- #176
Pythagorean
Gold Member
- 4,403
- 314
Yes, discussion is good. Badass tough guy demonstration not so much.
Hurkyl said:...
You do seem to explicitly state that that the props are important. That, regardless of the circumstances involved, shooting the laptop is inherently inappropriate. If that is true, then you need to discuss that point on its own without getting it all confused up in the other aspects....
I didn't ask for a retraction, just if you were withdrawing them from the conversation.Pythagorean said:I don't retract those statements, but they aren't the main issue;
The method he used was "shoot the laptop on video."You're still putting words in my mouth. The props still don't matter. It's the method (which can be reproduced with any number of props).
I honestly don't know. If I don't want to just ignore you, I'm forced to put words in your mouth. I prefer to let you know what words I think fit best, and give you a chance to replace them with words of your own.Are you honestly having trouble with this or are you attempting Socratic sagaciousness?
No offense, but I think this is ridiculous. I strongly suspect this attitude is a product of villainizing guns and gun owners, rather than having any sort of sound basis in reality.Integral said:In my eyes the use of a gun in this fashion is a very thinly veiled threat. He used his weapon on an inanimate object for this "crime". For what "crime" will he use it on an animate object. If you make him mad enough will he shoot the offender?
Whether or not it's true, one cannot react to a situation by taking actions 10 years in the past; they have to take actions in the present.As I said before if you have to discipline a teenager you are 10yrs to late...
Hurkyl said:It's hard to know, especially since I feel like you've been almost deliberately vague and resisting attempts to clarify.
lostcauses10x said:And what if all of this was just staged??
lostcauses10x said:And what if all of this was just staged??
Hurkyl said:No offense, but I think this is ridiculous. I strongly suspect this attitude is a product of villainizing guns and gun owners, rather than having any sort of sound basis in reality.
There is a huge difference between destroying an object and killing someone in a berserker rampage. I can't imagine there is any credible threat, except in the case where the person already has abusive tendencies or other edge cases.
And to be a veiled threat actually requires the person to take some action to make the implication.
Whether or not it's true, one cannot react to a situation by taking actions 10 years in the past; they have to take actions in the present.
netgypsy said:But remember KIDS CAN BE BRIBED regardless of age, IF the request is reasonable.
netgypsy said:You ALWAYS have power over kids. Parents are more difficult. Dads will listen to daughters. Moms are nearly impossible to get to do anything they don't decide to do on their own. Sons do better than daughters with moms but sons don't do well. When it comes to stopping dangerous behavior in a mom, good luck. Because they sacrifice so much when their kids are younger and their husbands are trying to succeed in a difficult situation that by the time this is over, they'll do what they want to do.
netgypsy said:YOU have the power.
netgypsy said:Oh yes you have power over teens. Teens can be bribed. They don't do well with threats because they are at that age where it's "the principle of the thing" that matters. But BRIBERY - OH YES. And bribery combined with something like losing the computer or cell phone is REAL POWER. BUT it depends. Can't bribe a girl to stop seeing a boyfriend. You have to compromise. You can bribe the boyfriend. I remember a father whose daughter was determined to marry a guy they thought was a real loser. The dad went out and bought an expensive new car. He told the daughter that if she married him, this was their wedding gift and they would have no further financial support. If she didn't, the car was hers and he'd pay for her college education. IF the guy was decent at all you know he'd tell her, go to college. I'll wait. But regardless, the girl didn't marry him.
When a family member was a teen her mother told her if you will wait until you are 21 to drink and smoke I will buy a carton of any cigarettes you want and a bottle of any alcoholic beverage you want. She waited. It was a reasonable request.
Another was given a nice car and the promise of $2000 cash if he didn't drink for two years. He agreed and kept his side of the bargain as did the parent. (He's now middle aged and said that was probably the only thing that would have stopped him from drinking as he was 21 (college student) at the time so could drink legally BUT he had a drinking problem that caused a serious accident so he had negative experience from it also but the carrot helped a LOT. And it was his dad who made the bargain with him and his dad gave up his personal car and drove a real piece of crap with no air conditioning and no radio and no heater, so this made quite an impression.
You ALWAYS have power over kids. Parents are more difficult. Dads will listen to daughters. Moms are nearly impossible to get to do anything they don't decide to do on their own. Sons do better than daughters with moms but sons don't do well. When it comes to stopping dangerous behavior in a mom, good luck. Because they sacrifice so much when their kids are younger and their husbands are trying to succeed in a difficult situation that by the time this is over, they'll do what they want to do.
And yes there are always exceptions to the rule but the sensible, logical moms don't indulge in really harmful behaviors in the first place so the ones that remain - if I knew the answer to that one I'd be a millionaire.
But remember KIDS CAN BE BRIBED regardless of age, IF the request is reasonable.
Hurkyl said:There is a huge difference between destroying an object and killing someone in a berserker rampage. I can't imagine there is any credible threat, except in the case where the person already has abusive tendencies or other edge cases.
nitsuj said:Morally yes, but physically it's razor thin. It's most accurate to call the gun a threat.
If I have a dispute with you, and we meet to discuse it, would you not feel threatened if I had a gun with me and shot some inanimate object each time you said something I didn't like?
Integral said:There are times and places for using guns. This was not one of them. Why not just cut her laptop off from the internet, put it in the closet, make her post an apology. The list of alternative actions is long, there is no place in the home for firing weapons. He should be arrested for endangerment.