• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

A world without religion...

Free episodes:

"Technically speaking, bullets kill people, the guns are mearly a delivery system..."

Chris Rock says we need "bullet control".
 
CapnG said:
Technically speaking, bullets kill people, the guns are mearly a delivery system...

Technically, it's the loss of blood and the damage to internal organs caused by the collision of the bullets with the body, that kill people...

...how far can we go with this?

Technically, the fact that people are alive leads to their death...

...so ultimately, it's parents that kill people, because they are the one's creating life. 8)

Reminds me of something I read somewhere "The biggest killer is life - 100% fatal in all cases."
 
nikki630 said:
And yes -- I do believe that someone's behavior is altered when they have a gun in their hands. They will feel more powerful that makes them much more likely to commit homicide then if they did not have the gun and had to get an A-bomb instead.

I agree - people use guns because it empowers them.

People also justify their actions with religion - they believe they are acting on God's will - it empowers them.
 
"People kill people" and rocks, knives, gravity(pushed of a cliff or building), poison, guns...etc...can make it easier. Tools always make things easier, thats why they call them tools.

In the interest of full disclosure–I collect and own many, many firearms (most 80-130 years old) and not one of them has ever been used in anger, used illegally to threaten or make me feel like a "real" man. Guns do not change a person or make the person "feel" more powerful. The person who gets a "rush" out of owning a weapon has some deep seeded psychological issues and yes, probably should not own a firearm. Saying that a gun "empowers" person is like saying a can-opener "empowers" a person. A gun can put food on the table, and it can punch a hole in metal.. with a satisfying plink I might add.

I think there is a lot of rhetoric out there about guns, religion too. People on both sides have an axe to grind and they don't care about how many facts they have to mangle to force you to see it their way. God haters, freedom haters, Jew haters, race haters, and gun haters have one thing in common...hate. Hate, like fear, may be a great motivator but it is a horrible decision maker. Wise up, get some facts, and make a decision instead of having a reaction.

Do, I think it is too easy to get a gun in this country...yup. Do I think people have done horrible things in the name of God...you bet. Will forcibly eliminating both from our society be some sort of universal panacea...HELL NO!

Take a look at the godless, disarmed masses of the former Soviet Union, and red China. Murdered by their government in the tens of millions, in the name of building a utopian society, or more tens of millions herded into "re-education" camps to make sure their minds worked in a "proper" manner. Still, hundreds of millions more bullied, fired from their jobs, ostrasized, beaten, starved, etc...Religion is not a necessary component for brutality.

If you really want to point the finger, point it at brutality, intolerance, bigotry, hatred, jingoism, when and where they happen, not at inanimate objects or people seeking a PEACEFUL relationship with God.
 
underdog said:
"People kill people" and rocks, knives, gravity(pushed of a cliff or building), poison, guns...etc...can make it easier. Tools always make things easier, thats why they call them tools.

In the interest of full disclosure–I collect and own many, many firearms (most 80-130 years old) and not one of them has ever been used in anger, used illegally to threaten or make me feel like a "real" man. Guns do not change a person or make the person "feel" more powerful. The person who gets a "rush" out of owning a weapon has some deep seeded psychological issues and yes, probably should not own a firearm. Saying that a gun "empowers" person is like saying a can-opener "empowers" a person. A gun can put food on the table, and it can punch a hole in metal.. with a satisfying plink I might add.


Darn -- now you gone and done it. Now I have to do some research.

OK Here's an article from the New England Journal of Medicine about how owning a firearm is associated with an increased risk of suicide - http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/329/15/1084

From The American Journal of Public Health, concluding that in in areas that people own guns a inordinately large numbers of deaths are from gun related homicides. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1447364

Owning a gun does not make everyone a homicidal maniac, nor does it insure that you will commit suicide. But I think these articles shows that it does change peoples behavior.

underdog said:
Do, I think it is too easy to get a gun in this country...yup. Do I think people have done horrible things in the name of God...you bet. Will forcibly eliminating both from our society be some sort of universal panacea...HELL NO!


So, in this we agree. I have no desire to ban guns -- all I want to see are good sensible gun control laws. Of course we might disagree what those laws look like :)

I do admit that I think the world would be better off without religion, but that is unlikely. That being said I don't want to ban religion. I just want to keep it out of our government. I have no real issues with the way people want to live their lives -- see my post about the Amish above. The problem I have is when they try to make me live MY life by their rules.

underdog said:
If you really want to point the finger, point it at brutality, intolerance, bigotry, hatred, jingoism, when and where they happen, not at inanimate objects or people seeking a PEACEFUL relationship with God.


But much of that hatred is based on religious beliefs. Up above I posted a link to a Rev. Rod Parsley where he declares that America was founded in part to destroy Islam. Rev John Hagee says that Hitler was doing god's work, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell declared that 9/11 was god's punishment for gays and lesbians in our society. You can argue that these people are not really following the word of god - but many many people use them as their religious touchstone, When John Hagee calls the Catholic Church 'the great whore' , when Pat Robertson says that feminism encourages women to become lesbians and when Jerry Falwell says that Tinky Winky is gay ... their followers believe them because they believe they are speaking for god.

And lets not forget that G. W. Bush believes that god told him to invade Iraq.

But it is not just crazy preachers -- the bible teaches intolerance, most of us are familiar with 'thou shall not suffer a witch to live" Exodus 22:18, but there is more. Exodus 23:24 says that not only should you not worship other gods, but destroy thier images as well. In Exodus, Chapter 34, verses 11-14 and Leviticus, Chapter 26, verses 7-9 god's word encourages genocide. In the new testament there are these passages in Luke 19:27 Jesus calls for the death of those who do not follow him. In 1 Corinthians 10:20-21 Paul says that all gentiles are Satan worshipers. The list goes on and just a little research on the internets will reveal much more.

So you can see how in my mind religion does teach intolerance, hatred and bigotry.
 
Must... resist... urge... to... debate... aw, fuck it...

underdog said:
In the interest of full disclosure–I collect and own many, many firearms (most 80-130 years old) and not one of them has ever been used in anger, used illegally to threaten or make me feel like a "real" man. Guns do not change a person or make the person "feel" more powerful.

Yes, they can and do. The fact that it does not effect you personally has no bearing on how it effects others.

underdog said:
The person who gets a "rush" out of owning a weapon has some deep seeded psychological issues and yes, probably should not own a firearm. Saying that a gun "empowers" person is like saying a can-opener "empowers" a person.

Nobody with deep psychological problems should have access to firearms, let alone ownership. As for the empowerment thing, that's ridiculous I can't kill someone with a can opener... well, I suppose I could but I'd have to really, REALLY want to get the job done.

underdog said:
I think there is a lot of rhetoric out there about guns, religion too. People on both sides have an axe to grind and they don't care about how many facts they have to mangle to force you to see it their way. .... Wise up, get some facts, and make a decision instead of having a reaction.

Okay, FACT: amongst first-world nations where gun ownership by private citizens is limited, restricted or banned the number of gun related deaths (both criminal and accidental) is dramatically lower per capita than in first-world nations where access to firearms is more liberal.

underdog said:
Do, I think it is too easy to get a gun in this country...yup. Do I think people have done horrible things in the name of God...you bet. Will forcibly eliminating both from our society be some sort of universal panacea...HELL NO!

If you really want to point the finger, point it at brutality, intolerance, bigotry, hatred, jingoism, when and where they happen, not at inanimate objects or people seeking a PEACEFUL relationship with God.

Completely and unequivocally agreed.

I would like to add one final thought I have about guns. Guns are not tools, guns are weapons. Some people may not like to make this distinction but it needs to be made.

A hammer is a tool. I can use a hammer as a weapon but that does not make it a weapon. Why? Intent. The intention of the hammer's designer was that it be used as a tool for constructive purposes. The fact that it can be perverted in it's use has no bearing on the hammer.

A gun on the other hand was designed from the start to kill things. Like a sword, it has a singular purpose. So to gun owners I plead: stop calling them tools. It's a weapon, just admit it. I don't care if you own one, or ten or a hundred guns, it's nothing to do with me. Just be honest about what they are, okay?
 
The problem with gun ownership (which I support, but nonetheless lament the consequences...) is that people who carry them may and do at times react emotionally. In East Los Angeles and in just about any part of town, just about every day there seems to be a gun related murder on the TV news - no exageration. And in most cases, the person murdered was a stranger to the person with the gun. Unfortunately, the two people met at the wrong place and time. This could be a road rage incident, where if neither person had a gun they might just resolve their hostility with verbal insults instead of homicide. This could be at a night club where both people are drunk, and someone got shoved or felt in some way demeaned, and the gun was in the pocket. Without the gun being in that pocket, maybe a fist fight would occur, but not a homicide.

My point is that in emotional situations of hostility, having a gun is an easy way to end it, a fast way to reach "closure". It often ends an innocent young man or woman's life, and puts the other person in prison for years. WIthout the gun, in most cases both parties would survive the encounter.
 
underdog said:
In the interest of full disclosure–I collect and own many, many firearms (most 80-130 years old) and not one of them has ever been used in anger, used illegally to threaten or make me feel like a "real" man. Guns do not change a person or make the person "feel" more powerful. The person who gets a "rush" out of owning a weapon has some deep seeded psychological issues and yes, probably should not own a firearm. Saying that a gun "empowers" person is like saying a can-opener "empowers" a person.

I think you're just plain wrong.
 
CapnG said:
I would like to add one final thought I have about guns. Guns are not tools, guns are weapons. Some people may not like to make this distinction but it needs to be made.

A hammer is a tool. I can use a hammer as a weapon but that does not make it a weapon. Why? Intent. The intention of the hammer's designer was that it be used as a tool for constructive purposes. The fact that it can be perverted in it's use has no bearing on the hammer.

A gun on the other hand was designed from the start to kill things. Like a sword, it has a singular purpose. So to gun owners I plead: stop calling them tools. It's a weapon, just admit it. I don't care if you own one, or ten or a hundred guns, it's nothing to do with me. Just be honest about what they are, okay?

A very well thought out argument. Kudos to you.
 
Rick Deckard said:
CapnG said:
I would like to add one final thought I have about guns. Guns are not tools, guns are weapons. Some people may not like to make this distinction but it needs to be made.
... Just be honest about what they are, okay?

A very well thought out argument. Kudos to you.

Right on. I live in the middle of nowhere on 36 acres in a wooded area or central PA, so I have a gun. A rifle. Now, I totally agree. My gun has only one purpose. To kill things. Any argument with that is just stupid. Recreational target practice? Okay, but that's silly since there are much cheaper and simpler ways to hit targets with "stuff" - why not ring toss for that matter? Or croquet?

What can't you do with a gun? It won't drive a nail safely, it can't mix cake batter, it's a useless torch in the dark, um....no good as a tent peg....hell, we can go on forever.

What CAN you do with it? Yep, you can shoot a person or animal with it. That you CAN do. It does that very, very well. So, if you find that you need to or may need to shoot a person or animal then perhaps gun ownership is prudent for you.

Me? I have bears and cougars around and I like to keep my three kids and our dog safe. Oh, and my police department (State Police Barracks) is not exactly a speedy response in the event of burglers or some other sort of dangerous human. But I'm honest about what the darned thing is made for. It is not a swizzle stick, it is a tool used to shoot living things and kill them.
 
Rick Deckard said:
...so ultimately, it's parents that kill people, because they are the one's creating life.

Actually -- IF you believe in god -- then it is god that kills people because he created people in the first place. :)
 
nikki630 said:
Actually -- IF you believe in god -- then it is god that kills people because he created people in the first place. :)

S'funny, 'cos I did start to add stuff about 'His divine plan' to the end of the post then thought better of it...
 
Rick Deckard said:
S'funny, 'cos I did start to add stuff about 'His divine plan' to the end of the post then thought better of it...

I guess I didn't -- LOL

Oh and my response to "divine plan" or "god's plan" is
"THIS is the plan ???"
 
Wow...go away for a couple of days and people eat your lunch.

Fine, guns can be weapons...but doesn't the definition of tool still encompass that. I have guns that are little more than high powered paper punchers (feed sack rifles, gallery guns, parlor guns (built for indoor use no less),) and then I have guns that are WEAPONS, designed to kill. Lets not lump a 7.62x39mm SKS with a 30 round banana clip 3-9x scope and a hellfire rapid fire trigger in with an 1880 vintage Stevens boys rifle that shoots a single .22 short. A little perspective here please.

One is a weapon on par with some world military forces...the other is a toy that was given to a boy over 120 years ago to teach him about responsibility.

Statistics on gun use are all over the place so I don't trust them much. Usually you can find a statistic that spins any facet of gun ownership in your favor. Does the US have too much gun crime...Of course. I don't quite know why people didn't read where I thought it was too easy to get one. Easy there fellas, were just jawin' here...calm down.

I'll state very simply and slowly, again...I am for sane, well vetted gun ownership that includes training for basic proficiency, licensing, background check, and some sort of basic psych evaluation. Relicensing should occur at regular intervals with some sort of testing and basic proficiency shown.

I have in the past belonged to the NRA but have, after 10 years of membership let my membership lapse. The leadership of the organization has become outrageous fear mongers of the highest order. I do not believe or support their notion that the jack booted thugs are coming to my house to kick down my door at the rise of the 4th reich. Wayne LaPierre is a freakin' nutcase. Neither do I support the ninnies on the left who somehow think that if we got rid of all firearms, all would be right with the world and the government in all its glory and purity would somehow protect me from all harm. Yeah those government officials go to sleep every night just dreaming of ways they can help me live in harmony...not.

I guess I don't see whats so incendiary about that position.

Gun ownership is more a philosophical argument than anything that can be justified by mere statistics. Either you believe that a law abiding citizen in a free country should be able to defend themselves, their family, and their home or you don't.
 
underdog said:
Statistics on gun use are all over the place so I don't trust them much. Usually you can find a statistic that spins any facet of gun ownership in your favor. Does the US have too much gun crime...Of course. I don't quite know why people didn't read where I thought it was too easy to get one. Easy there fellas, were just jawin' here...calm down.

I don't think anyone's jumping down your throat, underdog. I'm sorry if I came off that way. As for statistics, I trust the ones I live with. Here in Canada, gun ownership is possible but difficult (difficult by American standards, anyway) so the majority of Canadians don't bother. Consequently, gun crime is minimal, almost non-existant. In fact, the more recent episodes of gun related violence in my province have been A) inter-gang related and B) employing firearms smuggled in from the US, so domestically at least, the logic would seem to follow that less guns makes for less gun crime/deaths. The proof of that pudding is in the eating.

underdog said:
I'll state very simply and slowly, again...I am for sane, well vetted gun ownership that includes training for basic proficiency, licensing, background check, and some sort of basic psych evaluation. Relicensing should occur at regular intervals with some sort of testing and basic proficiency shown.

I can't really see why anyone would disagree with that. I would add the caveat that certain types of weapons (those on the more extreme, military end) should not be available to civillians, save perhaps as decommisioned, non-functioning models for collectors.

underdog said:
Neither do I support the ninnies on the left who somehow think that if we got rid of all firearms, all would be right with the world and the government in all its glory and purity would somehow protect me from all harm. Yeah those government officials go to sleep every night just dreaming of ways they can help me live in harmony...not.

Not to be crass but in consideration of the "enemies foreign and domestic" aspect, I don't think the government which has access to god knows what advanced military hardware, is all that concerned about the .45 in John Q Public's nightstand...

underdog said:
Either you believe that a law abiding citizen in a free country should be able to defend themselves, their family, and their home or you don't.

Here's where I go "Huh?" You sound like a reasoned, rational, intelligent person underdog so understand I'm genuinely curious when I ask you to please paint me a scenario in which you feel gun ownership guarantees this protection you speak of?
 
underdog said:
I'll state very simply and slowly, again...I am for sane, well vetted gun ownership that includes training for basic proficiency, licensing, background check, and some sort of basic psych evaluation. Relicensing should occur at regular intervals with some sort of testing and basic proficiency shown.

Just for the record. I never thought you were a "gun nut'. Your post made it clear that you are for sane gun control and I think in my reply I said that I agreed with you. You sound sane and responsible about gun ownership. I just wish more people were as sane as you are about the issue.
 
Back
Top