Do You Think A 30.06 Sign Welcomes OC?

Gun, shooting and equipment discussions unrelated to CHL issues

Moderator: carlson1


OlBill
Senior Member
Posts: 242
Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Do You Think A 30.06 Sign Welcomes OC?

Postby OlBill » Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

LucasMcCain wrote:
OlBill wrote:Whose morality?


Well, you'd have to be a little more specific in order for me to give a proper answer specific to the point that you take exception to. I think I stated my opinion pretty clearly, though. I understand that there are different views of morality. My personal views come from an evangelical Christian view of morality. However, most major crimes are condemned by all major belief systems, as well as those without one. Many lesser crimes, though, are not specifically condemned by any one belief system, but are still illegal. I don't know of any belief system that believes that jaywalking is a sin, but it is still illegal in many places. By the same token, many acts are legal, despite being condemned by many belief systems. I'm really not trying to start a debate on the morality of any specific practices, as I believe that is outside the focus of these forums, and this subforum specifically. Still, if you are more specific in your question, I'll try to give you a more specific answer.

There is not one morality in this country. There are several. We are not one country in the context, we are at least 11.
This is the root cause of the conflicts we see.

I suggest American Nations and American Character Both by Colin Woodard for further information. Very enlightening.

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts: 22143
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: Grapevine, Texas

Re: Do You Think A 30.06 Sign Welcomes OC?

Postby The Annoyed Man » Sat Mar 18, 2017 10:34 am

OlBill wrote:
LucasMcCain wrote:
OlBill wrote:Whose morality?


Well, you'd have to be a little more specific in order for me to give a proper answer specific to the point that you take exception to. I think I stated my opinion pretty clearly, though. I understand that there are different views of morality. My personal views come from an evangelical Christian view of morality. However, most major crimes are condemned by all major belief systems, as well as those without one. Many lesser crimes, though, are not specifically condemned by any one belief system, but are still illegal. I don't know of any belief system that believes that jaywalking is a sin, but it is still illegal in many places. By the same token, many acts are legal, despite being condemned by many belief systems. I'm really not trying to start a debate on the morality of any specific practices, as I believe that is outside the focus of these forums, and this subforum specifically. Still, if you are more specific in your question, I'll try to give you a more specific answer.

There is not one morality in this country. There are several. We are not one country in the context, we are at least 11.
This is the root cause of the conflicts we see.

I suggest American Nations and American Character Both by Colin Woodard for further information. Very enlightening.

But there are some things that are unlawful in the eyes of the law, no matter what country you go to, and no matter what the predominant religion (if any) happens to be predominant in that country, that are also universally condemned as immoral. I mention religion only because, culturally and historically, religion tends to be the core definer of morality. But even atheists manage to craft a moral core based on ethics that nearly perfectly coincide with universally accepted concepts of morality. I have yet to meet an atheist who didn't believe that murder, rape, and theft are immoral and should also be illegal, if they aren't already. The only difference between nations and their enforcement of universally accepted core moral values tends to be whether or not the existing laws are assiduously enforced by existing authorities.

For instance, there are virtually no countries (ISIS is not a "country", it's a territory controlled by terrorists) in the entire world where murder is legal. Justifiable killing killing may be legal, yes, under very clearly defined circumstances like self-defense; but out and out cold-blooded murder, no. It's not "legal" anywhere. Furthermore, cold blooded murder is not only illegal everywhere where there exists a gov't to enforce laws, but it is also universally regarded as immoral - even in nations that push the boundaries of "justifiable" when it comes to homicide. Even in nations where the definition of "justifiable" is stretched way beyond what we would accept - such as honor killings - there IS such a thing as unjustifiable homicide for which the local laws require punishment. Rape and theft are two other moral concepts that intertwine with the law. Again, different cultures may have looser definitions of what rape consists of, but there is a core definition that does exist, and is virtually universally categorized as both illegal, AND immoral. In some countries where rape and "justifiable homicide" may have stretched meanings, they will cut off your hands for stealing a pack of cigarettes. So theft is pretty much universally condemned as immoral and illegal.............except when governments do it under the color of crapulent legal theory like asset forfeiture......and progressive income taxes......

So, there ARE some universally accepted moral standards no matter where you go. It may be a smaller subset of the totality of morality, but it does exist, and where it does, it always intertwines with the law.

I'll download a copy of the book you suggested and add it to my reading list. Right now, I'm slogging my way through "The Fourth Turning: What the Cycles of History Tell Us About America's Next Rendezvous with Destiny" by William Strauss and Neil Howe. VERY interesting stuff, but also very densely written. Definitely not light reading.
"Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself."—Hookalakah Meshobbab
"I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes."—The Annoyed Boy
"Id aegre et in omnibus semper."—Quod Homo Aegre

User avatar

bigtek
Member
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 9:48 am

Re: Do You Think A 30.06 Sign Welcomes OC?

Postby bigtek » Sat Mar 18, 2017 10:45 am

I don't think a 30.06 sign welcomes OC.

I also don't think this sign welcomes 1911s and Glocks.

Image
The time has come for Texas politicians to choose sides.
  1. Pro RKBA
  2. Pro Rapist


OlBill
Senior Member
Posts: 242
Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Do You Think A 30.06 Sign Welcomes OC?

Postby OlBill » Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:39 pm

The Annoyed Man wrote:
OlBill wrote:
LucasMcCain wrote:
OlBill wrote:Whose morality?


Well, you'd have to be a little more specific in order for me to give a proper answer specific to the point that you take exception to. I think I stated my opinion pretty clearly, though. I understand that there are different views of morality. My personal views come from an evangelical Christian view of morality. However, most major crimes are condemned by all major belief systems, as well as those without one. Many lesser crimes, though, are not specifically condemned by any one belief system, but are still illegal. I don't know of any belief system that believes that jaywalking is a sin, but it is still illegal in many places. By the same token, many acts are legal, despite being condemned by many belief systems. I'm really not trying to start a debate on the morality of any specific practices, as I believe that is outside the focus of these forums, and this subforum specifically. Still, if you are more specific in your question, I'll try to give you a more specific answer.

There is not one morality in this country. There are several. We are not one country in the context, we are at least 11.
This is the root cause of the conflicts we see.

I suggest American Nations and American Character Both by Colin Woodard for further information. Very enlightening.

But there are some things that are unlawful in the eyes of the law, no matter what country you go to, and no matter what the predominant religion (if any) happens to be predominant in that country, that are also universally condemned as immoral. I mention religion only because, culturally and historically, religion tends to be the core definer of morality. But even atheists manage to craft a moral core based on ethics that nearly perfectly coincide with universally accepted concepts of morality. I have yet to meet an atheist who didn't believe that murder, rape, and theft are immoral and should also be illegal, if they aren't already. The only difference between nations and their enforcement of universally accepted core moral values tends to be whether or not the existing laws are assiduously enforced by existing authorities.

For instance, there are virtually no countries (ISIS is not a "country", it's a territory controlled by terrorists) in the entire world where murder is legal. Justifiable killing killing may be legal, yes, under very clearly defined circumstances like self-defense; but out and out cold-blooded murder, no. It's not "legal" anywhere. Furthermore, cold blooded murder is not only illegal everywhere where there exists a gov't to enforce laws, but it is also universally regarded as immoral - even in nations that push the boundaries of "justifiable" when it comes to homicide. Even in nations where the definition of "justifiable" is stretched way beyond what we would accept - such as honor killings - there IS such a thing as unjustifiable homicide for which the local laws require punishment. Rape and theft are two other moral concepts that intertwine with the law. Again, different cultures may have looser definitions of what rape consists of, but there is a core definition that does exist, and is virtually universally categorized as both illegal, AND immoral. In some countries where rape and "justifiable homicide" may have stretched meanings, they will cut off your hands for stealing a pack of cigarettes. So theft is pretty much universally condemned as immoral and illegal.............except when governments do it under the color of crapulent legal theory like asset forfeiture......and progressive income taxes......

So, there ARE some universally accepted moral standards no matter where you go. It may be a smaller subset of the totality of morality, but it does exist, and where it does, it always intertwines with the law.

I'll download a copy of the book you suggested and add it to my reading list. Right now, I'm slogging my way through "The Fourth Turning: What the Cycles of History Tell Us About America's Next Rendezvous with Destiny" by William Strauss and Neil Howe. VERY interesting stuff, but also very densely written. Definitely not light reading.

Great post.

I will offer this in rebuttal as poor as it may be:

Atheists are no more than two generations from a religion.

For years in this country it was practically impossible for a man to rape his wife. In many places it still is.

For centuries, theft was a badge of honor in many societies, including our own Indians.

Can we not shoot trespassers for geography?

Illegal and immoral are two entirely different things, as I believe you alluded to.

We are in complete agreement on asset forfeiture and progressive taxes.

Pardon my intrusion, morality fascinates me, I've put some effort into study.


Return to “General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 13 guests