It's the Guns, Stupid

[feedup]

Cana wrote:

<quoted text>
Stupid Myths are now downgraded to not being argued! I love it.
Ok I will challenge the assumption of an armed society is safe from serious problems.
There was some work done on Chimps that showed.
In their natural environment they were wary but calm.
When a threat was placed in the environment, the Chimps became anxious.
When weapons were placed in, they became aggressive.
When both items weapons and threat were removed, they went back to being wary, but calm.
Next the weapons were placed in their environment the Chimps displayed aggressive but with no threat to them. They became confused and anxious.
There was no conclusion to this study, but it looks like. Over time the placement of weapons within the group, signals constant anxiety which could be detrimental to their society?

Case study information is preferred. Links please.

[Ramafuchs]

Let me wish that all the people who read thisview of mine spare some coins to get guns for their kids in the name of protection.
Christmas presents need not be some chewing gum or cane of cock but guns please.
happy Christmas

[Foie Gras Fox]

feedup wrote:

<quoted text>
Case study information is preferred. Links please.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/R...

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/03/swedish_...

Knock yourself out!(pardon the pun)
:-p

[Foie Gras Fox]

Ramafuchs wrote:

Let me wish that all the people who read thisview of mine spare some coins to get guns for their kids in the name of protection.
Christmas presents need not be some chewing gum or cane of cock but guns please.
happy Christmas

Plastic toy guns or a PlayStation / X-Box with annihalition game software?

[Tinka]

Cana wrote:

<quoted text>
Well Tinka...I guess you were just one Canadian too many for all these gun happy USers to take!!!

Did they say something...ha ha...how come it was not you?

[Ramafuchs]

A melting pot like USA should have more prisons and more guns to protect the puny pathetic life.
I hope OBAMA spend some tax payer's money to the factories which produce guns and other lethal weapons before christmas.
medical care ? forget it
Job? ignore
Shelter to sleep? leave it.
Guns are vital for survival

[Tory II]

Cana says we are as dumb as chimps.
post # 33562:

Cana wrote:

<quoted text>
Stupid Myths are now downgraded to not being argued! I love it.
Ok I will challenge the assumption of an armed society is safe from serious problems.
There was some work done on Chimps that showed.
In their natural environment they were wary but calm.
When a threat was placed in the environment, the Chimps became anxious.
When weapons were placed in, they became aggressive.
When both items weapons and threat were removed, they went back to being wary, but calm.
Next the weapons were placed in their environment the Chimps displayed aggressive but with no threat to them. They became confused and anxious.
There was no conclusion to this study, but it looks like. Over time the placement of weapons within the group, signals constant anxiety which could be detrimental to their society?

Cana wrote:

Stupid Myths are now downgraded to not being argued! I love it.
Ok I will challenge the assumption of an armed society is safe from serious problems.

Sunlight does not warm the planet.
Gravity doesn't keep us on the planet.
Water doesn't quench thirst or keep us alive.

Morality keeps our govt from stealing Middle East oil ?

Saddam Hussein's third world military kept the U.S. military from invading Iraq ?

Kuwait's lack of military deterred Iraq's from invading and conquering ?

Checkoslavakia's unarmed society, and lack of military prevented the Russian army from invading and pacifying ?

THE ARMED PEOPLE OF AFGHANISTAN NEVER REMOVED OR FORCED THE RUSSIAN ARMY OUT OF THEIR COUNTRY ? The Russians gave up and left because they finally realized the Afghanistan people were all unarmed ? It was an unarmed Afghanistan society that saved it from Russian rule ?

Burglars never rob homes because they know homeowners never have guns in their homes and if they did, the burglars know the bullets are harmless.

Humans easily survive living outside without any source of heat on the Artic circle without wearing any clothing ?

90 million American gun owners (350 million guns), and according to Cana, because of all those guns, Americans are nervous as Chimps sleeping in the trees.

According to Cana, tree branches (the only weapons chimps have) and powerful chimpanzee hands and arms are making the chimps anxious (as if the chimp hands and arms sometimes go away and allow the chimps to relax).

According to Cana, if our govt eliminates fireams there would not be any more weapons either (strong males, sticks, rocks, clubs, other tools, or ligatures.)

Cana wrote:

Stupid Myths are now downgraded to not being argued! I love it.
Ok I will challenge the assumption of an armed society is safe from serious problems.

Because there are 350 million firearms in America Cana is always nervous, like a chimpanzee. Cana is a hoplophobe.

[Yankee Yahoo]

Foie Gras Fox wrote:

<quoted text>
Biologically, so are humans. Compare:
CHIMPANZEE
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Family: Hominidae
Subfamily: Homininae
Tribe: Hominini
Subtribe: Panina
Genus: Pan
HUMAN
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Family: Hominidae
Subfamily: Homininae
Tribe: Hominini
<quoted text>
Well THAT explains the trolls on Topix! LOL
So, by your logic, a woman should just live with the fact that she could be raped, and is entitled to no self-defense? Well, she is an animal, of course, right? It's her job to be raped?
<quoted text>
Humans have intelligence and the ability to reason as a defence. That implies that you're smart enough not to get yourself into dangerous situations unless you're willing to take a controlled risk.
<quoted text>
Your argument is that a gun would and should somehow negate any social group hierarchy. We are a social animal, after all! Baboons settle their rank and mating disputes on the basis of the natural law of an individual's strength. We have codes of law, wealth, sex appeal, fame, ability, social standing, common sense etc. In such a group the best defence is intelligence, not brute force.

Biologically, yes. Psychologically, no. Psychologically, even subject to animal instincts and desires, we are no where near the level of animals. For incredibly obvious and observable reasons.

So, if we are smart enough to avoid bad situations, then criminals must also be smart enough to plan ahead and anticipate their prey not wondering into bad areas. And you miss the OBVIOUS problem. Government officials and police can be criminals, and we have every right o defend ourselves from them, too. Historically, governments make the worst predatory groups, and the best defense against other equally powerful predatory groups. That does not negate the absolute that everyone has a right to defend themselves.

Taking a controlled risk is carrying a weapon suitable for that risk. That is taking responsibility for one's self.

"Your argument is that a gun would and should somehow negate any social group hierarchy. We are a social animal, after all! Baboons settle their rank and mating disputes on the basis of the natural law of an individual's strength. We have codes of law, wealth, sex appeal, fame, ability, social standing, common sense etc. In such a group the best defence is intelligence, not brute force."

Negate what? YOU are arguing that somehow the presence of society negates one's personal responsibility!

No, we are NOT social animals. The willingness of individuals to cooperate together in society does not magically make us anything less than individuals. There is no such thing as a social mind. Now you are making things up or flirting with science fiction. We are individuals. Only individuals can think. Only individuals can be responsible for their own self-defense.

You are mixing how animals settle their disputes using MIGHT-IS-RIGHT mentality, which is the OPPOSITE of justice and a need for the law.

Now quit making things up and argue the points logically. Do you have an excuse why humans, as biological creatures, should not have a self-defense mechanism? Do you have a philosophical argument that would negate one's responsibility for self-defense?

You're ultra-conservative views supporting the state's power over the individual is archaic and old, and has been shot down by far better men than both of us. If you don't have anything new, then just say it.

[Cana]

Yankee Yahoo wrote:

<quoted text>
Chimps are animals. ALL animals, when empowered in some new way, will use this advantage. That's why predatory animals are aggressive and hunt and kill, even when not hungry sometimes. Chimps are adaptable and will survive both ways.
So, by your logic, a woman should just live with the fact that she could be raped, and is entitled to no self-defense? Well, she is an animal, of course, right? It's her job to be raped?
You dunce, that is an irrational argument. Humans are not animals. We have society, they do not. But, even if you excepted that they were, then this argues FOR gun-rights. Snakes have venom. Bears have claws. Eagles have talons. Every species has some kind of means of self-defense ... BECAUSE SELF-DEFENSE IS ESSENTIAL TO SURVIVAL IN NATURE.
Can humans run away as fast as antelope? Do humans have venom, long claws, or long teeth? No!
We have our minds. And our minds tell us how to make tools to defend ourselves. That is our right as a species ... period. It is OUR responsibility to defend ourselves, by the laws of nature, by the laws of society. PURE LOGIC.
You have argument. Each individual is responsible for their own self-defense, just as all animals are. What argument do you have against that responsibility?

Do you reread what these posts say before clicking the button, if not then I would recommend it!

I don't know what species you belong too, but every Canadian is a RED BLOODED ANAMIAL!!! And both Male and Female love it.

[Cana]

Plant Lady wrote:

<quoted text>
Without seeing the bias of which it was presented it would be difficult to asses the validity of the study. How is it applicable to human behavior? Who did the study? How long was the study conducted? Was their a neutral set up?
1970 was an interesting peace loving era, so the study could be total bs. <shrugs>. I am not stating that is it, just that it very well could be, which is why I asked for a link to the study.
For instance take a look at this book written (complete with documentation and studies) about the same time as you state the study was conducted.
http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Life-Plants-Pete...
Did that go anywhere of significance?(other than the new ager type hippies)

There are many many studies that don't see the light of day.
As you probably know Academics’ have to publish their research if they want to continue receiving funding.

The point I was trying to make to this person (that I'm losing respect for with every one of their posts) is Humans evolve in many ways, in different part of the World. One group’s solution to problems is different, than another’s.

Most of the more successful groups of people (Animals) living in Countries. Are the ones that look and absorb different solutions, then making them fit, and work in their situation.
Your National crisis with Health care is a good example.

[Cana]

Tory II wrote:

Cana says we are as dumb as chimps.
post # 33562:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Sunlight does not warm the planet.
Gravity doesn't keep us on the planet.
Water doesn't quench thirst or keep us alive.
Morality keeps our govt from stealing Middle East oil ?
Saddam Hussein's third world military kept the U.S. military from invading Iraq ?
Kuwait's lack of military deterred Iraq's from invading and conquering ?
Checkoslavakia's unarmed society, and lack of military prevented the Russian army from invading and pacifying ?
THE ARMED PEOPLE OF AFGHANISTAN NEVER REMOVED OR FORCED THE RUSSIAN ARMY OUT OF THEIR COUNTRY ? The Russians gave up and left because they finally realized the Afghanistan people were all unarmed ? It was an unarmed Afghanistan society that saved it from Russian rule ?
Burglars never rob homes because they know homeowners never have guns in their homes and if they did, the burglars know the bullets are harmless.
Humans easily survive living outside without any source of heat on the Artic circle without wearing any clothing ?
90 million American gun owners (350 million guns), and according to Cana, because of all those guns, Americans are nervous as Chimps sleeping in the trees.
According to Cana, tree branches (the only weapons chimps have) and powerful chimpanzee hands and arms are making the chimps anxious (as if the chimp hands and arms sometimes go away and allow the chimps to relax).
According to Cana, if our govt eliminates fireams there would not be any more weapons either (strong males, sticks, rocks, clubs, other tools, or ligatures.)
<quoted text>
Because there are 350 million firearms in America Cana is always nervous, like a chimpanzee. Cana is a hoplophobe.

Comprehension is not one of your strong points is it.

[Plant Lady]

Cana wrote:

<quoted text>
There are many many studies that don't see the light of day.
As you probably know Academics’ have to publish their research if they want to continue receiving funding.
The point I was trying to make to this person (that I'm losing respect for with every one of their posts) is Humans evolve in many ways, in different part of the World. One group’s solution to problems is different, than another’s.
Most of the more successful groups of people (Animals) living in Countries. Are the ones that look and absorb different solutions, then making them fit, and work in their situation.
Your National crisis with Health care is a good example.

How so?

[Yankee Yahoo]

Cana wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you reread what these posts say before clicking the button, if not then I would recommend it!
I don't know what species you belong too, but every Canadian is a RED BLOODED ANAMIAL!!! And both Male and Female love it.

Yep. But I think the fault lies with the one that read it. Notably, you.

Yeah, and humans love sex more than any other animal, yet move proof of the differences between humanity and all other life forms. Most animals do not enjoy sex, and are not creative with sex. They do it to procreate. We do NOT, despite the best efforts of the Catholics and other religious zealots overstepping their authority on such matters.

The fact that we human love sex so much sets us WAY apart from animals.

[Cana]

Plant Lady wrote:

<quoted text>
How so?

There are lots of different health systems in the Industrial World, which have one common theme through all of them.
That would be medical coverage for all the Population, without going bankrupt to receive it. That is except the US, which is very sad.

The US is going through major changes with your system, but I have not seen much in the way of examining other's ways.
Although there was a Doc topic on TV that showed the different types British, German, Japan, and Taiwan. The US commentator said Taiwan was the closed to what he thought the US would like.
The person from Taiwan said they looked closely at the Canadian system before developing theirs.

Smart people, we are looking at other Countries too, as we need to change things also.

[Cana]

Yankee Yahoo wrote:

<quoted text>
Yep. But I think the fault lies with the one that read it. Notably, you.
Yeah, and humans love sex more than any other animal, yet move proof of the differences between humanity and all other life forms. Most animals do not enjoy sex, and are not creative with sex. They do it to procreate. We do NOT, despite the best efforts of the Catholics and other religious zealots overstepping their authority on such matters.
The fact that we human love sex so much sets us WAY apart from animals.

You dunce, that is an irrational argument. Humans are not animals.
This is your quote above. Do you still stand by this statement?

[Plant Lady]

Cana wrote:

<quoted text>
There are lots of different health systems in the Industrial World, which have one common theme through all of them.
That would be medical coverage for all the Population, without going bankrupt to receive it. That is except the US, which is very sad.
The US is going through major changes with your system, but I have not seen much in the way of examining other's ways.
Although there was a Doc topic on TV that showed the different types British, German, Japan, and Taiwan. The US commentator said Taiwan was the closed to what he thought the US would like.
The person from Taiwan said they looked closely at the Canadian system before developing theirs.
Smart people, we are looking at other Countries too, as we need to change things also.

What would you change concerning your current system? Do you resent your taxation for the system?

btw- When my Canadian grandson was born with a heart condition it was several weeks before he could be seen by a specialist. My daughter must travel over an hour to get their immunization shots.

[feedup]

Cana wrote:

<quoted text>
There are lots of different health systems in the Industrial World, which have one common theme through all of them.
That would be medical coverage for all the Population, without going bankrupt to receive it. That is except the US, which is very sad.
The US is going through major changes with your system, but I have not seen much in the way of examining other's ways.
Although there was a Doc topic on TV that showed the different types British, German, Japan, and Taiwan. The US commentator said Taiwan was the closed to what he thought the US would like.
The person from Taiwan said they looked closely at the Canadian system before developing theirs.
Smart people, we are looking at other Countries too, as we need to change things also.

Why do you feel we must control others health care or provide for it?

[Cana]

Plant Lady wrote:

<quoted text>
What would you change concerning your current system? Do you resent your taxation for the system?
btw- When my Canadian grandson was born with a heart condition it was several weeks before he could be seen by a specialist. My daughter must travel over an hour to get their immunization shots.

In the Doc I mentioned during and after the show, we were talking on the pro/cons of each.
Most of the ones in Europe seem to have a simple charge before meeting their GP. To me that would be one effective way of keeping recidivism down.

The other issues for me would be;
Making the system more comprehensive by integrating priority home care
Services (home mental health, post-acute home care, and palliative home care) as well as improving prescription drug coverage.

Improving timely access to quality care for all Canadians through special
Initiatives to improve waitlist management, and by increasing the supply of advanced diagnostic services

Those are all possible, and one of the easiest ways is to address our admin costs, which is high.

[Cana]

feedup wrote:

<quoted text>
Why do you feel we must control others health care or provide for it?

Well being is the short answer.

I know personally having to worry about whether the insurance company is going to pay out without issues would be unnerving.
I would not like to have my personal assets up on the table either, as in the case of bankruptcy trying to pay the bill.

[Plant Lady]

Cana wrote:

<quoted text>
In the Doc I mentioned during and after the show, we were talking on the pro/cons of each.
Most of the ones in Europe seem to have a simple charge before meeting their GP. To me that would be one effective way of keeping recidivism down.
The other issues for me would be;
Making the system more comprehensive by integrating priority home care
Services (home mental health, post-acute home care, and palliative home care) as well as improving prescription drug coverage.
Improving timely access to quality care for all Canadians through special
Initiatives to improve waitlist management, and by increasing the supply of advanced diagnostic services
Those are all possible, and one of the easiest ways is to address our admin costs, which is high.

Are illegal aliens treated?

(yeah- I know the answer, the daughter was not legal for a couple of years- but I am curious to your view )