How Recreational Outrage Culture Fans the Flames of Hate

Discussion of current events
Post Reply
User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1220
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

How Recreational Outrage Culture Fans the Flames of Hate

Post by SteveFoerster » Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:52 am

Accomplices to Mass Murder: How Recreational Outrage Culture Fans the Flames of Hate

http://www.zenruption.com/politicsarene ... es-of-hate

Or, as I'd put it, with enough snowflakes do you end up with an avalanche?
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 1072
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: How Recreational Outrage Culture Fans the Flames of Hate

Post by Milo » Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:47 pm

Yeah let's talk about anything but gun control.

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1220
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: How Recreational Outrage Culture Fans the Flames of Hate

Post by SteveFoerster » Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:27 am

Milo wrote:
Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:47 pm
Yeah let's talk about anything but gun control.
Except that the people who say that almost never want to talk about why it actually doesn't work.

I say "almost" because there are a few notable intellectually honest exceptions, e.g.:

I used to think gun control was the answer. My research told me otherwise. | The Washington Post

With that out of the way, did you have anything to say on the actual topic?
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 1072
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: How Recreational Outrage Culture Fans the Flames of Hate

Post by Milo » Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:17 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:27 am
Milo wrote:
Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:47 pm
Yeah let's talk about anything but gun control.
Except that the people who say that almost never want to talk about why it actually doesn't work.

I say "almost" because there are a few notable intellectually honest exceptions, e.g.:

I used to think gun control was the answer. My research told me otherwise. | The Washington Post

With that out of the way, did you have anything to say on the actual topic?
As for the article in the OP, these sort of 'end times decline of moral society' screeds can be found in writings going back to the birth of history. They are uniformly useless in terms of either describing or proposing solutions, so is this one.

"take a good look at yourself, and ask ‘Am I fanning the flames of hate?’

Well with that nobody will ever die again! Nobody is better equipped to advise on policy solutions than a "model". Worth noting that Ms Airbrush asserts that "The worst mass shooting our country has ever seen happened last night in Nevada." Which contradicts the other article you posted which says "It depends."

And as for the WaPo, NRA astroturf article above, I'll just pluck one of the stupid assertions out of it.

"Two-thirds of gun deaths in the United States every year are suicides. Almost no proposed restriction would make it meaningfully harder for people with guns on hand to use them."

Well, yes, gun control that would not control guns would not help with gun control! But even then she feels compelled to qualify it "Almost". So in fact what she says is there is a solution. Yet for some reason the restrictions that WOULD work are not explained.

Ok, one more.

"I found out that no gun owner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon. It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, a rocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos."

What classifications are not invented? And if nobody buys assault weapons, because anyone can just snap any gun together from any assortment of guns, why are there so many gun sellers advertising assault weapons?



Is it because they want to sell to nobody?

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 1673
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: How Recreational Outrage Culture Fans the Flames of Hate

Post by Doc » Fri Oct 06, 2017 2:52 am

Milo wrote:
Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:47 pm
Yeah let's talk about anything but gun control.
OK

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/20 ... icans.html
CBS fires vice president who said Vegas victims didn't deserve sympathy because country music fans 'often are Republican'
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” … George Orwell

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1220
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: How Recreational Outrage Culture Fans the Flames of Hate

Post by SteveFoerster » Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:20 am

Milo wrote:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:17 pm
As for the article in the OP, these sort of 'end times decline of moral society' screeds can be found in writings going back to the birth of history. They are uniformly useless in terms of either describing or proposing solutions, so is this one.

"take a good look at yourself, and ask ‘Am I fanning the flames of hate?’

Well with that nobody will ever die again!
The thing is, what she's saying applies to those on both sides of an increasingly polarised society. That you would respond with puerile ridicule rather than a counterargument only proves her point.
Nobody is better equipped to advise on policy solutions than a "model". Worth noting that Ms Airbrush asserts that "The worst mass shooting our country has ever seen happened last night in Nevada." Which contradicts the other article you posted which says "It depends."
It's true that Las Vegas wasn't the worst, but only the worst in modern times. That's an error on her part, okay, but not one that has to do with her argument.

By the way, she has a doctorate in business, so when you focus on that she's also a model, and call her "Ms Airbrush", that's what misogyny looks like.
And as for the WaPo, NRA astroturf article above, I'll just pluck one of the stupid assertions out of it.
Stop right there. The NRA had nothing whatsoever to do with that article; and it's not astroturf, Libresco's story is genuine. You just 100% made both of those up.
"Two-thirds of gun deaths in the United States every year are suicides. Almost no proposed restriction would make it meaningfully harder for people with guns on hand to use them."

Well, yes, gun control that would not control guns would not help with gun control! But even then she feels compelled to qualify it "Almost". So in fact what she says is there is a solution. Yet for some reason the restrictions that WOULD work are not explained.
I suppose she was wrong to use a qualifier, because I can't think of any such restriction that would be effective.
Ok, one more.

"I found out that no gun owner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon. It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, a rocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos."

What classifications are not invented? And if nobody buys assault weapons, because anyone can just snap any gun together from any assortment of guns, why are there so many gun sellers advertising assault weapons?



Is it because they want to sell to nobody?
She's saying is that because of the modular nature of rifles, the definition isn't useful in terms of legislation.

Either way, all you did there was try to paint the article as something it's not and quibble about her language usage, and you did that because you know the statistics don't support your preferred approach against private gun ownership.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

Post Reply