Comments on: Love and mental health are bigger issues than gun control

By: Steve Shipley

Steve Shipley — Sat, 15 Dec 2012 07:05:12 +0000

Philby, BTW, we did put considered thought into using (or not) the Picture on guns, pencils, cars and spoons, but decided to use it as it did depict logically a view point we have not seen clearly before. I would never use that picture on its own to make a point, but we decided to use it to try to refocus the arguments from the 'device' to the intent behind using it and how misguided that can be towards evil (intentionally or not as in the case of the drunk driving a car).It does run the risk that if people only look at the picture and do not read the post, they could think we are pro-gun when we are clearly anti-gun. We will discuss and may consider removing the picture if it draws too many inappropriate responses which are pro-gun.

By: Steve Shipley

Steve Shipley — Sat, 15 Dec 2012 06:56:22 +0000

I understand your point about the design intent of guns, pencils, cars, and spoons Philby, but my main point is about the focus on trying to improve peoples relationships and mental health. You have underscored my point about focusing on the guns. I am clearly against guns and make that point, but that is clearly not enough to stop things like this from happening. From the little we have seen so far, Adam Lanza was a very troubled individual with a tough relationship with his mother.I am only asking people to look at the issues here and the facts. The focus on guns will help, but not be sufficient to stop insane violence. I am just trying to bring light to the other relevant issues at play here.I respect your point, and would clearly take this post down if I was convinced it was hurting the arguments, but I have taken a strong anti-gun approach and I have asked people to look at the mental health and emotional issues involved.I do take and support your last point on guns being anti-social and designed for killing and therefore strengthening the case for stronger and more restrictive gun control, but complete banning of guns or other weapons (or non-weapons such as hammers, golf clubs, etc) that can be used for killing would only allow evil to run rampant and win. There will always be a significant number of people with an intent to kill and they will not follow complete bans anyway. Therefore, some counter balancing of that must occur. Of course, how to legislate and decide who's hands to put guns into (policemen, armed forces, air marshals, etc?) is the crux of the issue. For example, guns have been helpful to thin out the deer populations in certain areas to provide for a more humane way for them to die than starving to death, so I would advocate there there are a small set of situations where guns are used in a beneficial way, and minimally as defense against evil or some natural danger.Working through and legislating this is all very difficult, but again my point is that focusing only on the guns is not sufficient to avoid tragic situations like what occurred today in CT. We need to be aware of and focus on some other issues also.

By: Philby

Philby — Sat, 15 Dec 2012 06:28:51 +0000

It would be better to take this post down. But, if you're going to leave it up, a brief comment on the logic of the guns, pencils, cars, spoons poster:Guns are designed for shooting bullets to kill;Pencils are designed for writing or drawing;Cars are designed for driving;Spoons are designed for eating.It would be perfectly logical for a society to decide that one of these activities is antisocial and, therefore, that the implement designed for that purpose should be banned.