Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[littlefallsmets]

What I'm down with is everyone sacrificing a little bit of their individual accomplishments for the shared good... not with some people giving up their everything for people who'd never even think about their long-term responsibility to the community.

George Bailey's trip around the world should've been heavily taxed, sure, and when he was making good money as an architect in a big city, that too.

I'm all about the essential needs of the people (health care, education, transportation infrastructure, police and emergency services, defense, etc) being covered through the massive buying power of a nationalized single-payer system that no one can "opt" out of because it is a tax.

That is an entirely different animal than the bloody sacrifice of one man's dreams high on a mountain.

"We're all in this together, kid" from BRAZIL is a much better summing up of my ethos than...

George Bailey giving up everything for a bunch of people who would eventually squander that gift and never consider doing the same.

We don't NEED martyrs... hell, martyrs fuck the whole thing up because they trick people into thinking that that's all we need... the total sacrifices of a handful of great men and women and then everyone else can go on not worrying about it.

The sacrifices of George Baileys ultimately make the situation worse.

Everybody giving what they can, probably only a little bit but in great mass, means so much more actual lasting change than a knife through George Bailey's heart on the altar of America's God.

[Doc]

'course I could just see it myself.

For myself I think I'm enjoying these second hand versions better.

I propose a remake: The Passion of George Bailey.

[jaydub]

...snipped excellent overview

The main argument in favour of banning guns is that it makes people feel like they're doing something.  Its completely an emotional response.  Guns are loud, smelly, oily and kill people when used as designed.  This is terrifying stuff for a population sleeping in climate controlled, soft comfy beds, eating supermarket obtained food and transporting themselves from work to home in cushy, vibration-isolated, music filled conveyances that have been engineered to eliminate the perception of danger.  There is a group wish, apparently, to live in a safe bubble with soft furniture with rounded edges and have the Nanny State provide all our needs so we can entertain each other from cradle to grave.  Guns, motorsports, boxing, hunting and the like are unwanted reminders that the group wish is a fantasy.

[theinevitable]

I bought into the argument recently that... we need guns because the government has guns, the army has guns, the police have guns. Redcoats had guns. Nazis had guns.

There are nuances that I can't bring up facts for at the moment, but... putting ourselves in a situation where only the bad guys/the government guys have guns is a horrible idea.

Freakonomics has some good stats on this. I trust the facts in that book because he poo-poos statistics from both sides. Gun control doesn't reduce violent crime. Neither does arming every citizen.

[wombat]

This is terrifying stuff for a population sleeping in climate controlled, soft comfy beds, eating supermarket obtained food and transporting themselves from work to home in cushy, vibration-isolated, music filled conveyances that have been engineered to eliminate the perception of danger. 

Well, actually it's more terrifying when you're walking down a dark street on the way home from the subway, really.

I think there is a really big urban/rural divide on this subject.  I've seen where Ash lives, roughly - there are wide open spaces where you can shoot at critters without endangering anyone else.  Whereas if you step out my door, the only thing you're going to shoot are other people, for many miles around.  You can't underestimate the difference in perception that results from this. We're starting from fundamentally very different places in thinking about this so there's no surprise that we weigh the factors differently.

I should say that I could care less if Ash shoots his gun at critters far, far away from me. I have no interest in stopping him from doing that. But I also don't think it's fair to accuse city dwellers of being irrational and emotional if they would prefer that this sort of thing not go on, like, down the corner from them. How is that not a rational desire?  Maybe banning guns is not a realistic goal, that's a different question, but what is irrational about thinking that it would be better if no shooting went on in places where there's no possible sporting use of it?

[pmcd9]

George Baily isn't a martyr, he's a hero.  His childhood dreams got dashed, but that happens to a lot of people.  He gave more because he had more to give and the rubes you say wouldn't do the same did exactly the same.  The whole fuck*ng town did the same.

But the point of the story is, just because you've had some trouble in your life and taken some hard knocks, it's not as bad as it seems.  I guess I relate to this story because I've taken some hard knocks in my life, but still see myself as blessed.

And you too Mike.  You've taken some hard knocks in your life, but take a look around you.  You've got a lot going for you and lot to offer.  Maybe you don't believe these blessings come from Heaven, but they exist nonetheless. 

[wombat]

Wombat, what's the root cause of the types of shootings you're mentioning?

Yeah, cause our society has shown itself to be so good at addressing root causes. Sigh.

You gotta admit though that if we did successfully address the root causes, the result would be exactly the same: No one in a city would have a gun, because they wouldn't need them to do crimes, they wouldn't need them to defend themselves from criminals, and they sure don't need them to shoot Bambis.

[Doc]

My knee jerk reaction to guns is that if you are talking about handguns or similar the only purpose they serve is to kill people. Since we are against killing people as a society I can't help feeling that removing this doesn't have a lot of down sides. Sure criminals will probably still get them but it will be a far reduced number of criminals and of course people will still commit violent crime but handguns make horribly wounding or killing someone that much easier. On the other hand I actually agree with a lot of the arguments you've put forward Ash, and it's certainly true that even if your government suddenly passed a law to outlaw all handguns tomorrow it's doubtful they'd ever get them all (or even most of them, given how a fair proportion of your society thinks one of their most important rights is to own something that lets them kill other people which is another ridiculously long thread by itself) so I suppose we have to deal with what the reality is now.
Of course core problems need to be dealt with, but if you miraculously removed the cause of violence then there wouldn't be much reason to have guns for personal protection anyway. I mean, while we're talking about core problems this society we have that glorifies violence, especially gun violence, and simultaneously tells you that you need a gun to protect yourself from all the things out there that want to kill you right now should probably high up on the list.
It's a bit of a tangent, but it's not hard to see how some people progress from the idea that you are the only person who will look out for you (a core american value, or so I'm told)  to the idea that having more power than another person gives you the right to the right to take what that person has, I mean it's their fault for not adequately protecting themselves and you don't owe them anything.

I took a reference to guns equaling power out of that last line because actually it stands on it's own whether you're talking about gun violence or not.

Disclaimer: I live in a country where four teenage storming a city school with machetes and baseball bats (putting two kids in hospital, but not too badly) made the national news yesterday so maybe I have a bit of a wussy perspective on the whole matter.

[CortJstr]

It's a bit of a tangent, but it's not hard to see how some people progress from the idea that you are the only person who will look out for you (a core american value, or so I'm told)  to the idea that having more power than another person gives you the right to the right to take what that person has, I mean it's their fault for not adequately protecting themselves and you don't owe them anything.

And, as tI said, this is a country created by a violent revolution. So we're a little squeamish about being left unarmed when the next revolution comes.

[wombat]

All I have to say at this point is that I am so confused by the fact that this discussion is in a thread about It's a Wonderful Life instead of the one about Charlton Heston.

[AugustWest]

from It's a Wonderful Planet of the Apes!

"Dr. ZMr. Wonderfuls.  Dr. ZMr. Wonderfuls!  Don't you know me?  It's me, George Bailey."

later...

"Take your hands off me, you damn dirty Mr. Potter!"

[lprkn]

Gotta be a James Stewart formatting button around here somewhere...

[jay-ell]

from It's a Wonderful Planet of the Apes!

"Dr. ZMr. Wonderfuls.  Dr. ZMr. Wonderfuls!  Don't you know me?  It's me, George Bailey."

later...

"Take your hands off me, you damn dirty Mr. Potter!"

Nice work, Bright Eyes.