In The Perfect World?

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Bowser, Dec 9, 2017.

  1. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    Some people are nothing more than collectors, while others enjoy the firing range. I owned a semiautomatic when I was younger, but didn't get any satisfaction from it. But that's not to say others can't.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member


    This could be argued to be a will for destruction - simply redirected at something that feels no pain.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    There's a lot of truth in that statement.

    There's something to be said for excellence in an activity, though a machine gun doesn't require much expertise. My problem with owning a rifle was that I wasn't a very good shot. Even while in the military I received the Marksman badge, which is basically a participation award. However, I could cut down anything with a M60 machine gun.

    We attended a class while in the military, and they had a machine that tracked the movement of the rifle sight right before the trigger was squeezed. It was fascinating to watch those who knew how to shoot.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    That's why I'm kind of confused by this fetish some folks have for full-auto, high-cyclic weapons, especially machine pistols like the Glock 18c - I mean, with a 1200 round per minute cyclic rate in the form factor of a pistol, you aren't hitting shit with any kind of accuracy. You are spraying and praying the bullets go in vaguely the direction you want them to go.

    Meanwhile, a double-tap with my M1911 Colt .45 would stop any probable would-be attacker cold so long as I hit center mass... and it has less chance of penetrating several walls, ricocheting around, and striking a bystander should I miss.

    Seems like a no-brainer to me, but maybe it's personal taste?
  8. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    I don't own a gun at present but have considered one since our unexpected house guest last year. As a practical matter, I would probably go with a shotgun. As for owning a high capacity gun, it's not something I would invest money, but it would be fun to take one to a range,
  9. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Only issue with shotguns is they are a bit long; depending on how tight the space is, of course. They are much easier to hit with (point in the general direction and let the spread do the work) and even if they don't kill an attacker, they aren't liable to be in much state to continue an assault after a chest or face full of buckshot.
  10. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Perfection results in stasis, IMO.

    Interestingly, in many countries weavers introduce an intentional small imperfection in their work, usually as a sign of humility.
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2017
  11. birch Valued Senior Member

    it's also the greed, over-consumption, waste and pollution. it's the lack of moderation which makes one insensitive/unappreciative to the basic necessities of life and therefore the basic and humane needs of others.

    you know that there is something evil in nature when people have a roof over their heads, food in their fridge, clothes on their back and a decent income (which includes decent disposable income) and they view it as an assault on their ego because they are not at the very top and millionaires. they will trample, use and abuse others to reach what their ego demands. that's what society teaches a form of vanity at the expense of humanity and ethics.

    this is how the average person views it in this shallow fashion, because so much of a person's social value has been taught is based on money and prestige so the motives are often disingenuous as it's not about reflecting whether what you are reaching for (and what at what and whose expense) is sound, what you really care for, interested in but just a vehicle to attain status and ego-stroking. you should try to better yourself and reach higher but there is always a reason for that and it should be reflected on as to why and how. competition just because you don't want to see another succeed or do better than you or because such and such a position or income level is considered noteworthy is not genuine.

    ambition is not always a good thing. it depends on what that ambition is for and why. but if you have to trample and abuse others to get there, then obviously it's purely ego, then it's not about your craft, passion/genuine interest or to better society.

    i learned this viewpoint from the stepfather (which also influenced my personality to a degree) but his view is not isolated, it is because the world is largely this way. he was always cutting down others, so hateful and jealous of what others have or might be better than he did or have (whether he actually cared about the 'thing' was not the point). everything was viewed as a vehicle for ego-driven motives.

    he was a very intense, hateful, megalomaniac, ungrateful and very jealous man if anyone around him even had a hint of a possible potential beyond him as he was obviously been given a horrible hand as a white male born to a upper-middle class family in a first world country (america) and had a career, decent income, two marriages, children and health. never went hungry, never been homeless, never had a serious accident or illness, never had to go to mental health, never had to suffer ptsd, never had to go to jail (like i did for trespassing as a vagrant once homeless) . no one has ever actually gotten in his way of attaining anything or really abused him. that's just fuking terrible, isn't it?

    he obviously has good reason as he has suffered so much to have been such a jealous/envious, narcissistic, megalomaniac sociopath, right?

    he had to make sure to crush, cripple and abuse anyone that he remotely felt jealous of, if he could or speak badly about them if they did better than him or were more successful.

    now, he seems to have cooled off and be comforted knowing that he gets full disability/free money from the government (va benefits that he actually does not deserve since he is a real criminal) and true to a hypocrites values being a republican voter that rails against the democrats, communism and any other stereotypical soundbyte, he further doesn't deserve it because it was the democrats that are responsible for his benefits that he denigrated all his life. and also, his daughter is very successful now so he can be proud of that.

    pay attention: this is the most hypocritical part. it was my mother who helped put in the benefits for the stepfather when she learned i was getting something from the veterans administration ( he gets full, mine is partial/minimal to survive) out of spite/competition because, again, they can't stand knowing someone else may have some benefit they don't have. jealousy again. she made sure to tell me to not say anything about him to the VA defending him 'because it was a long time ago' when she learned i was going there for counseling.

    THIS IS THE MOST TELLING PART: the reason why they are hypocrites being conservative republicans is THAT I WOULDN'T HAVE NEEDED these benefits had they not abused and undercutted/sabotaged me every way they could in the first place! but their need to oppress, use, abuse and keep another down because of ego or jealousy or just callousness was more important to them. i would have been healthy, normal and strong enough to take care of myself without any aid had they been decent people.

    conservative republicans are diabolical devils in disguise!!! they are not trustworthy and are absolutely complete corrupt hypocrites and liars which blame and project what they do (problems they create through their sins ) onto liberals and make them take the blame!! and just like a twisted, manipulative liar have the gall to pompously rail against the poor and why they don't pull themselves up by the boot-straps. that's their game!!
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2018
  12. birch Valued Senior Member

    why the whole system makes me angry is because when i was homeless, it was the liberals/democrats who were reaching out to the homeless to help, even the homeless trump supporters and those that vote against themselves which benefit from liberal's fighting for them. that's because it takes a real heart to do so. it would be like pulling teeth to get conservatives to help. if there were some, i didn't run into them because they must have been few and far between.

    this is the whole ploy and mindset of conservatives: like any animal they can identify eachother and with them it's primarily dependent on two aspects - egoism and level of cruelty/inhumanity toward others. that is how they identify who to rally with in order to have the good life by oppressing and using others. that whole pro-life is part of it as human misery does not bother them as they want a slave class.

    you can also surmise with most churches and their so-called charity which will usually be petty along the lines of a church food bank of canned goods the members donate once in awhile. they don't want people dead necessarily but they do want a class to be perpetually desperate and to use though.

    they are also not true humanitarians and i can also use the example of my own family members who are religious and help others (because it looks good) and they mostly like to help only other conservatives, but when it hit close to home, they did not want to or turn a blind eye. that is how conservatives are image-driven and fake.

    conservatives want to keep the status quo of top-down, trickle-down economics going even if it's abject misery and suffering of others as long as they benefit. they don't evaluate the whole structure honestly to see how it can be overhauled and improved in actual fairness and betterment. they also, contrary to their shpiel, don't care about qualifications as they rail against communism and socialism because they will support, hire and promote their own, even if less qualified over a liberal.

    furthermore, conservatives generally are not the most intelligent because it takes true objectivity and less bias to develop a true intellect. they use liberals's painstaking and meticulous study and expertise and the resulting info to twist it to their benefit as well as their technical contributions/innovations as if they are in charge and should be master of it all.
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2018

Share This Page