You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Gun Debate Started at www.counter-strike.net!
- Thread starter Incursion
- Start date
Scaramanga
New member
I went ahead and posted a reply, but I was so upset from the idiots posts that I don't think I was very coherent.
Man do they hate America! I mean, there are statements about how all Americans should be lined up and shot. I didn't think we were disliked that much.
------------------
Strength does not come from physical capacity.
It comes from an indomitable will. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Man do they hate America! I mean, there are statements about how all Americans should be lined up and shot. I didn't think we were disliked that much.
------------------
Strength does not come from physical capacity.
It comes from an indomitable will. -- Mahatma Gandhi
here's a better link: http://bbs.counter-strike.net
TheBluesMan
Moderator Emeritus
You guys keep up the good work over there. Remember, "Take the High Road."
We might even win over a couple of unbelievers if we play our cards right.
------------------
RKBA!
"The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security"
Ohio Constitution, Article I, Section 4 Concealed Carry is illegal in Ohio.
Ohioans for Concealed Carry Website
We might even win over a couple of unbelievers if we play our cards right.
------------------
RKBA!
"The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security"
Ohio Constitution, Article I, Section 4 Concealed Carry is illegal in Ohio.
Ohioans for Concealed Carry Website
Here they are playing a game that glorifies gun violence and they talk about how guns are bad.
Post this on their forum
THE ROOT OF THE EVIL
by Jeff Cooper
My dictionary describes an obsession as "a haunting by a fixed idea." A haunting is a nagging, continuous fear of the unreal. A fixed idea is one that cannot be altered, by truth or reason or anything else.
Phobia is listed as "fear, horror, or aversion - of a morbid character." Morbid is "unwholesome, sickly."
Those of us who shoot cannot help being perplexed when we encounter people who are apparently haunted by a fixed and morbid aversion to our guns. When first we meet such persons we generally respond with explanations, as is only reasonable. But with time we discover that often we are not dealing with rational minds. This is not to say that everyone who is opposed to shooting is mentally aberrant, but it is to say that those who latch on to an unreasonable notion and thereafter refuse to listen to any further discussion of it have problems that are more amenable to psychiatry than to argument.
I coined the term hoplophobia over twenty years ago, not out of pretension but in the sincere belief that we should recognize a very peculiar sociological attitude for what it is - a more or less hysterical neurosis rather than a legitimate political position. It follows convention in the use of Greek roots in describing specific mental afflictions. Hoplon is the Greek word for "instrument," but refers synonymously to “weapon" since the earliest and principal instruments were weapons. Phobos is Greek for "terror" and medically denotes unreasoning panic rather than normal fear. Thus hoplophobia is a mental disturbance characterized by irrational aversion to weapons, as opposed to justified apprehension about those who may wield them. The word has not become common, though twenty years is perhaps too short a time in which to test it, but I am nevertheless convinced that it has merit. We read of "gun grabbers" and "anti-gun nuts" but these slang terms do not face up to the reasons why such people behave the way they do. They do not adequately suggest that reason, logic, and truth can have no effect upon one who is irrational on the point under discussion. You cannot say calmly "Come, let us reason together" to a hoplophobe, because that is what he is - a hoplophobe. He is not just one who holds an opposing view, he is an obsessive neurotic. You can speak, write, and illustrate the merits of the case until you drop dead, and no matter how good you are his mind will not be changed. A victim of hydrophobia will die, horribly, rather than accept the water his body desperately needs. A victim of hoplophobia will die, probably, before he will accept the fallacy of his emotional fixation for what it is.
Have you noted that whenever an assassination is committed with a rifle, our journalistic hoplophobes clamor for further prohibitions on pistols? A pistol is a defensive weapon; a rifle is an offensive weapon. Yet the hoplophobes always attack pistols first because they feel that pistols are somehow nastier than rifles. (Though rifles are pretty nasty, too. They will get to those later.) This is the age of the "gut reaction" -that crutch of intellectual cripples - and for an interesting number of commentators it is not even embarrassing to admit that actually thinking about anything important is just too much trouble. Some of our most ubiquitous and highly paid social-problem columnists are egregious examples of this.
Not long ago a staff member of the Chicago Tribune held forth at some length about how the color gatefolds in outdoor magazines exemplified the same sniggering depravity that we find in the pornographic press, substituting guns for girls. What a sewer of a mind this man displays! It is undeniable that both a man-made work of art and a beautiful woman are manifestations of God's blessing, but to imply that our admiration for them is obscene is to give oneself away. For some it indeed may be, but the rest of us need no advice from such.
(I had thought that the fad to fantasize everything into a Freudian sex-symbol had gone out of vogue prior to World War 11, but obviously there are a good many who never got the word.)
The essence of the affliction is the belief that instruments cause acts. It may be that certain degenerate human beings are so far gone that they will use something just because it is there - a match, for instance. (I saw a bumper sticker in the Rockies that admonished "Prevent Forest Fires. Register Matches!') One who will burn people because he has a match is the same as one who will shoot people because he has a gun, but the hoplophobe zeroes in on guns because he is - let's face it -irrational. He will answer this by saying that we need matches (and cars, and motorcycles, and power saws, et cetera) but we do not need guns. He will not accept the idea that you may indeed need your guns, because he hates guns. He is afflicted by the grotesque notion that tools have a will of their own. He may admit that safe driving is a matter of individual responsibility, but he rejects the parallel in the matter of weapons. This may not be insanity, but it is clearly related to it.
One cannot rationally hate or fear an inanimate object. Neither can he rationally hate or fear an object because of its designed purpose. Whether one approves of capital punishment or not, one cannot rationally fear a hemp rope. One who did, possibly because he once narrowly escaped hanging, would generally be referred to a shrink. When the most prominent hoplophobe in the United States Senate says that he abhors firearms because their purpose is to put bullets through things, he reinforces the impressions that many have formed about his capacity to reason.
My point - and I hope it is clear - is that hoplophobia is a mental disturbance rather than a point of view. Differences of opinion - on economic policy, or forced integration, or the morality of abortion, or the neutron bomb - these we may hope to resolve by discussion. But we cannot so resolve a phobia. The mentally ill we cannot reach. But we can identify a form of mental illness for what it is, and so separate its victims from the policy considerations of reasonable people.
The root of the evil is the unprincipled attempt to gain votes by appealing to the emotions of the emotionally disturbed. Few reasonable politicians dare to take on the Second Amendment, even in the Eastern Megalopolis. (One prominent left-liberal told a New Yorker interviewer that he "would rather be a deer, in season, than to take on 'the gun lobby'!') But if, as is the case with the aforementioned senator, the politician is already a hopeless hoplophobe, his advisers must turn him loose to appeal to his constituency of crazies, since their jobs depend on it. "Go to it, Senator! The nuts are all with you.”
This is something we who prize our traditional liberties must face. Convincing the uninterested is the very essence of politics, in a two-party system. It is up to us to do that by demonstrating that hoplophobia is a disease, and to call upon all reasonable people to reject it as a basis for the formulation of policy.
Post this on their forum
THE ROOT OF THE EVIL
by Jeff Cooper
My dictionary describes an obsession as "a haunting by a fixed idea." A haunting is a nagging, continuous fear of the unreal. A fixed idea is one that cannot be altered, by truth or reason or anything else.
Phobia is listed as "fear, horror, or aversion - of a morbid character." Morbid is "unwholesome, sickly."
Those of us who shoot cannot help being perplexed when we encounter people who are apparently haunted by a fixed and morbid aversion to our guns. When first we meet such persons we generally respond with explanations, as is only reasonable. But with time we discover that often we are not dealing with rational minds. This is not to say that everyone who is opposed to shooting is mentally aberrant, but it is to say that those who latch on to an unreasonable notion and thereafter refuse to listen to any further discussion of it have problems that are more amenable to psychiatry than to argument.
I coined the term hoplophobia over twenty years ago, not out of pretension but in the sincere belief that we should recognize a very peculiar sociological attitude for what it is - a more or less hysterical neurosis rather than a legitimate political position. It follows convention in the use of Greek roots in describing specific mental afflictions. Hoplon is the Greek word for "instrument," but refers synonymously to “weapon" since the earliest and principal instruments were weapons. Phobos is Greek for "terror" and medically denotes unreasoning panic rather than normal fear. Thus hoplophobia is a mental disturbance characterized by irrational aversion to weapons, as opposed to justified apprehension about those who may wield them. The word has not become common, though twenty years is perhaps too short a time in which to test it, but I am nevertheless convinced that it has merit. We read of "gun grabbers" and "anti-gun nuts" but these slang terms do not face up to the reasons why such people behave the way they do. They do not adequately suggest that reason, logic, and truth can have no effect upon one who is irrational on the point under discussion. You cannot say calmly "Come, let us reason together" to a hoplophobe, because that is what he is - a hoplophobe. He is not just one who holds an opposing view, he is an obsessive neurotic. You can speak, write, and illustrate the merits of the case until you drop dead, and no matter how good you are his mind will not be changed. A victim of hydrophobia will die, horribly, rather than accept the water his body desperately needs. A victim of hoplophobia will die, probably, before he will accept the fallacy of his emotional fixation for what it is.
Have you noted that whenever an assassination is committed with a rifle, our journalistic hoplophobes clamor for further prohibitions on pistols? A pistol is a defensive weapon; a rifle is an offensive weapon. Yet the hoplophobes always attack pistols first because they feel that pistols are somehow nastier than rifles. (Though rifles are pretty nasty, too. They will get to those later.) This is the age of the "gut reaction" -that crutch of intellectual cripples - and for an interesting number of commentators it is not even embarrassing to admit that actually thinking about anything important is just too much trouble. Some of our most ubiquitous and highly paid social-problem columnists are egregious examples of this.
Not long ago a staff member of the Chicago Tribune held forth at some length about how the color gatefolds in outdoor magazines exemplified the same sniggering depravity that we find in the pornographic press, substituting guns for girls. What a sewer of a mind this man displays! It is undeniable that both a man-made work of art and a beautiful woman are manifestations of God's blessing, but to imply that our admiration for them is obscene is to give oneself away. For some it indeed may be, but the rest of us need no advice from such.
(I had thought that the fad to fantasize everything into a Freudian sex-symbol had gone out of vogue prior to World War 11, but obviously there are a good many who never got the word.)
The essence of the affliction is the belief that instruments cause acts. It may be that certain degenerate human beings are so far gone that they will use something just because it is there - a match, for instance. (I saw a bumper sticker in the Rockies that admonished "Prevent Forest Fires. Register Matches!') One who will burn people because he has a match is the same as one who will shoot people because he has a gun, but the hoplophobe zeroes in on guns because he is - let's face it -irrational. He will answer this by saying that we need matches (and cars, and motorcycles, and power saws, et cetera) but we do not need guns. He will not accept the idea that you may indeed need your guns, because he hates guns. He is afflicted by the grotesque notion that tools have a will of their own. He may admit that safe driving is a matter of individual responsibility, but he rejects the parallel in the matter of weapons. This may not be insanity, but it is clearly related to it.
One cannot rationally hate or fear an inanimate object. Neither can he rationally hate or fear an object because of its designed purpose. Whether one approves of capital punishment or not, one cannot rationally fear a hemp rope. One who did, possibly because he once narrowly escaped hanging, would generally be referred to a shrink. When the most prominent hoplophobe in the United States Senate says that he abhors firearms because their purpose is to put bullets through things, he reinforces the impressions that many have formed about his capacity to reason.
My point - and I hope it is clear - is that hoplophobia is a mental disturbance rather than a point of view. Differences of opinion - on economic policy, or forced integration, or the morality of abortion, or the neutron bomb - these we may hope to resolve by discussion. But we cannot so resolve a phobia. The mentally ill we cannot reach. But we can identify a form of mental illness for what it is, and so separate its victims from the policy considerations of reasonable people.
The root of the evil is the unprincipled attempt to gain votes by appealing to the emotions of the emotionally disturbed. Few reasonable politicians dare to take on the Second Amendment, even in the Eastern Megalopolis. (One prominent left-liberal told a New Yorker interviewer that he "would rather be a deer, in season, than to take on 'the gun lobby'!') But if, as is the case with the aforementioned senator, the politician is already a hopeless hoplophobe, his advisers must turn him loose to appeal to his constituency of crazies, since their jobs depend on it. "Go to it, Senator! The nuts are all with you.”
This is something we who prize our traditional liberties must face. Convincing the uninterested is the very essence of politics, in a two-party system. It is up to us to do that by demonstrating that hoplophobia is a disease, and to call upon all reasonable people to reject it as a basis for the formulation of policy.
Just had to send this e-mail
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>With a gun is simple, you must be prepared to live with your 'accident'.[/quote]
Kameleon, how many felons accidentally shoot someone?
What they do is called pre-meditated. If some punk robs you at gunpoint do you really think they are concerned of their actions.
Looking around America the places with the most gun laws and or restrictions have the most crime. Just the opposite with the least law. Did you hear about the kid that died in a car jacking? After getting in the drivers seat the thief pushed him out the passenger door. The poor kid was hung in the seat belt and drug to death. I guess that was an accident.
If the childs mother had a firearm then maybe her accident (bang) would have saved her child.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>With a gun is simple, you must be prepared to live with your 'accident'.[/quote]
Kameleon, how many felons accidentally shoot someone?
What they do is called pre-meditated. If some punk robs you at gunpoint do you really think they are concerned of their actions.
Looking around America the places with the most gun laws and or restrictions have the most crime. Just the opposite with the least law. Did you hear about the kid that died in a car jacking? After getting in the drivers seat the thief pushed him out the passenger door. The poor kid was hung in the seat belt and drug to death. I guess that was an accident.
If the childs mother had a firearm then maybe her accident (bang) would have saved her child.
California Government Code Section 845:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=gov&group=00001-01000&file=844-8 46
845. Neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise to provide police protection service or, if police protection service is provided, for failure to provide sufficient police protection service.
There are similar laws and rulings on the books all over the nation. For a comprehensive listing, get the book "Dial 911 And Die!" by Richard W. Stevens, available at this link: http://www.jpfo.org/dial911anddie.htm
-Michael Pelletier http://www.firearmsfreedom.net/guncontrol/
[This message has been edited by mvpel (edited May 21, 2000).]
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=gov&group=00001-01000&file=844-8 46
845. Neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise to provide police protection service or, if police protection service is provided, for failure to provide sufficient police protection service.
There are similar laws and rulings on the books all over the nation. For a comprehensive listing, get the book "Dial 911 And Die!" by Richard W. Stevens, available at this link: http://www.jpfo.org/dial911anddie.htm
-Michael Pelletier http://www.firearmsfreedom.net/guncontrol/
[This message has been edited by mvpel (edited May 21, 2000).]
Scaramanga
New member
Just posted another thread. It seems the more facts that are presented, the more upset they get, and the more insults are thrown. I find it pathetic.
I hope my posts over there have at least shown that we can present a calm, logical arguement. Incursion has posted some great stuff. Let's keep it up big guy!!
------------------
Strength does not come from physical capacity.
It comes from an indomitable will. -- Mahatma Gandhi
I hope my posts over there have at least shown that we can present a calm, logical arguement. Incursion has posted some great stuff. Let's keep it up big guy!!
------------------
Strength does not come from physical capacity.
It comes from an indomitable will. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Scaramanga
New member
I don't think I've made much of a dent. Any constructive criticism on my posts are welcome. Almost every post I have read here has maintained a civilized tone, and I have learned a lot from everyone here.
------------------
Strength does not come from physical capacity.
It comes from an indomitable will. -- Mahatma Gandhi
------------------
Strength does not come from physical capacity.
It comes from an indomitable will. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Well, from what the hysterical fools at that little forum said, they think America is terrible because we have too much freedom and some poor people. Interesting, because half the population of England is on the dole.
People like these will actualy admit that they want to curtail economic and personal freedom. They WANT socialism. How do argue with that?
People like these will actualy admit that they want to curtail economic and personal freedom. They WANT socialism. How do argue with that?
Scaramanga and Incursion, I went over and read that thread. Just wanted to say, you guys gave a good account of yourselves and the rkba point of view. There was that one guy that got on there and wigged out about his life in New York, which didn't help. But you guys did well. Maybe the question over there should be..."once they confiscate the guns, can the gun games be far behind?" (after all, violence starts in the mind right?) Just a thought. It is really bizarre though that here these guys are ripping the USA and the rkba while at the same time in their minds and the virtual world of their games they are blowing people away one after another. Thanks for your efforts over there. ol blue
Dizzipator
New member
Try this for countering socialism. Maybe they will see the light.
"Socialism is the myth that two people can live off each other indefinitely without either of them doing any work."
"Socialism is the myth that two people can live off each other indefinitely without either of them doing any work."
David, here it is: http://bbs.counter-strike.net/Forum20/HTML/002115.html