rec.autos.simulators

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

Jay Wolf

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by Jay Wolf » Wed, 05 May 1999 04:00:00



>> I wonder. I know little of this, but I wonder whether the gun lobby is so
>> vociferous that they drown out the very many silent Americans who object
to gun
>> ownership.

>This is exactly the case, Paul.  The vast majority of Americans favor
stricter gun
>control, but an unrepresentative number of our fine political representives
vote
>contrary to these wishes.

as you yourself have stated:

SOURCES?

and not some bozo slanted christian coalition crap, either.

one way to have "one of the (if not the) most powerful lobbying groups in
the USA" is to have enormous support of the general public, right?

well, that makes ONE state. hardly a "vast majority", eh?

you ARE kidding, right?

hmmmmm...lemme see here. 50 bullet clip. 50 people shot. that is one bullet
hit per person. that ain't too bad of shootin', amigo.  (said with a
severely mocking sneer towards miss ewing)

Jay Wolf

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by Jay Wolf » Wed, 05 May 1999 04:00:00

oh, my gosh, dave! 3 people were killed in c***te due to a car accident
at a race track! wow, maybe we should ban all cars since those people would
still be alive if it wasn't for those evil cars.

don't go outside. you could get killed out there.

Paul Jone

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by Paul Jone » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00



> oh, my gosh, dave! 3 people were killed in c***te due to a car accident
> at a race track! wow, maybe we should ban all cars since those people would
> still be alive if it wasn't for those evil cars.

> don't go outside. you could get killed out there.

Jay, I don't think these two events are in any way comparable. In the one
people get inadvertantly killed watching a sport where both the program(me) and
tickets warn them that this is a dangerous sport and in the other a group of
people being deliberately ***ed by a gunman. I hope that after studying the
two you can discern the different ethical dimensions, but if you're still
having difficulty then perhaps it's best just to back out of the argument, eh?
Don't want to get in out of our depth do we, mate?
Cheers,
Paul
Steve Ferguso

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by Steve Ferguso » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00

:>out of ammo in his clip.  Unfortunately, his clip held 50 bullets and
: he was able to shoot all 50 of them in approximately one minute.

: hmmmmm...lemme see here. 50 bullet clip. 50 people shot. that is one bullet
: hit per person. that ain't too bad of shootin', amigo.  (said with a
: severely mocking sneer towards miss ewing)

Hey Jay, you under-educated monkey, even a rudimentary knowledge of
english grammar would help you to see that "them" is a pronoun taking the
place of "bullets", not "victims".

best regards
Stephen

Mark C Dod

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by Mark C Dod » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00

I thought I would stay away from this argument but this statement is utter crap.

There is no such thing as an evil child. All children are born innocent. Their
personality is moulded by those around them and the events they experience.

A child requires guidance and strong examples. A child will not listen to a parent
telling them not to smoke when the parent lights one up two minutes after the lecture.

Most "good" parents who end up with problem children are victims themselves of not
having the required skills or guidence. These parents aren't bad people. In our society
the parents are the child's only *** influence apart from teachers. In other
societies the extended family is a good role model and the cases of delinquency are
decreased. Advice from in laws who have been there/done that can help parents.

I have seen some of the most cunning, *** street wise kids become model citizens
not through discipline but what they mostly need and respect, advice from ***s who
treat them as equals and pratice what they preach.


> It's easy to blame parents. I have 2 kids who are generally very well behaved
> (except with us :-) ). This is not because we are particulary good or strict
> parents. It is because these little spirits are usually good little spirits. I have
> seen many ***y-minded and often downright evil little spirits, and I wonder to
> myself how on earth the parents cope. Personalities are born and not made. You can
> guide them but not mould them.
> Cheers,
> Paul



> > >I have an even beter suggession lets blame the comms. or how about the
> > >democrats; republicans, liberals. do you like placing the blame? this is
> > >completely rediculus the blame if any is on the american society

> > Sounds as though you're disagreeing with me, and then agreeing with me. Either
> > way, we have a serious situation on our hands. I wasn't "placing blame;" I was
> > establishing RESPONSIBILITY for this tragic nonsense.

> > I happen to be around quite a few parents and their children every day. I've
> > wondered for the past few years how these parents can idly stand by and let
> > their children run riot without any correction or supervision whatsoever. The
> > mystery was cleared up when I heard a parent utter the most ridiculous
> > philosophy imaginable: "They're little spirits, and shouldn't be inhibited in
> > any way." Well, spirits come in all stripes, and some are downright evil unless
> > taught to respect the "spirits" with whom they share the world. Hell, even
> > puppies are trained not to pee on the carpet.

> > To nudge this thread back on topic, we stand to lose our rights to uncensored
> > media and video games (and to own firearms, if that's your thing) if idiots are
> > going to use them as re-enforcement of their unchecked ***s on society.

> > It all starts with parents' obligation to RAISE their kids---not just allow
> > them to reach ***hood  with the mentality of children.

> > Back to my Lotus,
> > Trey Behan

Keith Meye

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by Keith Meye » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00

<snip>.
<snip>

Ummm, no, it's to spend the most money. You can't honestly think the
lobbying industry in this country has anything to do with what the people
want... It's all about organization, money, and pressure.

Keith

David Ewin

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by David Ewin » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00


> >Here's something else for the pro NRA folks to consider:  At the previous
> high
> >school massacre in Oregon, the ***age gunman was tackled and disarmed
> after he ran
> >out of ammo in his clip.  Unfortunately, his clip held 50 bullets and he
> was able
> >to shoot all 50 of them in approximately one minute.

> hmmmmm...lemme see here. 50 bullet clip. 50 people shot. that is one bullet
> hit per person. that ain't too bad of shootin', amigo.  (said with a
> severely mocking sneer towards miss ewing)

Jay, if you could  read, you would have noted that no where in my statement did
I say that the kid hit 50 people.  I clearly stated that he was able to get off
all 50 rounds before having to reload, at which point he was disarmed.  My point
obviously being that the availability of these large ammo clips makes an already
dangerous weapon even more dangerous.

And then you call me "Miss Ewing" .... So you really do equate your ***ity
with your gun lust.  Perhaps the theory that gun nuts are really just
compensating for their 1"***s isn't so far fetched.

Dave Ewing

David Ewin

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by David Ewin » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00



> oh, my gosh, dave! 3 people were killed in c***te due to a car accident
> at a race track! wow, maybe we should ban all cars since those people would
> still be alive if it wasn't for those evil cars.

> don't go outside. you could get killed out there.

Very intelligent analogy, Jay.  Your debating skills are really quite
remarkable.

Dave Ewing

Jay Wolf

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by Jay Wolf » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00


>Hey Jay, you under-educated monkey, even a rudimentary knowledge of
>english grammar would help you to see that "them" is a pronoun taking the
>place of "bullets", not "victims".

hey, stevey - i gots an edumication. what for is you calling me a
"rudimentary" for? this hain't got nuthin' to do with no aardvarks. heck,
you done spelt "grammur" all wrong, too, and stuff.
Jay Wolf

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by Jay Wolf » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00


>And then you call me "Miss Ewing" .... So you really do equate your
***ity
>with your gun lust.  Perhaps the theory that gun nuts are really just
>compensating for their 1"***s isn't so far fetched.

i don't actually own a gun, davey, but i do have a HUGE 12 cylinder car that
represents my lack of bologna, right?    ; -)
Jay Wolf

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by Jay Wolf » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00




>> oh, my gosh, dave! 3 people were killed in c***te due to a car
accident
>> at a race track! wow, maybe we should ban all cars since those people
would
>> still be alive if it wasn't for those evil cars.

>> don't go outside. you could get killed out there.

>Very intelligent analogy, Jay.  Your debating skills are really quite
>remarkable.

(AP) DES MOINES, IOWA   EARLIER today, funnel clouds were banned throughout
the midwest. This was due to thier illegal life threatening nature. Several
tornadoes are under suspicion of killing over three times the number of
people gunned down in Colorado last week and are being held until details
are known.
David Ewin

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by David Ewin » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00

< Jay Wolfe's silly stuff about banning cars and tornados deleted >

Come on, Jay.  My original post was about the semi-automatic TEC-9 pistol - a
gun that serves absolutely no purpose other than to quickly kill as many people
as possible. It isn't used for hunting.  It is too inaccurate to use for target
shooting.  If you used it for self defense, you would probably kill your entire
family as "collateral damage", as our friends at the Pentagon like to say.  It
was manufactured by a shameless company who targeted the criminal element as
potential customers with advertising information such as its resistance to
finger prints.

Are you really unable to see why some people like me would want these things
banned?

A race car isn't designed to have its wheels fly off and intentionally kill
people.  As far as tornados ... you're right, they should be banned.  They
serve no useful purpose other than transporting the occassional restless child
over the rainbow.

I'm glad to see you are compensating for your deficiencies in a safer manner.
;-)

Drive carefully,

Dave Ewing

Paul Jone

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by Paul Jone » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00

Nature versus nurture - a very old subject that's been debated without any real resolution.
My statement is not "utter crap" - it's what I believe and, obviously, what you do not
believe. I personally think that our genetic make up determines the vast majority of our
personality and our behaviour patterns. The chemicals that occur in relatively low doses in
the brains of people who like to take risks are there because they have relatively low
amounts of the relative proteins which in turn are directly coded for in their DNA. I
believe that learning will affect some chemical pathways just as *** can as well, but I
still believe that sociopaths are born and not made. You take another view, that is your
right, and you can cite much supporting evidence for your view (as can I). In the end, as
with all the really keenly fought debates, which side of the fence you opt for is largely
value judgement. Mark, I respect the work that you do with kids and respect your views on
kids. No, there's no such thing as an evil kid, but then again I don't believe that there's
such a thing as evil anyway. Some kids are born with short attention spans and immunity to
fear. Chances are their parents are as well and putting the two together is a good bet for
deliquency. "Born innocent" - bit theological for me. Many children love to learn, almost
all love to be loved, some need "strong examples" others rarely require discipline. (My son
has been lecturing me for a couple of years to quit smoking and 2 weeks ago I finally did.)
I respect my sons and they respect me. We seldom fight and discipline is seldom an issue.
They appreciate the need to learn and take things in with open eyes and open arms. I know
of other children where that just isn't the case. As far as I can see they were born like
that. I guess we have to agree to differ.
Cheers,
Paul

> I thought I would stay away from this argument but this statement is utter crap.

> There is no such thing as an evil child. All children are born innocent. Their
> personality is moulded by those around them and the events they experience.

> A child requires guidance and strong examples. A child will not listen to a parent
> telling them not to smoke when the parent lights one up two minutes after the lecture.

> Most "good" parents who end up with problem children are victims themselves of not
> having the required skills or guidence. These parents aren't bad people. In our society
> the parents are the child's only *** influence apart from teachers. In other
> societies the extended family is a good role model and the cases of delinquency are
> decreased. Advice from in laws who have been there/done that can help parents.

> I have seen some of the most cunning, *** street wise kids become model citizens
> not through discipline but what they mostly need and respect, advice from ***s who
> treat them as equals and pratice what they preach.


> > It's easy to blame parents. I have 2 kids who are generally very well behaved
> > (except with us :-) ). This is not because we are particulary good or strict
> > parents. It is because these little spirits are usually good little spirits. I have
> > seen many ***y-minded and often downright evil little spirits, and I wonder to
> > myself how on earth the parents cope. Personalities are born and not made. You can
> > guide them but not mould them.
> > Cheers,
> > Paul



> > > >I have an even beter suggession lets blame the comms. or how about the
> > > >democrats; republicans, liberals. do you like placing the blame? this is
> > > >completely rediculus the blame if any is on the american society

> > > Sounds as though you're disagreeing with me, and then agreeing with me. Either
> > > way, we have a serious situation on our hands. I wasn't "placing blame;" I was
> > > establishing RESPONSIBILITY for this tragic nonsense.

> > > I happen to be around quite a few parents and their children every day. I've
> > > wondered for the past few years how these parents can idly stand by and let
> > > their children run riot without any correction or supervision whatsoever. The
> > > mystery was cleared up when I heard a parent utter the most ridiculous
> > > philosophy imaginable: "They're little spirits, and shouldn't be inhibited in
> > > any way." Well, spirits come in all stripes, and some are downright evil unless
> > > taught to respect the "spirits" with whom they share the world. Hell, even
> > > puppies are trained not to pee on the carpet.

> > > To nudge this thread back on topic, we stand to lose our rights to uncensored
> > > media and video games (and to own firearms, if that's your thing) if idiots are
> > > going to use them as re-enforcement of their unchecked ***s on society.

> > > It all starts with parents' obligation to RAISE their kids---not just allow
> > > them to reach ***hood  with the mentality of children.

> > > Back to my Lotus,
> > > Trey Behan

Jay Wolf

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by Jay Wolf » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00


>< Jay Wolfe's silly stuff about banning cars and tornados deleted >

>Come on, Jay.  My original post was about the semi-automatic TEC-9 pistol -
a
>gun that serves absolutely no purpose other than to quickly kill as many
people
>as possible. It isn't used for hunting.  It is too inaccurate to use for
target
>shooting.  If you used it for self defense, you would probably kill your
entire
>family as "collateral damage", as our friends at the Pentagon like to say.
It
>was manufactured by a shameless company who targeted the criminal element
as
>potential customers with advertising information such as its resistance to
>finger prints.

>Are you really unable to see why some people like me would want these
things
>banned?

heck, no, i can see why. i'm not blind (although i attempt to be, at a near
graeme nash rate!). my point, along with dang near every other pro-gun
person, is:
where do you draw the line?
it is clearly the wish of the anti-gun crowd to eventually ban all guns.
first these guns, then all handguns, then laser scopes, then infared sights,
then rifles, etc. i still maintain that the bad guys will have access to
these guns anyway, so why allow only them to carry them? if the general
public can be outgunned by the horrible few, they WILL take advantage of
this. contrary to popular belief, the average gun-toter is not a flaming
maniac. i have been around guns all of my life. i was taught at a very early
age the repurcusions and danger of handling a weapon. same goes with cars,
for that matter. my father was on the navy pistol team. i went to driving
ranges while growing up and was allowed to shoot his military-pack .45s from
about age 8 onwards. my brother and i where given .22s and bb guns for our
own. we were allowed to decide for ourselves the issue of hunting. my father
never did it, and other than a couple of exploratory lizards, neither have
i. i am glad that i know how to shoot a gun properly, even though i don't
currently own one. if my girlfriend is attacked, the bad guy had better be
ready to eat a 9mm slug. will this add to the 5-6 per 100,000 *** rate?
yes. good. one less person out there who thinks that it is okay to attack
people. she's a pretty good shot, too. on her first target with her new
pistol, she put 7 out of 10 in the "10" ring.
look, if you don't want to own a gun, then don't. but don't tell me that i
can't. fancy semi-automatic pistol or not. your point about banning certains
guns is completely moot since it will only ban them from the good guys.

j

p.s. - if you come over to my house for a BBQ, i promise not to shoot you,
okay?   ; -)

John Walla

(really) *VERY* IMPORTANT: PC Games are 100% positive CAMPAIGN

by John Walla » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00


In a country where sanity prevailed the child would have been unable
to obtain a handgun, thus preserving not only his school friends but
his own life as well.

As before, although I a) don't fancy her chances of *** out a gun
against someone who already has a gun out and is obviously prepared to
use it, and b) of not killing me in the process.

You don't see any link at all between all these incidents occuring in
the US and you having the weapons laws that you do? I could recite to
you only ONE similar instance in the UK and that was Dunblane and
splashed over the newspapers for months and years thereafter - that's
how unusual it is. There might be a connection there.....

Cheers!
John


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.