[andrewjs18]

This is an event I'm going to try and attend.

http://www.meetup.com/thinkingsociety/events/88133332/

When: 11/18/12 @ 2pm

Where: 1906 Rittenhouse Square
Philadelphia, PA 19103

details:

The topic of the second Democracy on Trial debate will be Gun Control. This debate will complement the gun control discussion of Nov 5th. We learned some valuable formatting lessons from our first role of government debate which we will apply to this next debate so we are confident that the changes we will implement will lead to a deeper exploration and understanding of this controversial issue. We have two smart people passionate about their ideals to represent each side. We will start the questioning addressing the issue of ethics and let the audience ask prepared questions after that. So please prepare any question that you would like to ask our debaters, and them post it to this meetup site so it is available for all to review.

[andrewjs18]

bumping this since it's tomorrow. hopefully some folks will show up.

[rmagill]

I have plans or I'd be there. Do you know who the debaters are?

[andrewjs18]

I have plans or I'd be there. Do you know who the debaters are?

on the pro-gun side it'll be Darren Wolfe. I'm not sure who will be representing the anti-gun side.

I know Darren, he's solid.

[bigdawgbeav]

How did it go?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

[andrewjs18]

How did it go?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

the pro-gun side won IMHO. the debate was supposed to be about philosophy, not legal issues. the lady speaking on behalf of the anti-gun side was only talking about legal issues, not philosophical issues.

I think there's a video of the debate online somewhere. if I find it, I'll post a link here.

[darrenlobo]

How did it go?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

the pro-gun side won IMHO. the debate was supposed to be about philosophy, not legal issues. the lady speaking on behalf of the anti-gun side was only talking about legal issues, not philosophical issues.

I think there's a video of the debate online somewhere. if I find it, I'll post a link here.

Better late than never I just discovered this forum. I'm the pro-gun rights guy from the debate. The gun rights hating morons running that show must agree that I won because they have refused to release the video they took of the event.

A belated thank you to those who were there. Here is video of a more recent discussion I was in. The presentation is an expanded version of the opening statement I used at the debate: There Is No Case for Gun Control (video and hate mail)

[Dave]

the pro-gun side won IMHO.

To be fair, is there anything the other side could have said to have changed your mind?

Following the fashion these days, almost everybody has their view and then only seek reinforcement of how right they are.

[darrenlobo]

the pro-gun side won IMHO.

To be fair, is there anything the other side could have said to have changed your mind?

Great question, Dave. Obviously I can't speak for Andrew but would like to answer. First, they would have to show how to do gun control without violating the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP). Given the nature of gun control I see that as impossible.

Then, they would have to show that a disarmed population can defend their rights from govt tyranny. Again, not a realistic idea.

Lastly, they would have to show real proof that gun control reduces street crime (as opposed to govt crime). Here things get complicated because interpreting stats leads us into a swamp. Some people deliberately lie, others honestly misunderstand, & some fall into the gray area of convincing themselves that BS is truth. Complicating the matter even more is the fact that a police state that also implements gun control can reduce street crime. Look at NYC for an example of this. Is it gun control or the police state that makes it safer? I say the police state but can see why others cite the correlation.