 ends of the spectrum is not the way to go.....somewhere in the middle there should be a livable option for most people.

Regards + HH

Bill



Not to nit pick Bill but a disarmed public creates a police state,not an armed public.In Soviet Russia the public was disarmed,that was a police state,The public was disarmed in Nazi Germany,another police state
 
The way i see it is,a society that is equaled in arms is a polite society.A society that is unarmed is a society of victims waiting to happen.The good citizen will not be armed,the criminal still will.To evenly fight back the good citizen in fact becomes a criminal.
 
Well, here is MY "two bits"; wife & I were eating in a restaurant, and a guy walked in "packing heat" strapped to his right leg; assumed he had a weapon permit. Lost my appetite, and watched him... we then left before finishing meal. ANOTHER guy packed "heat" in our townhouse community, (former Navy Vet & biker); assumed he had a weapon permit. They coulda been "off-duty" cops... BUT! I KNOW local Law Enforcement, and THEY weren't. NOT interested to going back to the days of the WILD WEST where EVERYONE had a gun... (even the women/ladies). The ONLY ppl that I will tolerate/be comfortable "packing heat" would be COPS in uniforms; & even "they" could be FAKES. Here's the thing... wife's father was Lt. Col. in Maryland State Police; her brother was ALSO MSP; guns were in the house. Married me, and I had a gun in the house, as Administrator in MAX Security Prison (in case of inmate escape... prison policy was to be armed & pursue); thankfully, it was NEVER necessary. Good citizen/civilians will have to become knowledgeable about Crime Prevention "tech" and state laws of self-defense... BEFORE, we become an "ARMED CAMP". Don't think the WILD WEST was "Polite Society".
 
Last edited:
You can't fight intimidation with intimidation.
You can't fight threat with threat.
You can't prevent needless deaths by increasing the possibility for more.
During the "wars", how many were killed by friendly fire?
The more bullets you put in the air the more innocent people there will be who are going to be hit. Bring all of these bullets into the stressful civilian world and that number can only increase.
Unfortunately, because it has been allowed to reach the point it is at today, the source must now be addressed.

Let's not forget that these recent events were predicted many years ago as more and more violence started becoming visible in our society in the form of entertainment. I can well remember the many challenges to get it more strongly regulated, I can also remember the stern defenses that were displayed by the opposition in the form of, "rights." We cannot continue to allow "rights" to over-ride common sense and what is best for the entire country.
 
Just look at this latest nutjob. First off, he had beaten his grandmother to death with a hammer back in 1981; about 31 years ago. He was about 31 when he did that. So, shall we talk about a permissive society? A bunch of bleeding hearts on parole boards? Why was the SOB out of prison? I saw an interview with a older than middle aged parole board member a while back. When she was asked what criteria was used in the decision making process which decides whether to parole someone or not, her response was, "It's a hope". A FRICKEN HOPE!! What the hell is a hope?! They PAY these morons on the parole boards? They should convict the parole board members for any crimes committed by scum they put on the streets. Then they will do more than hope. This guy kills his grandmother, then, after he gets released to the streets, he kills his sister and two firemen with guns that WERE NOT HIS just like the guns that were used at the school. They did not belong to the shooter. This guy writes a note that he wants to burn down his neighborhood and you don't want to talk mental illness? I don't promote uniformed, armed guards in schools at all. I do promote, however, armed teachers or other officials in the schools carrying concealed and wearing civies. There will be nothing visible to "Traumatize" the children but there will be someone there to protect them should something happen.
Look at our embassy situation. Ever since we lost 4 adults in an embassy attack, all they can talk about is beefing up security at ALL of our embassies. And how do they propose doing it? It sure isn't telling the bad guys they are passing gun laws so they can't attack anymore. They propose putting ARMED people at the embassies. This is to protect ADULTS! Are our children any less important?
We have tons of gun laws, especially here in California. We have limited magazine size here but a 30-round mag is easier to get than a joint. We have background checks. So what, the guns are stolen and then used by people that shouldn't have guns. I'll inject here that we need to toughen up some laws about locking up weapons when not in use by the legal gun owners. In my house there is only one weapon that isn't locked in a gun safe and it isn't a semi-automatic. Which "new" ones do you think will keep (can't say mentally ill) people from gaining access to guns? If not guns, how do you keep machetes, matches, fertilizer, poison and everything else out of the hands of these poor, unguided souls?
I've stated before that, years ago, guns used to be highly visible in the back windows of pickup trucks in the student parking lots. Guns have not changed so, what has? Society, that's what. How many kids are on drugs because mommy and daddy think they are hyper? How many are ignored by their druggie parents? The term, "Baby Daddy" is becoming socially acceptable. It's giving a sense of "legitimacy" to out-of-wedlock child bearing. Then the taxpayers have to support the kid, the promiscuous mommy and the scumbag male of the dog-like relationship. Yep, you have to stop more than guns to straighten out this screwed up society. 'Til you do, I'll have my guns to protect me and mine and everyone else can wonder "Why?" are we so messed up?
 
Don't think the WILD WEST was "Polite Society".

I dont think the wild west was as wild as portrayed in the movies, hollywood stigmatized it to create drama.Just as the alaskan gold rush was also stigmatized.The alaskan gold fields and camps were actually pretty civilized.Read the book precious dust,the true saga of the western gold rushes by Paula Mitchell Marks
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom