normiss 800 #1 November 13, 2015 Sadly sobering I think we owe it to our future generations to improve on this issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #2 November 13, 2015 normissSadly sobering I think we owe it to our future generations to improve on this issue. Hell We have already banned dodge ball!"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 800 #3 November 13, 2015 No kids I'm guessing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #4 November 13, 2015 normiss No kids I'm guessing. You guessed wrong"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grue 1 #5 November 13, 2015 I'll take some flak for this but I don't think we should place the lives of children as more important than the lives of adults. It'd be nice to see people stop shooting each other in general. That said, I think we owe it to future generations to stop raising them as fun-free pussies. Political correctness, helicopter parenting, and the nanny state mindset are a bigger problem than barely a gross of dead kids.cavete terrae. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #6 November 13, 2015 >I'll take some flak for this but I don't think we should place the lives of children >as more important than the lives of adults. I agree. It's just a bit harder for the pro-excessive-force types to claim that a 5 year old was a dangerous and violent thug who probably did something that caused his death. A simple guideline that we shouldn't shoot innocent people would be a good start. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grue 1 #7 November 13, 2015 billvon A simple guideline that we shouldn't shoot innocent people or dogs would be a good start. Agreed with one addendum cavete terrae. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #8 November 13, 2015 Quotestop raising them as fun-free pussies Agreed, let them lick those lead toys, not like evolution won't eventually catch up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cvfd1399 0 #9 November 13, 2015 I sat not 30 feet away from Neil Tyson the other night and listened to him talk for 4 hours. He got on a topic of "Banning" things. He said we should not ban anything. Think about the first car that hit a pedestrian and if we had said ooh well lets ban cars. Or if the first medicines had made someone sick, and we said ooh well lets ban medicines. He said the way we need to go about it is with true unbiased research, implementation, and review of things. He also got to talking about bias and the media and said that we are screwed as a society if we do not stop the cherry picking of information to give to the public. One it causes people to be closed minded, and the ones that are open minded who catch on to what they are doing will no longer trust the media, and when we stop sharing information and learning its over and another country will begin to take over which is happening. One of his examples was the U.S. funding that got slashed for the Superconducting Super Collider. The US gutted the funding and well science will continue to be done the LHC was built at CERN and they were the ones to find the higgs as well as many other achievements. We need detailed unbiased information and to quit all the hyperbole and clickbait media influencing the hivemind before anyone can begin to understand how bad of a problem this is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #10 November 13, 2015 >We need detailed unbiased information . . . And yet the NRA continues to oppose CDC research into gun deaths. It's almost as if they don't want that detailed unbiased information available to the general public. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #11 November 13, 2015 QuoteHe got on a topic of "Banning" things. He said we should not ban anything. Think about the first car that hit a pedestrian and if we had said ooh well lets ban cars. That sounds all really nice, but at some point as a society you make decisions as to what is absolutely not acceptable and you try and "ban" that behavior by penalizing it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #12 November 13, 2015 billvon>We need detailed unbiased information . . . And yet the NRA continues to oppose CDC research into gun deaths. It's almost as if they don't want that detailed unbiased information available to the general public. the CDC has a track record of not being unbiased on this topic before. Only a fool would want to let them try again"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #13 November 13, 2015 rushmc***>We need detailed unbiased information . . . And yet the NRA continues to oppose CDC research into gun deaths. It's almost as if they don't want that detailed unbiased information available to the general public. the CDC has a track record of not being unbiased on this topic before. Only a fool would want to let them try again Unbiased being defined as: anything that isn't pro-gun. Obviously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #14 November 13, 2015 >I sat not 30 feet away from Neil Tyson the other night and listened to him talk >for 4 hours. He got on a topic of "Banning" things. He said we should not ban >anything. So theft, drunk driving, statutory rape, Sarin home-defense kits - should all be legal? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cvfd1399 0 #15 November 13, 2015 Things not actions, get it together. By all means take to Twitter to debate him yourself I guarauntee you will get your ass handed to you by him. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #16 November 13, 2015 QuoteHe said we should not ban anything. Think about the first car that hit a pedestrian and if we had said ooh well lets ban cars. What about dangerously poor car designs? Do you want to remove all federal and state vehicle safety requirements? QuoteOr if the first medicines had made someone sick, and we said ooh well lets ban medicines. What about poorly designed or poorly produced medicines that kill people? Do you want to remove all FDA certifications for medicine?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #17 November 13, 2015 why does the discussion always immediately jump to 'banning'. Who the hell said anything about banning guns? there are 1000 other things that we could do to improve the situation but we refuse to do ANY of it. not one single fucking thing. which makes America tacitly 'OK' with kids killing each other with easy to access guns. fuck the ban. how about some control? Tyson may be right, but here is what he missed, we REGULATE cars, we REGULATE medicine, we REGULATE a lot of things that put harm into people's lives or have the potential of harm into people's lives. knock it off with the 'banning' of anything. we need to improve... now are you willing to give up ANYTHING? even one simple iota of ANYTHING to make the situation better? I doubt it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #18 November 13, 2015 >Things not actions So he's OK with allowing Sarin sales to homeowners for self defense (for example.) Or people driving cars with no brakes, lights, seatbelts or horns. (Cheaper that way.) Or liquor made with methanol. Would be interesting, for at least a little while. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #19 November 13, 2015 billvon>We need detailed unbiased information . . . And yet the NRA continues to oppose CDC research into gun deaths. It's almost as if they don't want that detailed unbiased information available to the general public. When the head of CDC sits on the board of directors of one of the largest anti-gun organizations, and says publicly that the research will be used to prove the need to control guns, then I'd be inclined to call that sort of 'research' "biased.""There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cvfd1399 0 #20 November 13, 2015 Quoteresearch, implementation, and review of things. All three of you are so fast to attack me you can't even read. If it doesn't work you go back review and figure out what was wrong and fix that, not ban it all together. And no bill I don't think he would allow nukes for self defense either but not even some poor old coonasses from louisiana was dumb enough to ask a question like that and it was a open mike q and a so there was nothing but air and opportunity! The context was in thinking and using your brains instead of emotions to solve problems. If you have any more questions about it feel free to ask him yourself I am off to a wedding dinner. http://www.haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/contact Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grue 1 #21 November 13, 2015 billvon>Things not actions So he's OK … people driving cars with no … seatbelts … Excuse my trimming there, but I don't see a compelling reason these should be mandatory. Lights, horns and brakes are for the safety of others as much as anything. If you want to make a choice involving your own body and you're an adult, so be it. No helmet on a bike, no seatbelt in the car, etc should not be concerns of the government.cavete terrae. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 800 #22 November 13, 2015 I think jakee is only one persons. Why and how do you see 3? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #23 November 13, 2015 billvon>We need detailed unbiased information . . . And yet the NRA continues to oppose CDC research into gun deaths. It's almost as if they don't want that detailed unbiased information available to the general public. Shirley, you jest. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #24 November 13, 2015 normissI think jakee is only one persons. Why and how do you see 3? Some sort of 'trinity mystery' perhaps? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cvfd1399 0 #25 November 13, 2015 I will do this slowley. 1.....billvon.......2.tkyahes.........3.jakee........three that's three ha ha ha Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
