The comment on political cartoons and graphics thread.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

It is true that firearms are a force multiplier. But the force comes from somewhere outside the firearm.

Well no sh*t. Who here thinks guns ALL BY THEMSELVES kill people? Nobody. Not a single person. And yet it's still something that the pro-gun crowd says.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Well no sh*t. Who here thinks guns ALL BY THEMSELVES kill people? Nobody. Not a single person.

Charles does. That's why he gave his guns a talkin' to today.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Charles does. That's why he gave his guns a talkin' to today.

I swear, if I hear/read "guns don't kill people, people kill people" one more damn time...

It doesn't even make sense.

We all know guns don't go out and murder people. Crazy people do. Guns just let them murder MORE people and FASTER!

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Well no sh*t. Who here thinks guns ALL BY THEMSELVES kill people? Nobody. Not a single person. And yet it's still something that the pro-gun crowd says.

Then people should post accordingly. I often read "guns killed X" or "guns did this". Perhaps, it is wiser to frame the argument better and instead say "guns were used in the killing of X".

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I swear, if I hear/read "guns don't kill people, people kill people" one more damn time...

If you do, just pose this question: If guns don't kill, then why do we give guns to our military when we send them into combat? Why don't we just send the soldiers?

[Penny Lane 8,159]

If you do, just pose this question: If guns don't kill, then why do we give guns to our military when we send them into combat? Why don't we just send the soldiers?

We should send them with cars, baseball bats and knives. Since those are just as lethal.

Then people should post accordingly. I often read "guns killed X" or "guns did this". Perhaps, it is wiser to frame the argument better and instead say "guns were used in the killing of X".

I don't think I've ever read someone say "guns killed this person" ... but I'll take your word for it. I was under the impression that it was safe to assume that people know inanimate objects don't go on killing sprees. But perhaps I'm giving too much credit where it isn't due.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

We should send them with cars, baseball bats and knives. Since those are just as lethal.

Just hands and feet since - according to the gun nuts - hands and feet are more lethal than assault weapons.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

We should send them with cars, baseball bats and knives. Since those are just as lethal.

I don't think I've ever read someone say "guns killed this person" ... but I'll take your word for it. I was under the impression that it was safe to assume that people know inanimate objects don't go on killing sprees. But perhaps I'm giving too much credit where it isn't due.

In this thread... "Guns have actually killed more people than anything in the history of this country".

Given we were talking about the government, changing the subject of the sentence as above is a tool of redirecting the argument away from the initial message.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Then people should post accordingly. I often read "guns killed X" or "guns did this". Perhaps, it is wiser to frame the argument better and instead say "guns were used in the killing of X".

70% of murders are committed with firearms. Over 30K lives are snuffed out annually with firearms. Where there are firearms, there is death and destruction. Which is not surprising since causing death and destruction is the sole purpose for which firearms are made. Happy now?

[Penny Lane 8,159]

In this thread... "Guns have actually killed more people than anything in the history of this country".

Okay. And do you honestly believe that what was meant by that was actually "Guns have, all by themselves, gone on a killing spree and killed more people than anything in the history of this country"?

No. Like I said, I assume people would read that and know that it's meant that guns were used in killing more people than anything in the history of this country.

Do we really need to be so specific so that people understand? Am I giving people the benefit of the doubt when they're really just idiots? Maybe.

But nobody believes guns kill people all by themselves. That's just an argument made by the pro-gun crowd because they honestly believe other people think that way. Or they think it's funny. Either way, they're incorrect, but that's beside the point.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Okay. And do you honestly believe that what was meant by that was actually "Guns have, all by themselves, gone on a killing spree and killed more people than anything in the history of this country"?

No. Like I said, I assume people would read that and know that it's meant that guns were used in killing more people than anything in the history of this country.

Do we really need to be so specific so that people understand? Am I giving people the benefit of the doubt when they're really just idiots? Maybe.

But nobody believes guns kill people all by themselves. That's just an argument made by the pro-gun crowd because they honestly believe other people think that way. Or they think it's funny. Either way, they're incorrect, but that's beside the point.

As I said, it is a vehicle of redirection. The point of Charles' post was not what was doing the killing but who. Yet we now have pages on the what and the initial message has been lost.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In this thread... "Guns have actually killed more people than anything in the history of this country".

Given we were talking about the government, changing the subject of the sentence as above is a tool of redirecting the argument away from the initial message.

I know it hurts but the obsession with firearms which is the reason that they are all over the place and accessible to anyone and everyone at any time just about anywhere is why we have so many deaths by firearm in this country. So god damn many that over the last 4 decades alone more civilians were killed with firearms on our streets, in our towns and cities than have fallen on all of the battlefields where Americans fought in all of our history. That is sickening.

Edited January 28, 2013 by Mr. Big Dog

[Penny Lane 8,159]

As I said, it is a vehicle of redirection. The point of Charles' post was not what was doing the killing but who. Yet we now have pages on the what and the initial message has been lost.

The point of Charles' post was to make a "joke" which argues something that nobody actually believes.

The pro-gun crowd can continue the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument all they'd like and pretend that other people actually believe that guns by themselves kill people but it's obvious that isn't the case.

But hey, it's easier to do that than respond to someone providing a counter-argument to their silly pictures, I guess.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

As I said, it is a vehicle of redirection. The point of Charles' post was not what was doing the killing but who. Yet we now have pages on the what and the initial message has been lost.

This thread was created specifically for the purpose of commenting on graphics posted in another thread. The graphic clearly has a false message in it. In this country, that which is responsible for the most deaths of this country's citizens are guns. That is a fact. All of our wars over our more than 200 year history COMBINED have not caused as much death among our citizens as firearms have done over just the last four decades. I know that gun nuts don't like to face the facts but they're the facts all the same.

The point of Charles' post was to make a "joke" which argues something that nobody actually believes.

I wouldn't be so sure that nobody actually believes that. I can think of a number of people that I am sure actually believe that falsehood.

[scotinmass 588]

It's comments like these that make rational discussion impossible. I understand why the picture thread appeals to you - you get to post pictures, regardless of fact or accuracy, and it's against the "rules" to comment on them. But then when someone does, with a logical argument, this is the response.

Congrats on being part of the problem.

It's great being a moderator. You can post stuff that supports your narrow minded views and if someone comments on it you can remove the post and say it's not allowed.