View Single Post
Old 11-12-18, 07:01 AM   #23
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,447
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

The confusuon argument describes a situation where everything turns worse. But somehow it is not concerned abut the fact that a gunman starting to run amok itself already is a worst case scenario as well.



Can it get worse than a wolf going rabid inside a fllock of unarmed sheep? Or could it be even worse when sheep have fangs and claws as well, at leats have some of these huge wolf dogs that even wolves scare away from?


WThe confusion argument silently takes it for granted that the losses suffered from the gunman spraying bullets is an acceptable price for nt allowing the confusion of a group of victims shooting back and maybe - AND MAYBE NOT !! - lock onto the wrong transponder signals, so to speak.


And then, I would not expect that in a disco or bar EVERYBODY carries a fireweapon. the number of people beign armed, would be limited. Many ladies would not carry at all, and only some of the men. Also, those in the vicinity of the shooter starting a frenzy will react earlier than those at the very other side of the bar, hall, room.


However I would not trust (all) Americans (=every human being) to be panic-proof and reasonable, one should not take that for granted. One can only influence the chances for the better, the probability: by training, preparation, a need for license qulifications. this is no fail-safe approach, that is clear. But it shifts the chances in faovur of the future victims.



The many shooting incidents there are now, to me ARE the worst case already. Worse it hardly can get.


I u-turned on these gun law issues in the past couple of years. And in this case I must support August's views on it. Turning the population into a helpless, depending flock of harmless sheep, is not the way I support. But this is what states want. If state claims a monopole for violence, then it has the obligation to protect citizens and to compensate for the gap that the absence of self-defence capoacity of citizens leaves behind. It is obvious that sate cannot fulfill thisobligation, and that tibgs slowly shift for the worse, not ust in Aemrica. It will get worse in the future, for financial reaosns. and that is why I put the legitimacy of state monopoles for force and violence into question. State breaks the contract and so cannot expect or demand that citizens nevertheless should obey it.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote