Gun owners - Have you apologised for a spree killing recently?

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: TheArrow

originally posted by: NavyDoc
It started out that way. OP thought he was being clever and part of an anti-gun agenda, it seems. Why pick on law abiding gun owners? He could have said why don't gays come out more against pedophiles or environmentalists apologize for ELF terrorists.

Obvious agenda is obvious.

Do you believe all pedophiles are homosexuals?

No I don't and, as such, I presented that as an example of an equally preposterous connection.

But it isn't ,because as you say, it isn't analogous if all pedophiles aren't homosexuals.

a reply to: tmeister182

No one wants them to.

Just in case this hasn't been done already, let's try looking at it this way;

Most gun owners in America are law abiding and responsible people, yes?

Every now again, something goes horribly wrong and someone goes on the rampage shooting innocent people.

So, is it reasonable to hold all gun owners responsible? No
Is it reasonable to expect all gun owners to apologise? No
Is it fair to expect gun owners to actively seek out these nutters and take them on, without exception? No again

So why do we see threads bemoaning Muslims who are just getting on with their lives after attacks like this. Like most people of ANY faith, of ANY nationality have just got on with their own lives in any number of conflict situations. In WW2, not every Frenchman was in the resistance, for example.

Yet we see people saying that any Muslim that hasn't denounced a radical must therefore support it. The G W Bush mentality.

Life is more complex than that and we have enough to worry about without alienating an entire culture.
Simple enough?

I didnt know that I was responsible for the actions of other men that I have never even met...

Youve got some seriously flawed logic, OP.

a reply to: neformore

Ahh, somewhat of a reductio ad absurdum. Very well played indeed.

originally posted by: twhite93
a reply to: neformore

Ahh, somewhat of a reductio ad absurdum. Very well played indeed.

Well stated twhite..well stated.. even in satire...


reductio ad absurdum.....en.wikipedia.org...

But well played to those unaware. Very much like many in politics/leadership today....satire and also reductio ad absurdum.


Thanks,
Orangetom

a reply to: 8fl0z

You don't, it is literally the entire point of the thread.

a reply to: neformore


Ummm...COOL...nice example of juvee trolling......Oh...and lookee there...you hung a fine print disclaimer at the bottom...ah thats so cuuuuute...

Oh....and your post has a case of..."topical satire"...I usually get that when I've been grazing on poison ivy...very stimulating indeed...
It is a parallel alright.......dimension I mean...You just put a truck load of apples in the atom smasher with a boatload of oranges...and came up with appanges...or was that orpples...Hmmm...?

My GOD man...this wasn't even a bait and switch.......just bait...but hey...if your going to be all...Troll speed ahead and damn the torpedoes...then you probably should take plenty of appanges and orpples...for bait I mean...




YouSir

Oh...let's see how long it takes you fine peeps to slap the old...OFF TOPIC...on this fine example of "topical satire" of mine
PSSSST......got any calamine...?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
sorry but why should other gun owners apologise for the actions of someone else they have nothing do do with?

Do you also think all car drivers should be out protesting every time a kid gets knocked down.

But do you think all Muslims should apologise for killing some people in France by a small group of extremists?

Now I am no advocate of guns but i don't really see why a gun owner in Texas should be out apologising if a gunman in Alaska kills a couple of people.

I think the answer is simple. Cars are useful, and practically a necessity today. But guns are not.

So, you have the right to have guns. But, you also have the right to be sued.

Since every gun owner, by purchasing his gun from some manufacturer, is in effect "supporting" the gun industry, and keeping this "non-essential" industry alive, he subjects himself to a possible lawsuit for "aiding and abetting" the killers. We don't only arrest terrorists, we also arrest and prosecute those who support them financially.

Every gun owner is giving financial support to the development of guns that are used to kill people.

At some point, someone will decide to bring a class action lawsuit against all organizations and individuals that support the practice of putting guns in the hands of killers.

a reply to: YouSir

21 pages...no ones been modded.

Its satire. That means its fair game.

Nice try into trying to make it something else though.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: Jamie1

Oh, come now Jamie1 - come and join the conversation

Do you think the Muslims should apologize for terrorism?

By the way Jamie1 - how many other Jamies are there?

:-)

This thread is about gun owners, not Muslims.

If a group of terrorists murdered 132 school children, and claimed their reason was because the schoolchildren didn't believe in the 2nd Amendment, I would imagine those that did believe in the 2nd Amendment would do everything in their power to correct the public perception.

If not, a reasonable inference could be drawn that their silence is implicit support for the murders in the name of the 2nd Amendment.

So far, I've not heard of any gun owners committing mass murder to make a political statement against those who have different beliefs about the 2nd Amendment than they do.

a reply to: Jamie1

It's not about guns or gun owners at all.
It is just that people see a convo that looks like a gun control one and see red.

It is about blaming the many for the actions of the few.

a reply to: neformore


Ummm...as was mine...satire...and fair game...

Care for an orpple...?




YouSir

a reply to: neformore

I read your disclaimer, and I'll still comment the same way I would have:

Your post made me laugh.

That is all.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Jamie1

It is about blaming the many for the actions of the few.

E PLURIBUS UNUM

Out of many come the few.

Without the many, the few would not exist.

Without gun owners, there would be no gun killers.

originally posted by: Aliian

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Jamie1

It is about blaming the many for the actions of the few.

E PLURIBUS UNUM

Out of many come the few.

Without the many, the few would not exist.

Without gun owners, there would be no gun killers.

Well, at least we have a taker.


It is illogical to blame someone for the acts of a total stranger, be they Muslim, a gun owner, gay, or whatever.

By your logic, you are part of the "gun problem" because you buy gas that gives taxes to make the roads that the mass shooters drive on to get to the place of doing the shooting.

Guilt by association indeed.

a reply to: neformore

I'll apologize when people who drink alcohol apologize for all the deaths it has caused. Or those that own cars apologize.
Or those that own cigarettes apologize.
Or those who own lighters apologize.

What a foolish argument/discussion. I own a firearm that has only killed paper, should I apologize to the trees?

And now a new question. Should anyone dim enough to post a reply like the one immediately above this post have their gun taken away due to lack of faculty?

A sort of back door suitability test.
Discuss.

a reply to: Feltrick

Yes you should. I think you should apologize to every tree you see for the harsh punishment you bestow upon them all the time. OR you could go look up the definition of satire and learn that you are driving down the wrong road right now.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Aliian

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Jamie1

It is about blaming the many for the actions of the few.

E PLURIBUS UNUM

Out of many come the few.

Without the many, the few would not exist.

Without gun owners, there would be no gun killers.

Well, at least we have a taker.


It is illogical to blame someone for the acts of a total stranger, be they Muslim, a gun owner, gay, or whatever.

By your logic, you are part of the "gun problem" because you buy gas that gives taxes to make the roads that the mass shooters drive on to get to the place of doing the shooting.

Guilt by association indeed.

No. The same reason that police go after "thepiratebay.org" but not "google.com", when both sites allow people to search for illegal content on the Internet, is the same reason we go after "gun owners" but not "gas stations" nor "gas buyers." One has a narrow focus that is directly related to the problem, while the other has a broad focus proving it's not specifically part of the problem.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: Forensick

Your right I have horrid spelling but thatthat is dyslexia for you.
Plus fat fingers and a small phone.
Well done bet you are really proud.

And a stutter when you type, hilarious! Nice comeback but was this joke too far? Did it offend people enough to kill me?