^This
By your logic, Blacks should be barred from purchasing guns because as a group they are far more likely to commit crimes.
no no, case by case!!! just be really really suspicious due to their blackness and do an extensive background check of every black person and evaluate their threat level and then determine if they’re eligible for their constitutional rights!
Please be trollin. facepalm
Garthbartin, you wanna talk fallacies? I didn’t wanna point it out, lest I appeal to fallacy myself, but it seems like you won’t give in. You are using these following logical fallacies: the base rate fallacy, appeal to probability, and also correlation does not imply causation.
All we need now is a proof by example and we’ve got you labeled as a dipshit.
A: murder occurs in correlation with schizophrenia
B: therefore, schizophrenics kill people.
:fffuuu:
Go ask your English teacher to teach you more about things that aren’t English. After that maybe your P.E. teacher can tell you about space travel.
But nietz, people use logical fallacies to make laws all the time, why should this be any different
you are correct, intooblivion. i am defeated.
…
welp, off to smash the state!
I will just say one thing here: Schizophrenia is a phycological disorder, and thus is on a scale. On the more extreme ends of the scale the person becomes more and more dangerous to society and should be barred from certain activities, only because of the high likely hood of violent actions. That said, those people are a tiny amount of schizophrenics.
JESUS CHRIST!!! THIS THING IS STILL GOING ON!?!?!?!? Can’t we all just, get along?
No. How can you not have realized that?
Yes I have realized it. The last 9 pages have pretty much proved it without a doubt. But it is a comforting thought, thinking that we can all stop complaining about each other.
The original means of this thread was is to honor those that lost their lives in the shooting, not to get political and bitch about who’s right and who’s wrong. And whether skitzos are a threat. And if black people should be evaluated for safety reasons. You can complain about what I have said, and I won’t care. I am just stating what this thread has strayed from. And what we should BE on.
I feel sorry for the people who have to suffer through this horrible tragedy, but shame on all the politicians for using this as an excuse to bash each other.
The same applies to certain forum members by the way. How dare you exploit this tragedy to attack other forumites. Its terrible and you are all terrible people, and should be disregarded from now on. [color=black]Protip: Irony
My true logic:
A: murder occurs in correlation with schizophrenia
B: on AVERAGE a schizophrenic is more likely to kill someone than an average non schizophrenic.
The fallacy you are using is called the strawman tactic; you’ve oversimplified my argument to make it sound silly.
This analogy completely fails because there is nothing about your race that causes violence. Crime rates among blacks may be higher simply because a higher percentage of blacks than whites live in violent ghettos and there actually IS a correlation between living in a violent ghetto and committing a homicide.
A better analogy would be someone living in a city with very high crime rates is much more likely to commit a crime than someone living in an average or low crime rate city, so we should ban all firearms in ghettos with high crime rates. This, however, is still not a perfect analogy as banning guns in violent cities just isn’t nearly as practical as banning guns from schizophrenics.
And the case by case idea is still perfectly legitimate, Fancy Pants simply has a schizophrenic 
paranoia towards the government. And it wouldn’t even be the government running the per case diagnosis of too dangerous to own a gun. It’d be psychiatrists. And already many things rely on a psychiatrist’s evaluation, like entry into the military, or if you display mental instability and fail a psychiatrist’s evaluation you get kicked out of college (Like what almost happened to the AZ shooter). The only problem with this system is it has been FAR too lenient.
If you guys really won’t go for banning firearms from dangerous people then how about simply banning handguns and rifles not designed for hunting? That isn’t even violating any rights seeing as the constitution said people solely had the right to bare (fuck I’m probably using the wrong bare aren’t I?) arms, and semi automatic weapons let alone semi automatic weapons that fit in your pocket didn’t exist in those days. Handguns account for a massive percentage of homicides and are very little use as a sport weapon. Also, they aren’t even particularly useful for protection as very few people bring guns with them for protection and in a house a shotgun is a much better for protection.
Also, fun only slightly related fact I just stumbled across on pbs’s site:
“Number of federal safety standards that apply to the manufacture of teddy bears: 4
Number of federal safety standards that apply to the manufacture of firearms: 0”
url=‘https://farmgirlsworld.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/marinara-sauce.jpg’[/url]
It made me lol.
You’re missing the point. Schizophrenia is a psychological condition, and, as such, has many different intensities. Most people who have it can act fairly normally, and aren’t a threat to others. Some extreme cases, however, lend the sufferer to violent acts and should be regulated. You simply cannot lump such a vague group as “schizophrenics” together, just as you cannot lump a vague group, such as “blacks” together.
Let’s see if we replace a word with a phrase:
A: murder occurs in correlation with black people
B: on AVERAGE a black person is more likely to kill someone than an average non-black person.
:fffuuu:
That’s the point here, garth, and what you’re insinuating.
Sorry, left some of it out. I strawman’d my own argument XD. The reason schizophrenics have a higher rate of crime is because a large portion of them are delusional, especially when not taking medication. And many have paranoid delusions. So delusions+paranoia can very often lead to violence. Paranoid and delusional people should be kept from owning guns. The statistics of higher crime rates is simply a way of proving the connection between schizophrenia and violent delusions. The reason blacks have a higher rate of crime is because many blacks are raised in violent ghettos, so the population of the the violent ghettos should be restricted, not blacks.
Which is why the case by case system is ideal. It avoids lumping any group. However, if the case by case system is not feasible, which fancy pants has already told us with her infinite wisdom that it is not, then the next best thing would be to simply ban firearms from all schizophrenics. high functioning schizophrenics that were unable to purchase firearms would be a small sacrifice to stop over 1600 deaths a year. And in addition to that, if only handguns were banned for schizophrenics that would still be nearly as effective and would be a lot less restrictive to schizophrenics that wanted to own a gun for legitimate purposes.
And the schizophrenics-black analogy still does not work as violence IS a fairly rare but still present symptom of schizophrenia however violence IS NOT a symptom of being black.
Once again, THE CASE BY CASE SYSTEM IS PREFERABLE, lumping shizophrenics together would simply be the back up plan.
No. It’s not a backup plan at all. It’s just flat out bigotry.
It would save lives at the small cost of some high functioning schizophrenics not being able to own guns. It’s backed up by statistics to so you can’t claim it’s a stereotype or something similar. Are you seriously claiming a small number of people’s right to own weapons is more important then over 1600 lives? Let me tell you, IT’S NOT. It’s like the justice system. No matter how perfect we make our courts there will be mistrials and innocent people will be jailed. But does that mean we should simply give up and let everyone free? The innocent people were an unfortunate unavoidable sacrifice.
I think that we should just lock up everyone into individual cells so that we can ensure the survival of the species. No one killing anyone else.
If one isn’t doing something wrong, then you don’t have the right to reduce their rights simply because they’re a member of a specified group.
I love how he keeps bringing up that violent areas should have a ban on guns
that’s just as bad… deny someone their rights for living somewhere?
who was it that said something along the lines of “freedom should never be sacrificed for safety”?