Monday, August 25, 2014

Are guns inclined toward moral evil?

Apparently so, or at least the attempt is made to suggest it.  Not gun owners, mind you.  But guns themselves.  The inanimate objects known as guns.  I think the effort epic fails.  Pete the Greek demolishes the idea on just one level.  There are other problems, especially when somehow dragging the atomic bombs into the discussion.  Not that taking into account man's fallen nature is a bad thing.  But this post, like a growing number, seems to throw careful arguments and fact based analysis out the window.  This is all too common anymore, and not just in this one corner of the Catholic blogosphere.  Which might be what comes from putting so much credence in an editorial comic as vapid as Tom Tomorrow.

15 comments:

  1. Guns don't kill people. People kill people, but guns make it a lot easier. I guess it's like a sexy dress on a woman. The dress is morally neutral, but it makes it a lot easier to actualize sin.
    Peace.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, societal violence has tended to go down as more effective arms have been developed and made available to the public, and we can see that greater rates of gun ownership correlates with lower rates of crime.

    So, I think Mark is right. Guns aren't morally neutral. They are objectively good.

    ReplyDelete
  3. One may also point out that the "pen" (stand in for "writing tool", which can include keyboards in today's world) can cause a lot of harm and makes it a lot easier to sin as well (as my preacher pointed out the stern words God has towards gossip last Sunday).

    Well... one only need to apply Shea's "logic" in the same manner to see how quickly such an idea can go awry.

    ReplyDelete
  4. OH and Deuce, I see you were finally banned.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oh what's that? Rape gangs becoming a problem? (note that it's Mark that brings this up)

    Gee, I can't IMAGINE why anyone would maybe be concerned about having the tools to defend their daughters or granddaughters. It's almost infuriating watching Shea just. not. get it!

    ReplyDelete
  6. @Duce
    “Well, societal violence has tended to go down as more effective arms have been developed and made available to the public…”

    There must be a point, however, of diminishing returns the more effective the weapon is. If uzi machine guns or flame throwers were legal for everyone and everyone had one, would things be even better? There must be limits, but where should they be? It's a hard question.

    ReplyDelete
  7. OH and Deuce, I see you were finally banned.

    I was? LOL, I hadn't even bothered to check back to see if there was any followup to my comment there, because I've got no respect for Mark, no regard for his opinion, and no expectation of reasoning with him.

    ReplyDelete
  8. He said on one thread "you're gone" in reply to someone I assume was you.

    Seeing some of Mark's other complaints about "how bad conservatives are" I want to start referring to his blog as, "That things that used to be Catholicism."

    ReplyDelete
  9. Duece,I'm afraid it looks like you were banned.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ben,

    True to a point, and there might be some who agree. I hope it's nobody on CAEI, given how back during the Great Women's Dress crisis of a year ago, anyone who suggested how a woman dressed should be considered in temptation. In fact, that's why I was a bit taken by Mark's post. He was one who roared at anyone who tried to blame their lust on the dress of a woman (though he did admit there could be limits). So it's odd that he suddenly wanted to put the burden on guns. I see inconsistency there. Not saying you're saying that (and based on your post, you're not). But given how other things have been dismissed when trying to say 'inherently evil', it seemed a bit forced for Mark to suddenly make the case about guns.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Nate,

    One of the strange parts of CAEI is that Mark continues to insist he's a Buckeye while increasingly bleeding Maize and Blue. Not sure what to make of it myself.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Duece,I'm afraid it looks like you were banned.

    I regret only that I can't do it again!

    I hope it's nobody on CAEI, given how back during the Great Women's Dress crisis of a year ago, anyone who suggested how a woman dressed should be considered in temptation.

    Well, see, modesty in dress is different, because Scripture specifically advocates it. Er, wait a second...

    One of the strange parts of CAEI is that Mark continues to insist he's a Buckeye while increasingly bleeding Maize and Blue. Not sure what to make of it myself.

    Which suggests that he's A) deluding himself, because B) he's ashamed of being what he is. You'll notice that he's extremely, extremely touchy about being called a liberal, or for being called out for his bad faith arguments and obvious false motives.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yes, he doesn't like his arguments being criticized. That will get you banned today more than anything. In your case, he accused you of accusing him of being a liar. Which I didn't see. I saw you pointing out that he seemed to be fishing for a hook to hang his arguments on, since his rage and outcries against guns don't hold up to scrutiny.

    But you got banned for the most common reason: upholding a traditionally conservative view while calling out his arguments. Don't know how long you've visited CAEI, but back in the day, it was only for accusing people falsely or threatening them that would get you banned. If you kept it on the level of attacking arguments, that was OK. Another example of how things there have changed.

    ReplyDelete

Let me know your thoughts