• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Reports: 4 shot, hostages taken in Binghamton, NY

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
And for your review Captain, another, explaining how I feel. I hope this ends your dishonesty once and for all here. this is a serious issue to me and your dishonest tactic to bait me with misrepresentations of my point are rather irksome. I expect better from you.



On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs - Dave Grossman
Click to expand...

I read the article. If what the article says is similar to what you said, then my accusation of what your post meant is right on target. Further, the author contradicts himself, many times, and I reject his premise as simplistic and faulty.

And I am still waiting for you to clarify your post. If the above article is your attempt, then, as I said, my accusation is dead on.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Another one. Did you take my position as a whole?


Nope.


Show me in what you quoted where I stated one who chooses not to have a gun is meek.


My position is, and I will quote from an essay I linked:


"The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door. "


On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs - Dave Grossman



We teach our society to be meek in the face of the wolf. To wait for the coming slaughter. .What other way can you explain 14 peole being shot and killed by one man and two pistols?


The gun is irrellevant.


5th time I explained my position.
Click to expand...

As I said in my most recent post, if this is your position, my accusation stands. You are accusing those who do not carry a gun of disliking law enforcement and of being meek and teaching society to be meek.

I reject this position as fallacious and of you of having zero evidence of it.
 
Goshin said:
Dave Grossman is not one of my personal favorites; a lot of his work on the 'psychology of killing' is questionable. However, while I think it overly simplistic in some ways, his thesis On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs is a reasonably good way to get people to understand why some of us are the way we are.

I had a relative who didn't understand my position on guns and my concern with self-protection at all. I had her read Grossman's sheepdog analogy and her eyes were opened. Her problem, and the reason I made her uncomfortable, is that to the "sheep", a sheepdog looks a lot like a wolf. That essay helped her understand me better and to close that rift between us. It's worth reading.

We don't all have to be sheepdogs, but it would be nice if those who choose not to be, understood those who feel we have to be. Those of you who choose to go unarmed should not fear those of us who are honest citizens and who do go legally armed...we're not your enemy and wish you no harm; the day might come when you find us to be a valuable friend. We tend to have a strong sense of responsibility to protect others, and we just might be the one who steps between you and a dangerous criminal.

G.
Click to expand...

And part of my rejection of Grossman's article is that his claim that "sheep" fear "sheepdogs" is fallacious. Few "sheep" fear "sheepdogs". This is spin created by the "sheepdogs". If the sheep fear anything it is the wolves that pretend to be sheepdogs, and the teeth the sheepdogs have. As far as most sheepdogs go, Grossman is completely mistaken.
 
Goobieman said:
None of this changes the fact that his argument to said effect has been previously debunked.
Click to expand...


Show us where he previously made the argument to RH. Or will you continue to re-write his post?
 
FlyOnTheWall said:
I have read your posts, and your position appears to be you are struggling to understand why so many people choose to hide from a gunman instead of fighting, and that America as a whole has been conditioned to be meek, or docile. You may be correct, however the flip side of that coin would lead to a more violent nation than what we already have.
Click to expand...

Thank you..... You are fairly new here and you got it pretty easy, clearly showing the intent of others I have long known here as less than noble.

However please read:

On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs - Dave Grossman

There would be no more "violent" of a society, there would be a safer more peaceful one.


I am not advocating more "wolves" we all need to become a little more "sheepdoggish".


I said you were drawing conclusions, which is accurate. I do not understand why you have taken offense to others interpretation of your comments. Apparently you do believe that America is full of meek wimps. You shouldn't have to defend your position unless you really don't believe it.
Click to expand...



:lol:


Anyway. The offense I take is the dishonest hammering of a position I do not hold. I clearly explained, linked articles, and a you tube explaining my positions. As of your post, not one of these posters even attempted to address any of my further explainations and instead insist on attacking what they want me to have said, not what I had said.


out of the three, there is only one of them that I find irksome that he took that route. the other two you will come to learn are rather, well, I'll just let you figure it out. :lol:
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I will read this later, since I must get back to work. I would appreciate if you would not make ridiculous claims about my honesty. It is not I who has refused to clarify his post.
Click to expand...




So lets review.


3 or 4 explaination of my statement

a you tube about a lady with said "sheepdog" mindset

And a link to an article outlining the mentality I am refering to.



How much more clarification do you need? If you were being "honest" in your attempts to bait me, then I must question your intelligence. Since I know you are intelligent, I am only left with you willfully choosing to ignore my point to bait me, and that my friend is a dishonest tactic.
 
Goshin said:
Dave Grossman is not one of my personal favorites; a lot of his work on the 'psychology of killing' is questionable. However, while I think it overly simplistic in some ways, his thesis On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs is a reasonably good way to get people to understand why some of us are the way we are.

I had a relative who didn't understand my position on guns and my concern with self-protection at all. I had her read Grossman's sheepdog analogy and her eyes were opened. Her problem, and the reason I made her uncomfortable, is that to the "sheep", a sheepdog looks a lot like a wolf. That essay helped her understand me better and to close that rift between us. It's worth reading.

We don't all have to be sheepdogs, but it would be nice if those who choose not to be, understood those who feel we have to be. Those of you who choose to go unarmed should not fear those of us who are honest citizens and who do go legally armed...we're not your enemy and wish you no harm; the day might come when you find us to be a valuable friend. We tend to have a strong sense of responsibility to protect others, and we just might be the one who steps between you and a dangerous criminal.

G.
Click to expand...




I fully agree.


Thank you for demonstrating real quick, the understanding of the mindest I was trying to discuss.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
As I said in my most recent post, if this is your position, my accusation stands. You are accusing those who do not carry a gun of disliking law enforcement and of being meek and teaching society to be meek.

I reject this position as fallacious and of you of having zero evidence of it.
Click to expand...



Show me where I or this article states "not carrying a gun makes you meek"? This is the dishonesty I am talking about captain.


And to simplisticly say "I dont like the article its poo" is not intelligent debate.

Why do you disagree with the article and my ACTUAL position?


Lets try to move this debate into a realm where we can beneficially understand each other, and put the games away.


I await your response
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
And part of my rejection of Grossman's article is that his claim that "sheep" fear "sheepdogs" is fallacious. Few "sheep" fear "sheepdogs". This is spin created by the "sheepdogs". If the sheep fear anything it is the wolves that pretend to be sheepdogs, and the teeth the sheepdogs have. As far as most sheepdogs go, Grossman is completely mistaken.
Click to expand...



:lol:


"The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence"


"The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed."



So you "reject" him, then paraphrase him in agreement. I am a little confused here captain. Which is it?
 
SkyCore said:
Show us where he previously made the argument to RH.
Click to expand...
I dont need to.

He has made the 'responsible gun owners arent willing to contribute to solving the problem' argument before, and it has been debunked (see: the link I posted)

He's trying to make it again; I pointed out that it has been debunked.
 
Goobieman said:
I dont need to.

He has made the 'responsible gun owners arent willing to contribute to solving the problem' argument before, and it has been debunked (see: the link I posted)

He's trying to make it again; I pointed out that it has been debunked.
Click to expand...


No, for what, the second or third time...he specifically addressed a poster and not all gun owners. Or are you saying all gun owners are responsible and work towards solutions beyond the end of the barrel?
 
SkyCore said:
No, for what, the second or third time...he specifically addressed a poster and not all gun owners
Click to expand...
You don't have to like my response, but you DO have to accept that it IS my response.

If you don't -- well, I don't really care. MY post was directed at WR, and HE knows that I am right.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Thank you..... You are fairly new here and you got it pretty easy, clearly showing the intent of others I have long known here as less than noble.
Click to expand...
You are welcome. This is my forth post, so I would say I am brand spanking new here ;)

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
However please read:

On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs - Dave Grossman
Click to expand...
I read it and found it to be a rather humdrum piece of work with little thought other than the author's acknowledgment that he believes he is a protector because he carries a gun. I don't believe the guy because I believe that most people who carry a gun do it more for self protection than the protection of others. He immediately states that there is nothing wrong with being a sheep, then criticizes and belittles sheep throughout the rest of the piece. Basically, the author claims that he has a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens which makes him a protector (sheepdog). What happens when he loses his love for his fellow citizen? He becomes a wolf. There is a thin line between sheepdog and wolf, and that is the heart of the gun debate. People can snap at any time.

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
There would be no more "violent" of a society, there would be a safer more peaceful one.


I am not advocating more "wolves" we all need to become a little more "sheepdoggish".
Click to expand...
I never said you were. By "sheepdoggish", you mean we all should carry a gun, correct?








Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Anyway. The offense I take is the dishonest hammering of a position I do not hold. I clearly explained, linked articles, and a you tube explaining my positions. As of your post, not one of these posters even attempted to address any of my further explainations and instead insist on attacking what they want me to have said, not what I had said.


out of the three, there is only one of them that I find irksome that he took that route. the other two you will come to learn are rather, well, I'll just let you figure it out. :lol:
Click to expand...

Here are the names of the dead sheep:

Parveen Nln Ali, 26, Binghamton, Pakistan

Dolores Yigal, 53, Binghamton, Philippines

Marc Henry Bernard, 44, Endicott, Haiti

Maria Sonia Bernard, 46, Endicott, Haiti

Li Guo, 47, Binghamton, China

Hong Xiu Mao, 35, Greene, China

Lan Ho, 39, Binghamton, Vietnam

Hai Hong Zhong, 54, Endwell, China

Maria Zobniw, 60, Binghamton, U.S.

Roberta Bobby King, 72, Binghamton, U.S.

Almir O. Alves, 43, Unknown, Brazil

Jiang Ling, 22, Endicott, China

Layla Khalil, 57, Binghamton, Iraq

Did you really expect a bunch of foreigners to fight off a wolf carrying a couple guns? Did you expect a 72 year old female teacher to take out the wolf? You accused these people of allowing themselves to be killed when in reality they were not yet American citizens and legally could not carry a gun, except perhaps to hunt. Furthermore, you took offense to words like "hid" and "cower", when those were the words used by the writer and may not have even been the case.
Thirty-seven people in all made it out of the building, including 26 who hid in the boiler room in the basement, cowering there for three hours while police methodically searched the building and tried to determine whether the gunman was still alive and whether he was holding any hostages, Zikuski said.
Click to expand...
Don't you suppose the police (sheepdogs) told the sheep in the basement to stay there while they looked for the shooter?
 
FlyOnTheWall said:
What happens when he loses his love for his fellow citizen? He becomes a wolf. There is a thin line between sheepdog and wolf, and that is the heart of the gun debate. People can snap at any time.
Click to expand...
Yes. And this is why it is imposible to stop people like those who usually commit shootings like this from getting a gun -- at least so long as you continue to respect the 2nd amendment, anyway.
 
Goobieman said:
Yes. And this is why it is imposible to stop people like those who usually commit shootings like this from getting a gun -- at least so long as you continue to respect the 2nd amendment, anyway.
Click to expand...
Great.... It is impossible, even if everybody was locked and loaded. The wolves would then carry some sort of gassing agent to stop the militant sheep before leading them to the slaughter. Then the argument would be that the sheep do not carry gas masks and let themselves die because they were not prepared. :mrgreen:
 
FlyOnTheWall said:
Great.... It is impossible, even if everybody was locked and loaded. The wolves would then carry some sort of gassing agent to stop the militant sheep before leading them to the slaughter. Then the argument would be that the sheep do not carry gas masks and let themselves die because they were not prepared. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
Its hard to argue that when confronted in a situation like what we've seen recently that you are better off without a weapon than with a weapon.

Anyone can 'just snap'. Given that, there's no way to prevent people that 'just snap' from getting guns and shooting up the local BK.
 
Goobieman said:
Its hard to argue that when confronted in a situation like what we've seen recently that you are better off without a weapon than with a weapon.

Anyone can 'just snap'. Given that, there's no way to prevent people that 'just snap' from getting guns and shooting up the local BK.
Click to expand...
I was referring to the sheep-sheepdog-wolf tale in describing a sheepdog snapping and becoming a wolf. The point is how can we trust a sheepdog who snaps?
 
Goobieman said:
IIRC, you argument to this effect has been thoroughly debunked.
Click to expand...

It is not possible to "debunk" sound reason. As exerts in the ownership and use of weapons, gun owners should be in the forefront of the effort to prevent unstable individuals from aquiring firearms. There is nothing in that statement to "debunk", so either respond to it or slither away.
 
FlyOnTheWall said:
I was referring to the sheep-sheepdog-wolf tale in describing a sheepdog snapping and becoming a wolf. The point is how can we trust a sheepdog who snaps?
Click to expand...
Clearly, we cannot.
Which, of course, is why the police should be disarmed.
 
Goobieman said:
Clearly, we cannot.
Which, of course, is why the police should be disarmed.
Click to expand...
I am advocating for nobody to be disarmed. I am merely criticizing the sheep/wolf analogy and the remark that these people were sheep and died due their own meekness.
 
Goobieman said:
Your position was shown to be unsound.

Disagree? Then defend it from those that criticized it.


IIRC, when your poistion to this effect was challenged, you whined and cried and ran away.
Click to expand...

I don't cry, and I obviously haven't run away. You, on the other hand, constantly produce crap instead of response. For example:


Quote:
This is my position...that gun owners should take the lead in controlling firearms.

3rd time:
The firearms community is VERY active in this.
That their activity doesnt manifest itself in a manner you agree with doesnt change that.

Your entire position here is based on a false dichotomy -- that YOUR way is the only way someone can "take the lead in controlling firearms".

And so, you have been proven wrong. You can run away now.
Click to expand...

The "firearms community" does nothing regarding the acquisition of weapons by unstable individuals except defend their right to own them. When pressed, they retreat to the argument of a "slippery slope" whereby any control at all will lead to confiscation of all firearms, and then they talk about how cars kill more people than guns.
You have not answered the question, and your obviously limited ability to comprehend the issue indicates you never will.
 
WillRockwell said:
I don't cry, and I obviously haven't run away.
Click to expand...
The 2nd post I quoted says dofferently, as you did exactly that:

I took the time to explain my position in a mature and reasonable manner, and receive nothing but ridicule. **** you all.
Click to expand...

The "firearms community" does nothing regarding the acquisition of weapons by unstable individuals except defend their right to own them
Click to expand...
You're sumply restating your premise.
Restating your premise does nothing to support that premise.
Thus, your premise, based on the previously illustrated false dichotomy, remains unsound.

You may run away now.
 
Last edited:
FlyOnTheWall said:
You are welcome. This is my forth post, so I would say I am brand spanking new here ;)


I read it and found it to be a rather humdrum piece of work with little thought other than the author's acknowledgment that he believes he is a protector because he carries a gun. I don't believe the guy because I believe that most people who carry a gun do it more for self protection than the protection of others. He immediately states that there is nothing wrong with being a sheep, then criticizes and belittles sheep throughout the rest of the piece. Basically, the author claims that he has a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens which makes him a protector (sheepdog). What happens when he loses his love for his fellow citizen? He becomes a wolf. There is a thin line between sheepdog and wolf, and that is the heart of the gun debate. People can snap at any time.
Click to expand...


It is indeed a simple written piece. And I think that is the beauty of it. And no you are wrong. There is a big difference between the sheepdog and the wolf.

One is predator, the other is protector. And to state that because someone might do something, we need to ban guns punishes the innocent, not the guilty.


I never said you were. By "sheepdoggish", you mean we all should carry a gun, correct?
Click to expand...

Not at all. I keep trying to explain this as well. the mindset. not the tool.

Tell me you understand or do you need me to explain further?


Here are the names of the dead sheep:

Parveen Nln Ali, 26, Binghamton, Pakistan

Dolores Yigal, 53, Binghamton, Philippines

Marc Henry Bernard, 44, Endicott, Haiti

Maria Sonia Bernard, 46, Endicott, Haiti

Li Guo, 47, Binghamton, China

Hong Xiu Mao, 35, Greene, China

Lan Ho, 39, Binghamton, Vietnam

Hai Hong Zhong, 54, Endwell, China

Maria Zobniw, 60, Binghamton, U.S.

Roberta Bobby King, 72, Binghamton, U.S.

Almir O. Alves, 43, Unknown, Brazil

Jiang Ling, 22, Endicott, China

Layla Khalil, 57, Binghamton, Iraq

Did you really expect a bunch of foreigners to fight off a wolf carrying a couple guns?
Click to expand...


What does the fact they are foreigners have to do with anything? furthermore no, I don't expect the 1st "foreigner" to fight back, I expect the 2nd one to, then the 3rd, then the 4th, etc....

to get up to 14 dead without fighting back? What value do we place on our lives these days. This is a tragedy, but deeper into this story is the fact that we have become all too dependant on others for our very lives.

I highlighted several seemingly people of moderate age who could have acted.... Imagine if the mindset was to fight instead of "hide" and "Cower"? gun or no gun, we may have had less dead.

See the youtube video I posted for the mindset I am talking about. The gun is irrellevant in deciding what to do when you find yourself in a gun fight, if you have one or not, you have the rest of your life to win a gunfight.


Did you expect a 72 year old female teacher to take out the wolf?
Click to expand...

As best she can.


You accused these people of allowing themselves to be killed when in reality they were not yet American citizens and legally could not carry a gun, except perhaps to hunt. Furthermore, you took offense to words like "hid" and "cower", when those were the words used by the writer and may not have even been the case.
Click to expand...

Again the gun is irrellevant, they were in a gun fight.


Don't you suppose the police (sheepdogs) told the sheep in the basement to stay there while they looked for the shooter?
Click to expand...


Police are historians. There to document the carnage.
 
FlyOnTheWall said:
You are welcome. This is my forth post, so I would say I am brand spanking new here ;)


I read it and found it to be a rather humdrum piece of work with little thought other than the author's acknowledgment that he believes he is a protector because he carries a gun. I don't believe the guy because I believe that most people who carry a gun do it more for self protection than the protection of others. He immediately states that there is nothing wrong with being a sheep, then criticizes and belittles sheep throughout the rest of the piece. Basically, the author claims that he has a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens which makes him a protector (sheepdog). What happens when he loses his love for his fellow citizen? He becomes a wolf. There is a thin line between sheepdog and wolf, and that is the heart of the gun debate.
Click to expand...

It is indeed a simple written piece. And I think that is the beauty of it. And no you are wrong. There is a big difference between the sheepdog and the wolf.

One is predator, the other is protector. And to state that because someone might do something, we need to ban guns punishes the innocent, not the guilty.


People can snap at any time.
Click to expand...


They sure can. Its a good thing I have a means to protect myself, no?

I never said you were. By "sheepdoggish", you mean we all should carry a gun, correct?
Click to expand...

Not at all. I keep trying to explain this as well. the mindset. not the tool.

Tell me you understand or do you need me to explain further?


Here are the names of the dead sheep:

Parveen Nln Ali, 26, Binghamton, Pakistan

Dolores Yigal, 53, Binghamton, Philippines

Marc Henry Bernard, 44, Endicott, Haiti

Maria Sonia Bernard, 46, Endicott, Haiti

Li Guo, 47, Binghamton, China

Hong Xiu Mao, 35, Greene, China

Lan Ho, 39, Binghamton, Vietnam

Hai Hong Zhong, 54, Endwell, China

Maria Zobniw, 60, Binghamton, U.S.

Roberta Bobby King, 72, Binghamton, U.S.

Almir O. Alves, 43, Unknown, Brazil

Jiang Ling, 22, Endicott, China

Layla Khalil, 57, Binghamton, Iraq

Did you really expect a bunch of foreigners to fight off a wolf carrying a couple guns?
Click to expand...


What does the fact they are foreigners have to do with anything? furthermore no, I don't expect the 1st "foreigner" to fight back, I expect the 2nd one to, then the 3rd, then the 4th, etc....

to get up to 14 dead without fighting back? What value do we place on our lives these days. This is a tragedy, but deeper into this story is the fact that we have become all too dependant on others for our very lives.

I highlighted several seemingly people of moderate age who could have acted.... Imagine if the mindset was to fight instead of "hide" and "Cower"? gun or no gun, we may have had less dead.

See the youtube video I posted for the mindset I am talking about. The gun is irrellevant in deciding what to do when you find yourself in a gun fight, if you have one or not, you have the rest of your life to win a gunfight.


Did you expect a 72 year old female teacher to take out the wolf?
Click to expand...

As best she can.


You accused these people of allowing themselves to be killed when in reality they were not yet American citizens and legally could not carry a gun, except perhaps to hunt. Furthermore, you took offense to words like "hid" and "cower", when those were the words used by the writer and may not have even been the case.
Click to expand...

Again the gun is irrellevant, they were in a gun fight.


Don't you suppose the police (sheepdogs) told the sheep in the basement to stay there while they looked for the shooter?
Click to expand...


Police are historians. There to document the carnage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom