Pro-knife/Anti-knife?

**Syme** · 06-15-2009, 12:44 AM

Originally Posted by Anonymous D

And the whole switchblade thing is stupid IMO. The point of a switch blade is to be able to deploy the blade fast ans easy. So they ban it. What about fixed blades? THEY ARE ALREADY "DEPLOYED"

Yet another example of weapons legislation being driven by ignorant perception rather than fact. Switchblades have been perceived as being associated with gang violence and criminality, largely due to media imagery depicting them in this way and the popular image of the leather-jacketed switchblade-wielding thug, so they get regulated more heavily than other knives, without any consideration of whether they are actually more dangerous than other types of knives. It's the exact same thing that drives AWBs and similar gun legislation. People and lawmakers, with no realistic understanding of these issues, form opinions--and laws--based on what looks scary when they see it on the tee-vee. Lawmakers are not going to pass sensible laws about things that they don't understand and can't think about rationally.

**faesce** · 06-15-2009, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by Syme

Yet another example of weapons legislation being driven by ignorant perception rather than fact. Switchblades have been perceived as being associated with gang violence and criminality, largely due to media imagery depicting them in this way and the popular image of the leather-jacketed switchblade-wielding thug, so they get regulated more heavily than other knives, without any consideration of whether they are actually more dangerous than other types of knives. It's the exact same thing that drives AWBs and similar gun legislation. People and lawmakers, with no realistic understanding of these issues, form opinions--and laws--based on what looks scary when they see it on the tee-vee. Lawmakers are not going to pass sensible laws about things that they don't understand and can't think about rationally.

Does it really come as a surprise to you that publicly perceived issues are being patched up by publicly appointed politicians? Whether or not you feel (or know) a switchblade is any more dangerous than a boxcutter, or an automatic firearm is any more lethal than a pellet gun, that knowledge has zero impact on the vast majority of the public's impression. That impression is what therefore dictates some or most of the laws, and allows a pseudo sense of security to be achieved. Everybody knows this, and if somebody didn't, they're probably an idiot.

The whole "the public doesn't know shit and politicians are dumb" thing is pretty obnoxious to read simply due to the weird patronizing tones that usually go with it~

**Syme** · 06-15-2009, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by faesce

Does it really come as a surprise to you that publicly perceived issues are being patched up by publicly appointed politicians? Whether or not you feel (or know) a switchblade is any more dangerous than a boxcutter, or an automatic firearm is any more lethal than a pellet gun, that knowledge has zero impact on the vast majority of the public's impression. That impression is what therefore dictates some or most of the laws, and allows a pseudo sense of security to be achieved. Everybody knows this, and if somebody didn't, they're probably an idiot.

Of course it doesn't come as a surprise to me; what part of my post could possibly make you think I was surprised by this, or didn't already know it, or expected my knowledge to be reflected in the views of the general public? I was expounding on Anonymous D's point about switchblade laws, which is just about the exact opposite of expressing surprise at it. No, I am not surprised that an ignorant general public elects ignorant politicians who pass stupid laws, and of course I realize that the views of knowledgeable people don't have any impact on the views of the general public. Why would you think that because I express annoyance at this fact, I must be surprised by it or ignorant of it?

Originally Posted by faesce

The whole "the public doesn't know shit and politicians are dumb" thing is pretty obnoxious to read simply due to the weird patronizing tones that usually go with it~

Well, when it comes to firearms (and knives), it's definitely true; the general public, and the politicians representing them, don't know shit. I don't really care whether you find it obnoxious to read. If you don't want to read posts in which gun/knife owners express exasperation at the cluelessness of the politicians passing gun/knife laws, then you shouldn't be hanging out in the gun/knife forum and going into gun/knife threads. And I wouldn't call my attitude here "patronizing"; patronization implies that I'm being indulgent. "Contemptuous" is probably a better word. I have contempt for politicians who make a point of pushing laws on issues of which they're ignorant.

**faesce** · 06-15-2009, 11:30 AM

I was going to respond, but halfway through the reply I realized arguing with you about something in the gun/knife forum is like throwing kerosene at a wildfire. Every opinion I express is met with a hundred more semi-related ones.

Anyway, while you're not a particularly malicious person, you're definitely ignorant in a few very annoying ways imo. I'd be lying if I said you weren't very well educated on the issues you bring up, however I feel as though there's a degree of obnoxious patronization (yes, I know you don't feel as though you're displaying it--but you do) in everything you say which sets off my douche bag radar.

**Syme** · 06-15-2009, 12:38 PM

What would you even argue with me about? You didn't bring up some kind of counter-point or disagree with anything I said; you just asked me whether politicians passing laws based on ignorance "comes as a surprise to me", when obviously it didn't, and obviously I was just agreeing with Anonymous D on the silliness of switchblade laws. In response your accusations, I might reply that arguing with you about this is pointless, because you don't make actual arguments, you just try to poke holes in what other people have said, by deliberate misinterpretation if necessary. So far all you have done is tried to pretend that my comments about switchblade laws betray some ignorance of how laws get made, when of course I understand perfectly well how laws get made, and was only saying that it's regrettable when the process leads to stupid laws.

I'm genuinely interested in talking about this issue, if you feel you have something to say. If you feel that my previous post contained "semi-related" points, please identify them and I'll try to clarify anything that seemed less than pertinent. Also, if you feel that I'm ignorant of something, please explain what you mean. When you say I'm "definitely ignorant in a few very annoying ways", do you mean that there is actually something that I lack knowledge of (if so, please enlighten me), or are you just saying that I have some mannerisms that you find annoying?

Originally Posted by faesce

Like I said, I have no reason to believe he doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to guns, but to claim such spite towards an elected civil servant following the demands of the (uneducated) majority screams ignorance in every sense of the word and runs parallel to the "fuck the police" motto you hear spewed from hoods all day.

I really want you to clarify what you mean by "ignorance" here. I think you are misusing the word "ignorance". What facts am I missing out on here? What exactly are you trying to say that I'm ignorant of? And if you think that my position here is in anyway comparable to some "fuck the police" nonsense, then you are severely misunderstanding me.

EDIT: If I had to guess, I'd guess that you are trying to say that I'm ignorant of how democracy works because I'm complaining about politicians enacting laws in response to public feeling, and that I should accept that our system is based on politicians acting in accord with public opinion. That would be a misunderstanding of my position, but I'll wait for you to clarify before I go on.