# Crafter Man: author of the two most appalling posts I've ever read here. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 14, 2012, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069 "2012-12-14T22:10:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 7:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/241 "2012-12-20T07:11:49Z")
> [@Mince](#): > > Why don’t we just outlaw bad. If outlawing bad assures no bad will ever happen, then that’s the course we should take. Yea? That seems to be the logic behind banning abortions. Am I to believe it won’t work with guns? ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/242 "2012-12-20T07:18:43Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > That seems to be the logic behind banning abortions. Am I to believe it won’t work with guns? Sure, eliminating guns from the world will prevent gun deaths, but it won’t prevent death, and I don’t mean the natural kind. The only thing that will prevent unnatural death is banning unnatural death. How do you do that? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 7:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/243 "2012-12-20T07:56:11Z")
> [@Mince](#): > > Sure, eliminating guns from the world will prevent gun deaths, but it won’t prevent death, and I don’t mean the natural kind. The only thing that will prevent unnatural death is banning unnatural death. How do you do that? I’m confused. Are you asking for zombie control laws, or… ? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 8:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/244 "2012-12-20T08:00:10Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Are you asking for zombie control laws, or… ? Outlaw zombies, and only outlaws will be zombies! ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 8:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/245 "2012-12-20T08:11:26Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > I’m confused. Are you asking for zombie control laws, or… ? Well, if there were no zombies, no zombies could kill us. Seems logical. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/246 "2012-12-20T14:59:11Z")
> [@dnooman](#): > > Does a person that collects multiple assault rifles with high capacity mags seem to you to be a person exercising their second amendment right, or a person intent on being able to kill a whole lot of people at once? Both actually. A law-abiding person might want to own such a weapon rather than a six-shot revolver against the admittedly rare possibility of defending themselves against rioters and multiple home invaders. And if you believe it’s possible that someday either no government capable of defending you will exist, or it will be the government itself trying to harm you, then at least in potential and as a deterrent against it coming to that pass, owning those guns looks like a good idea. > [@](#): > > Precision assault rifles didn’t exist when this amendment was written. I highly doubt the authors of this meant that every man has a right to own the firepower needed to kill an entire kindergarten full of kids. And the Internet didn’t exist when the First Amendment was written. I highly doubt the authors of this meant that every man has a right to post images of women having sex with dogs where any kid with access to an unsecured computer can see them. > [@](#): > > Your analogy about the theater is woefully inept. How exactly? I thought it was quite apt. If a handful of crazy evil people can abuse a right and inflict intolerable harm on society, then for the sake of safety everyone must forfeit that right. > [@](#): > > The whole “Guns don’t kill people, people do” adage is correct, but it also explains the problem. “People do”. That’s the underlying issue. Guns of all types could be as ubiquitous as frying pans, and if nobody went postal, there would be no problem at all. > > I fully understand that the vast majority of gun rights advocates are highly disciplined and trained (almost to a fault) . Many of us know very responsible people that may own a large amount of guns. Those people are not the ones that cause mass murders that drive gun control movements. > > If a few bad apples are causing problems, maybe we shouldn’t ban all apples. The NRA is a very powerful force, in lobbying and otherwise. I think that the onus of keeping bad people from getting enough firepower to kill a whole school full of kids lies with the supporters of gun rights, the NRA, etc. Police yourselves. Nobody will be hounding gun owners about gun control when the murder rates drop. > > TLDR: Nobody will try to control access to guns if the problem of excessive gun violence is handled by those that advocate free access to guns. Fine, but just _how_ exactly do we keep bad people from getting guns? Other than improving mental health care in the US, the only other suggestions I’ve seen is to make sure that nobody at all can get at least some kinds of guns. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/247 "2012-12-20T16:20:38Z")
> [@bucketybuck](#): > > Just to check that your analogy holds up, what exactly are the guns for? Solme are for hunting, some are for varmint shooting, some are for target shooting, some are for home defense and self defense, and some are for collecting. You really didn’t know this? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/248 "2012-12-20T17:48:58Z")
And some are for overthrowing the government. Why did you leave that out? ---
**Author:** ![curlcoat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@curlcoat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curlcoat)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/249 "2012-12-20T18:29:58Z")
> [@Mince](#): > > Sure, eliminating guns from the world will prevent gun deaths, but it won’t prevent death, and I don’t mean the natural kind. The only thing that will prevent unnatural death is banning unnatural death. How do you do that? The thing is, you can’t eliminate guns, all you can do is try to take them all from law abiding folks. Even if all gun manufacturers were closed up, it would take forever for the current guns to quit working, and there would be plenty of incentive to create illegal gun factories. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/250 "2012-12-20T18:41:14Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > And some are for overthrowing the government. Why did you leave that out? Because a handful of yokels running around out in the woods playing soldier is not worth mentioning. ---
**Author:** ![dnooman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/839c29/32.png) [@dnooman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dnooman)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2012, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/251 "2012-12-21T04:38:05Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > And the Internet didn’t exist when the First Amendment was written. I highly doubt the authors of this meant that every man has a right to post images of women having sex with dogs where any kid with access to an unsecured computer can see them. What? My point was that when the 2nd amendment was created, a firearm was something that could be used to defend or attack, but at a limited capacity compared to today’s weapons. Mass murder with a gun back then was next to impossible. The intended targets would either beat the shit out of the shooter while he was reloading, or just run away. I’m confident had they known that there would be a weapon that could murder every last person in a tavern in less than a minute if he got angry, they would have banned it outright. How exactly? I thought it was quite apt. If a handful of crazy evil people can abuse a right and inflict intolerable harm on society, then for the sake of safety everyone must forfeit that right. > [@](#): > > Fine, but just _how_ exactly do we keep bad people from getting guns? That is literally the entire issue summed up into one tidy, yet un-answerable question. Gun control advocates think that bans on types of guns sold, and background checks will curb the slaughters. Maybe so. Responsible gun owners either keep their mouths shut and keep on doing what they do, or they flare up like rabid wolverines screaming about how their constitutional rights are being violated because they can’t have enough firepower to kill a whole town. Like I said before I love guns. I really like shooting, and the idea of potentially eliminating a threat. I also realize that said threat is highly unlikely to ever rear it’s head in my lifetime. I think both sides of the gun control argument genuinely want murder numbers (especially those of kids) to go down, and they agree that crazy and unstable people should not be allowed to possess firearms. If bad guys don’t have guns, everything is cool. I realize that this is often not the case, and is sometimes the opposite of what is true, but… it is what we all want to happen regarding this matter. There are two elements in common with every gun related mass murder: the shooter, and the gun. Regulating the gun, and its availability is not that hard. This is what gun control advocates want to do. Regulating who has access to guns is much more difficult. This is what gun rights advocates should be promoting. Remove the negative side affect of owning a gun, keep the crazies from having them. I think it’s the responsibility of the gun advocates to eliminate the chances of a mass murderer attaining a gun, rather than restricting guns in general. Yes, this is difficult if not impossible, but it beats the alternative of banning of gun sales across the board. ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2012, 8:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/252 "2012-12-21T08:31:31Z")
> [@dnooman](#): > > I’m confident had they known that there would be a weapon that could murder every last person in a tavern in less than a minute if he got angry, they would have banned it outright. Yet the amendment doesn’t mention anything about cannon, rockets, grenades or barrels of gunpowder - all of which were well known at the time and quite capable of causing significant damage. > [@](#): > > I think it’s the responsibility of the gun advocates to eliminate the chances of a mass murderer attaining a gun, rather than restricting guns in general. Yes, this is difficult if not impossible, but it beats the alternative of banning of gun sales across the board. This I agree with. It’s a shame there doesn’t seem to be any middle ground on the whole issue, frankly - it seems to be either “Guns for nearly everyone!” or “No-one gets a gun at all!” with not much in the middle. ---
**Author:** ![Dave\_Hartwick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7feea3/32.png) [@Dave\_Hartwick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dave_Hartwick)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2012, 9:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/253 "2012-12-21T09:18:42Z")
> [@Martini\_Enfield](#): > > This I agree with. It’s a shame there doesn’t seem to be any middle ground on the whole issue, frankly - it seems to be either “Guns for nearly everyone!” or “No-one gets a gun at all!” with not much in the middle. Even the UK still permits guns for hunting. The idea that gun control is the same thing as a gun ban is paranoid. I’ve seen posts here that favor a complete gun ban for the US. Trolling, I guess, or a reaction to personal tragedy. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2012, 10:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/254 "2012-12-21T10:16:50Z")
> [@Martini\_Enfield](#): > > Yet the amendment doesn’t mention anything about cannon, rockets, grenades or barrels of gunpowder - all of which were well known at the time and quite capable of causing significant damage. I think that’s his point. They didn’t mention them, because they weren’t planning on allowing them. And, while I’m not going to quote the people who said it because there’s too much, please quit with the dumbfuckery about cars. A car is primarily a transportation device that causes damage only if used improperly. A gun is a device specifically designed to cause damage that is only used for recreation on the side. Many people need a vehicle to get them to work. No one needs to go hunting. The only real need for a gun is to protect you from other people who have guns. Alcohol makes a faulty analogy, too, but for a different reason: the harm that occurs is mostly to the user. No one buys alcohol with the intent to harm others. Even with cars, this is unlikely. Both alcohol- and car-related deaths are usually accidents–they are unintentional. Most gun related deaths are not. The only thing guns can be compared with are other weapons–something primarily designed to cause harm, has only recreational use otherwise, and, when harm occurs from their use, said harm is usually intentional. These are the unique properties that make guns different from any other item I own. And, note, I said “other item.” I own a few heirloom guns. I got my hunting license a while back, even though I never used it. (It was a [not boy-] scout thing.) And I never even thought about gun control until I got to this board. I’m not anti-gun. I just hate these stupid arguments. A gun is not like a car, nor is it like alcohol. It’s like what it is, a weapon. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2012, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/255 "2012-12-21T10:25:02Z")
> [@Dave\_Hartwick](#): > > I’ve seen posts here that favor a complete gun ban for the US. Trolling, I guess, or a reaction to personal tragedy. Cite? You may have seen posts that refer hastily to a “complete” banning, but I can’t imagine anyone who doesn’t want guns in the hands of police, the military, the FBI, those who’ve passed rigorous background checks, etc. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2012, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/256 "2012-12-21T10:38:09Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > And the Internet didn’t exist when the First Amendment was written. I highly doubt the authors of this meant that every man has a right to post images of women having sex with dogs where any kid with access to an unsecured computer can see them. The thing is, I don’t hear people advocating that the founding fathers wanted us to be able to send porn to children. Everybody does, however, try to argue original intent when it comes to the Second Amendment. Plus, I’m not sure that the Internet changed things as much as you think. People could have pulled off the same thing with print and freedom of the press. What prevented this was obscenity and porn laws, so what changed things was the Fourteenth Amendment which incorporated the Bill of Rights to the State and later jurisprudence that found a lot of those laws unconstitutional. ---
**Author:** ![Dave\_Hartwick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7feea3/32.png) [@Dave\_Hartwick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dave_Hartwick)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2012, 10:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/257 "2012-12-21T10:43:44Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > Cite? You may have seen posts that refer hastily to a “complete” banning, but I can’t imagine anyone who doesn’t want guns in the hands of police, the military, the FBI, those who’ve passed rigorous background checks, etc. I only meant a “complete” civilian ban, sorry. A poster called foolsguinea had the most extreme position that I recall seeing here. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15808681&postcount=44](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15808681&postcount=44) ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2012, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/258 "2012-12-21T11:44:34Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I think that’s his point. They didn’t mention them, because they weren’t planning on allowing them. Not being in the US I don’t claim to be a US constitutional expert but it’s my understanding things like cannon likely weren’t specifically prohibited because they cost as much as someone’s house so it was breathtakingly unlikely there were going to be many in private hands. > [@](#): > > And, while I’m not going to quote the people who said it because there’s too much, please quit with the dumbfuckery about cars. Cars make a useful analogy because they’re a mechanical object which everyone is familiar with, which most people use responsibly, and which a small but visible group don’t. Most cars are capable of far more than what anyone “needs”. No-one _needs_ a family sedan that can drive at 220km/h. Almost no-one _needs_ a four-wheel drive to travel alone to their non-primary or construction-industry work along a paved road in temperate weather. No-one _needs_ a Bugatti Veyron. But, for the most part, most people have no problem with the fact family cars can drive at 200+ km/h, people can drive to work in an office in a 4WD, or spend a million dollars on the fastest car… … In The World. And calls to disallow these things because they’re not “needed” would be met with [Tony Harrison]Outrage![/Tony Harrison] from the majority of people who were using them sensibly. Just like guns, in other words. Most anti-gun people not only don’t understand why many shooters think laws banning guns for “Looking scary” are silly, they (anti-gun people) generally don’t know _anything_ about guns except that they don’t like them. But saying “Imagine if it was a law banning cars simply because they had a bodykit and a spoiler”? I’d suggest that’s a reasonable analogy for the “banning scary black guns” debate and one most people can engage with on some level. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaptics](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/278dde/32.png) [@Sinaptics](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaptics)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2012, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/259 "2012-12-21T12:47:47Z")
> [@Martini\_Enfield](#): > > Not being in the US I don’t claim to be a US constitutional expert but it’s my understanding things like cannon likely weren’t specifically prohibited because they cost as much as someone’s house so it was breathtakingly unlikely there were going to be many in private hands. > > Cars make a useful analogy because they’re a mechanical object which everyone is familiar with, which most people use responsibly, and which a small but visible group don’t. > > Most cars are capable of far more than what anyone “needs”. No-one _needs_ a family sedan that can drive at 220km/h. Almost no-one _needs_ a four-wheel drive to travel alone to their non-primary or construction-industry work along a paved road in temperate weather. No-one _needs_ a Bugatti Veyron. > > But, for the most part, most people have no problem with the fact family cars can drive at 200+ km/h, people can drive to work in an office in a 4WD, or spend a million dollars on the fastest car… > > … In The World. > > And calls to disallow these things because they’re not “needed” would be met with [Tony Harrison]Outrage![/Tony Harrison] from the majority of people who were using them sensibly. > > Just like guns, in other words. > > Most anti-gun people not only don’t understand why many shooters think laws banning guns for “Looking scary” are silly, they (anti-gun people) generally don’t know _anything_ about guns except that they don’t like them. > > But saying “Imagine if it was a law banning cars simply because they had a bodykit and a spoiler”? I’d suggest that’s a reasonable analogy for the “banning scary black guns” debate and one most people can engage with on some level. Well, at least here in the US, most modern cars will have an automatic disengaging of the engine if speed exceeds a certain amount. Additionally, some even newer cars have sensors that will detect and avoid obstacles. So i’d say your analogy fails because we are already addressing these problems. ---
**Author:** ![artemis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/91b2a8/32.png) [@artemis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/artemis)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2012, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069/260 "2012-12-21T13:45:11Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > The only real need for a gun is to protect you from other people who have guns. No, they are also quite useful for protecting yourself from other people who have knives, clubs, or who are attacking in a group. If I ever find myself facing a 25 year old, 6’ tall, 180 ib intruder (armed or not), 5’ 2"", 50 year old me will be damned glad she has her pistol. (That’s unlikely to happen, but it’s not an impossibility. Rapists and highway hunters are real.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crafter-man-author-of-the-two-most-appalling-posts-ive-ever-read-here/644069.md?page=14)