Keeping the next gerneration from becoming open carriers.....

[jsanchez]

That's not what I said.

I said anyone who is focusing on specifically gun violence, rather than the factors which engender violence itself (or ways to reduce violence itself) have made their bias, and agenda, clear.

Guns are not a causal factor in violence. At best they are an allowing factor, and I would go so far as to say usually not even that.

Did you watch the whole video? If so, do you have any critical thinking constructive criticism to impress us all with?

 

[jsanchez]

They are a huge allowing factor. UK has a rate of violent crime almost double ours and a rate of homicide not even half of ours. Firearms are vastly more lethal then hands and feet and contact weapons. Studying the proximate causes of violence with firearms is certainly legitimate.

In the Czech Republic most private citizens can own guns, they have owner licensing and registration, they had to in order to join the eurozone, but other then that there is little restrictions on what a citizen can own and any citizen can carry a concealed weapon if they have a self defense license, which is issued to all who qualify. Shall issue if you will. AR-15s, saturday night specials, handguns,SBRs, standard cap mags, all legal with no special restrictions.


In Czech Republic violent crime is very rare and so is crime committed wi firearms.

So no firearms are not a casual factor, but the differences between two progun countries (relatively speaking) show that there is a contrast and studying the differences of gun violence in our country when compared to ones with similar legal restrictions on guns is certainly legitimate, and no where in the lecture did I hear the lecturer advocate new gun control laws...

Hang in there Emn, don't let what these guys say bother you, they were once young, and they made their share of mistakes.

 

[jsanchez]

For those critical thinkers who want more of this good stuff here episodes 2 and 3 of the series


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jPmmLHH4Jg


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3wcriPMHqgg

 

[jsanchez]

http://deliberatedumbingdown.com/MomsPDFs/DDDoA.sml.pdf 6.7 MB 700 pages chronological compendium of policy papers and commentary

My history profresora, Mrs. Walinstien, taught me to look at history as if your looking through a window, question the window and all you see in it, ask why.

 

[jsanchez]

I know you guys are smart, this will make you smarter.

http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

 

[Grapeshot]

It's a big city/burbs thing.

Another instance of indoctrinated vs. taught.

We cannot allow independent thinking - no freedom. Must all march to the same drummer. Control, control, control.

 

[Jeff Hayes]

We cannot allow independent thinking - no freedom. Must all march to the same drummer. Control, control, control.

That about sums it up + 1

 

[Trigger Dr]

And that is why we have forum admins and moderators.........control, control, control:banana:

 

[Dave_pro2a]

And that is why we have forum admins and moderators.........control, control, control:banana:

I don't pay for the forum via taxation.

I don't have to participate on the forum, unlike education -- which is legally required afaik, and hard to 'opt out' of since they keep all your taxes to fund their schools leaving you little to afford private school.

 

[Grapeshot]

I don't pay for the forum via taxation.

I don't have to participate on the forum, unlike education -- which is legally required afaik, and hard to 'opt out' of since they keep all your taxes to fund their schools leaving you little to afford private school.

We, the users, do not "pay" for the forum - the educational benefit is optional/elective and free.

 

[Grapeshot]

And that is why we have forum admins and moderators.........control, control, control:banana:

When in your house, we will honor your rules and afford you all due courtesy

 

[jsanchez]

The name, "critical thinking", is not the thing. History professors indulge in historicism, ignoring the fallacy. Marx's dialectic is rank historicism. I do hope that you have learned that from la professora, the failures of Marx, if not historicism.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Poverty-Historicism-Routledge-Classics/dp/0415278465

Those were two completely different thoughts, totally separate from one another, ( Mrs.
Walinstien and critical thinking.)

I am going to open carry to the Lynnwood library and get a card and see if they have that book, thanks.

 

[jsanchez]

Well I finished the first episode and I didn't find a lot of objectionable stuff to what Prof. Conner was saying. Maybe I missed something.

I found it very interesting that women wonder why men are angry a lot of the time, and the Prof. thinks it because that's the emotion men are most in touch with, and society allows us to feel, instead of some of the other 7 basic emotions. This is discussed at the 31:45 on the video time clock.

I'm skeptical about the segment starting at 36:30 about "weapons effect", I thought there could be other variables involved, but I don't know how the experiment was conducted to be sure.

Also the second experiment of the "weapons effects" segment, with the bumper stickers on the back of the truck, some of the comments made by Prof. Conner to the effect its not a good idea to honk at someone who has a gun, I think stereotypes gun owners as mentally unstable, fly off at drop of the hat, is not accurate to the majority of gun owners.

I wonder what you guys thought of the first episode.

 

[Grapeshot]

Well I finished the first episode and I didn't find a lot of objectionable stuff to what Prof. Conner was saying. Maybe I missed something.

I found it very interesting that women wonder why men are angry a lot of the time, and the Prof. thinks it because that's the emotion men are most in touch with, and society allows us to feel, instead of some of the other 7 basic emotions. This is discussed at the 31:45 on the video time clock.

I'm skeptical about the segment starting at 36:30 about "weapons effect", I thought there could be other variables involved, but I don't know how the experiment was conducted to be sure.

Also the second experiment of the "weapons effects" segment, with the bumper stickers on the back of the truck, some of the comments made by Prof. Conner to the effect its not a good idea to honk at someone who has a gun, I think stereotypes gun owners as mentally unstable, fly off at drop of the hat, is not accurate to the majority of gun owners.

I wonder what you guys thought of the first episode.

From your comments, I would conclude that Prof. Conner is promoting his own negative agenda.

 

[jsanchez]

From your comments, I would conclude that Prof. Conner is promoting his own negative agenda.

He says he is a gun owner. Everything he is lecturing about is focused on the psychology of mass shooters, which is a pretty big media problem for us pro gunners. Prof. Conner lays out exactly what to do to stop this in the future. He has A solution not the only solution, AND he takes the media to task. I'm guessing from what you wrote you didn't look at the video, and that's ok, because I know everyone has demands on their time, only so many hours in a day. I was just hoping we might be able to have a intellectual conversation about this, to help our movement. IMO>

 

[Citizen]

I know you guys are smart, this will make you smarter.

http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

Good lord! What a bunch of confused rot. If he can't define it in one or two sentences, he doesn't know what it is.

I noticed in high school that the term "critical thinking" got bandied about with some frequency, but nobody ever defined it. I'm betting there isn't a definition. Certainly not a useable definition. I'm betting its a made-up word invented by people who didn't understand thinking well enough to use words that already exist.

 

[kparker]

They are a huge allowing factor. UK has a rate of violent crime almost double ours and a rate of homicide not even half of ours. Firearms are vastly more lethal then hands and feet and contact weapons. Studying the proximate causes of violence with firearms is certainly legitimate.

You really aren't making the silly cross-nation comparison, are you? Between the US and the UK?? Really???????

 

[Dave_pro2a]

Good lord! What a bunch of confused rot. If he can't define it in one or two sentences, he doesn't know what it is.

Oh but he CAN! He just uses sentences like this:

It entails the examination of those structures or elements of thought implicit in all reasoning: purpose, problem, or question-at-issue; assumptions; concepts; empirical grounding; reasoning leading to conclusions; implications and consequences; objections from alternative viewpoints; and frame of reference. Critical thinking — in being responsive to variable subject matter, issues, and purposes — is incorporated in a family of interwoven modes of thinking, among them: scientific thinking, mathematical thinking, historical thinking, anthropological thinking, economic thinking, moral thinking, and philosophical thinking.

I bet they could write a book about this topic, using only 1 sentence.

 

[Dave_pro2a]

That's why the Socratic Method works, and worked, so well, it is a dialogue.

Read a book.

Well which is it? Am I supposed to talk or read? [/teasing]

 

[marshaul]

Oh but he CAN! He just uses sentences like this:



I bet they could write a book about this topic, using only 1 sentence.

Damn! That guy could give me a run for my money.

:lol:

Edit: To be fair to myself, I achieve verbosity only in the pursuit of syntactical precision, whereas what we see above is nothing more than pretentiousness.