FOLLOW BOREME
TAGS
<< Back to listing
War of the words

War of the words

(6:30) Labels, soundbites and slogans are very powerful manipulators of thought. They limit the conversation to the context of the label.

Share this post

You can comment as a guest, but registering gives you added benefits

Add your comment
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Dafuq (1772 days ago)
Yeah, but can a hammer/knife/kitchen utensil kill 20 people in 3 seconds?
ReplyVote up (135)down (127)
Original comment
Yeah, but can a hammer/knife/kitchen utensil kill 20 people in 3 seconds?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Beau Guest (1772 days ago)
OED: Weapon; n. a thing designed or used to inflict bodily harm or physical damage. You could equally describe a weapon as a tool specifically designed to kill or maim. This is not an 'emotional' statement: it is a statement of fact. Another statement of fact is that for a society to call itself civilised, its citizens should not be allowed to carry tools that are SPECIFICALLY designed to kill or maim. One day, America will grow up and mature into a civilised society. In the meantime, its citizens are viewed by the rest of us as lovable-but-dangerous children. Many of whom believe in a four thousand year old middle eastern religion.
ReplyVote up (115)down (115)
Original comment
OED: Weapon; n. a thing designed or used to inflict bodily harm or physical damage. You could equally describe a weapon as a tool specifically designed to kill or maim. This is not an 'emotional' statement: it is a statement of fact. Another statement of fact is that for a society to call itself civilised, its citizens should not be allowed to carry tools that are SPECIFICALLY designed to kill or maim. One day, America will grow up and mature into a civilised society. In the meantime, its citizens are viewed by the rest of us as lovable-but-dangerous children. Many of whom believe in a four thousand year old middle eastern religion.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Submitted as a guest. (1773 days ago)
Let me ask this question. Why is it so, that the USA has the highest rate of gun related kills, up to 300% more than compared to other western civilized countries? Is it just the facts that in the USA theres just 300% more crazy people? ..I don't think theres any shred of evidence in that statement... The thing is.. you just Love your expencive guns, and can't bare to live without that kind of power in your hand. So, having all those guns in hands range, just makes it more possible for nutcases to do there killing frenzy.
ReplyVote up (133)down (130)
Original comment
Let me ask this question. Why is it so, that the USA has the highest rate of gun related kills, up to 300% more than compared to other western civilized countries? Is it just the facts that in the USA theres just 300% more crazy people? ..I don't think theres any shred of evidence in that statement... The thing is.. you just Love your expencive guns, and can't bare to live without that kind of power in your hand. So, having all those guns in hands range, just makes it more possible for nutcases to do there killing frenzy.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1772 days ago)
Your statistics are wrong. Check countries where guns have been banned such as Mexico and Columbia and check their gun murder rate. Also, the gun murder rate might be higher than the UK but our rape and other violent crime rate is lower than the UK. We have from 270 to 300 million guns in the US and it's impossible to remove them all so they are here to stay. Other countries trying to get us to surrender our guns with their opinions will not work. It's our 2nd amendment to our constitution that states we can own them. We have had guns since the very beginning and you'd know that if you ever watched an old western movie. Everyone carried their own weapons to protect themselves because the local sheriff couldn't protect you.
ReplyVote up (129)down (128)
Original comment
Your statistics are wrong. Check countries where guns have been banned such as Mexico and Columbia and check their gun murder rate. Also, the gun murder rate might be higher than the UK but our rape and other violent crime rate is lower than the UK. We have from 270 to 300 million guns in the US and it's impossible to remove them all so they are here to stay. Other countries trying to get us to surrender our guns with their opinions will not work. It's our 2nd amendment to our constitution that states we can own them. We have had guns since the very beginning and you'd know that if you ever watched an old western movie. Everyone carried their own weapons to protect themselves because the local sheriff couldn't protect you.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1772 days ago)
Your constitution also labels African people as 3/5ths human. Perhaps, just perhaps, the ideas come from a time gone by?
ReplyVote up (128)down (124)
Original comment
Your constitution also labels African people as 3/5ths human. Perhaps, just perhaps, the ideas come from a time gone by?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1772 days ago)
You have no idea what you're talking about. Fourteenth Amendment allowed blacks to vote and repealed the three-fifths rule; fifteenth made it a federal crime to deny the vote based on race. Finally, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 officially made it illegal to discriminate based on sex and colour.
ReplyVote up (105)down (120)
Original comment
You have no idea what you're talking about. Fourteenth Amendment allowed blacks to vote and repealed the three-fifths rule; fifteenth made it a federal crime to deny the vote based on race. Finally, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 officially made it illegal to discriminate based on sex and colour.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Submitted as a guest (1772 days ago)
Did i not mention 'compared to western civilized countries'? Mexico and Columbia does Not fall into that category, now try again.. And I want you to give me a true source of statistic for your crime/rape allegation, as its Not true at all. In America only Male-Female rape is counted as rape. And i do believe that other poorer countries don't keep that tight statistic, gun killing is on the other hand very reliable to count. And to be fair, rapes in UK and USA seems pretty much the same. Rate per 100,000 population: USA:27.3 - UK:28.8 - Mexico:13.2 - Russia:3.4 - Sweden:63.5 Do you really think that the people in Sweden is more frequently raped than in Russia, or are they just more willing to self report a rape case? Source: LINK Now then.. its estimated that every 2 minutes, someone is getting raped in American. Would there be More rapes if you didn't have the guns to protect you? And do the guns Really protect you from getting raped? The 2nd amendment is a blast from the past, and seems an outdated vision of personal security...
ReplyVote up (101)down (120)
Original comment
Did i not mention 'compared to western civilized countries'? Mexico and Columbia does Not fall into that category, now try again.. And I want you to give me a true source of statistic for your crime/rape allegation, as its Not true at all. In America only Male-Female rape is counted as rape. And i do believe that other poorer countries don't keep that tight statistic, gun killing is on the other hand very reliable to count. And to be fair, rapes in UK and USA seems pretty much the same. Rate per 100,000 population: USA:27.3 - UK:28.8 - Mexico:13.2 - Russia:3.4 - Sweden:63.5 Do you really think that the people in Sweden is more frequently raped than in Russia, or are they just more willing to self report a rape case? Source: LINK Now then.. its estimated that every 2 minutes, someone is getting raped in American. Would there be More rapes if you didn't have the guns to protect you? And do the guns Really protect you from getting raped? The 2nd amendment is a blast from the past, and seems an outdated vision of personal security...
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1772 days ago)
Here is the information you requested. LINK Next time, please do your own research. You can see clearly that the UK has higher crime rates than the US. Summary: UK Higher in Assault victims, believes less in police efficiency, higher in bribes, higher in drug offenses, lower in perception of safety when walking in the dark, higher in rape victims, higher software piracy, and higher in total crime victims (Ranked 3rd in the world and the US is at 15). The UK is better with murders and we already discussed that and the UK has fewer prisoners. Those are the only two statistics that is better in the UK when compared to the US.
ReplyVote up (110)down (112)
Original comment
Here is the information you requested. LINK Next time, please do your own research. You can see clearly that the UK has higher crime rates than the US. Summary: UK Higher in Assault victims, believes less in police efficiency, higher in bribes, higher in drug offenses, lower in perception of safety when walking in the dark, higher in rape victims, higher software piracy, and higher in total crime victims (Ranked 3rd in the world and the US is at 15). The UK is better with murders and we already discussed that and the UK has fewer prisoners. Those are the only two statistics that is better in the UK when compared to the US.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
TheBob TheBob (1772 days ago)
You're on a very slippery slope now you're recommending "old western" movies as a historical source. In the old frontier towns people actually had to check their guns in with the sheriff - so it was unlikely likely "Everyone carried their own weapons to protect themselves because the local sheriff couldn't protect you." Yes, there were probably exceptions - but this was the norm. I expect you'll soon be telling us how many Americans got away in "The Great Escape" and thanks to U571 the Americans cracked the enigma code.
ReplyVote up (95)down (119)
Original comment
You're on a very slippery slope now you're recommending "old western" movies as a historical source. In the old frontier towns people actually had to check their guns in with the sheriff - so it was unlikely likely "Everyone carried their own weapons to protect themselves because the local sheriff couldn't protect you." Yes, there were probably exceptions - but this was the norm. I expect you'll soon be telling us how many Americans got away in "The Great Escape" and thanks to U571 the Americans cracked the enigma code.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1772 days ago)
You're talking about in some of the city and in the towns like Dodge and Tombstone. You could carry your gun around to protect yourself in the wild west except where it was specifically prohibited which wasn't too many places when you consider the size of the US and the few places you had to check it in.
ReplyVote up (109)down (115)
Original comment
You're talking about in some of the city and in the towns like Dodge and Tombstone. You could carry your gun around to protect yourself in the wild west except where it was specifically prohibited which wasn't too many places when you consider the size of the US and the few places you had to check it in.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Juniper Juniper (1770 days ago)
I get his general point but his starting point seems disingenuous and his assumptions of origin are subjective. I've never heard of the phrase 'weapons of war' and I'm not sure where he is saying that it comes from. Surely if you're going to make a video about the power of words and chose an example you want to use a phrase that is widely used. Secondly, if a group attempts to change the name of something in order to get across the idea that you are 'less safe', surely any argument against such relabelling is severely compromised if in fact the thing DOES MAKE YOU LESS SAFE. He's seemingly arguing for a better discussion on gun control and other issues, but I get the sense that in the end, he'd just be the one guy staunchly holding on to the opinion that he formed ages ago, making discussion and debate pointless.
ReplyVote up (121)down (127)
Original comment
I get his general point but his starting point seems disingenuous and his assumptions of origin are subjective. I've never heard of the phrase 'weapons of war' and I'm not sure where he is saying that it comes from. Surely if you're going to make a video about the power of words and chose an example you want to use a phrase that is widely used. Secondly, if a group attempts to change the name of something in order to get across the idea that you are 'less safe', surely any argument against such relabelling is severely compromised if in fact the thing DOES MAKE YOU LESS SAFE. He's seemingly arguing for a better discussion on gun control and other issues, but I get the sense that in the end, he'd just be the one guy staunchly holding on to the opinion that he formed ages ago, making discussion and debate pointless.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1772 days ago)
All criminals have guns, whether or not there is gun control - but when there is gun control, criminals tend to use their guns less because no one else is carrying a gun. Gun control makes a bad situation less bad.
ReplyVote up (122)down (141)
Original comment
All criminals have guns, whether or not there is gun control - but when there is gun control, criminals tend to use their guns less because no one else is carrying a gun. Gun control makes a bad situation less bad.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1772 days ago)
All countries have crazies, whether or not there is gun control - but when there is gun control, crazies don't have easy access to guns, so they resort to other weapons and the death toll is usually less. Gun control makes a bad situation less bad.
ReplyVote up (123)down (120)
Original comment
All countries have crazies, whether or not there is gun control - but when there is gun control, crazies don't have easy access to guns, so they resort to other weapons and the death toll is usually less. Gun control makes a bad situation less bad.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1772 days ago)
Not all countries have gun control and paranoia as deeply ingrained into their psyche as America has. That is the wild card that makes this issue so difficult and frankly quite weird; the risk that the extreme right will blow their tops en masse.
ReplyVote up (187)down (105)
Original comment
Not all countries have gun control and paranoia as deeply ingrained into their psyche as America has. That is the wild card that makes this issue so difficult and frankly quite weird; the risk that the extreme right will blow their tops en masse.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (1772 days ago)
He makes a point, but is not entirely correct. Yes, labels matter, and can influence public opinion and governmental policy. However, many tools are not value neutral. The first rifle with selective fire, a buttstock, more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle, magazines and range of 300 meters was invented for use in war, and called a Sturmgewehr by Adolph Hitler. It means "storm rifle". Storm as in military attack, or assault. The express and explicit use of this design of gun is to attack and kill people. It really doesn't matter what the label is.
ReplyVote up (106)down (122)
Original comment
He makes a point, but is not entirely correct. Yes, labels matter, and can influence public opinion and governmental policy. However, many tools are not value neutral. The first rifle with selective fire, a buttstock, more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle, magazines and range of 300 meters was invented for use in war, and called a Sturmgewehr by Adolph Hitler. It means "storm rifle". Storm as in military attack, or assault. The express and explicit use of this design of gun is to attack and kill people. It really doesn't matter what the label is.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1772 days ago)
The express and explicit use of a sword is to "attack and kill people" too. Should those be banned?
ReplyVote up (132)down (106)
Original comment
The express and explicit use of a sword is to "attack and kill people" too. Should those be banned?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (1769 days ago)
Latest comment: His post is about labels, and language, not about banning. My comment is a response.
ReplyVote up (106)down (102)
Original comment
Latest comment: His post is about labels, and language, not about banning. My comment is a response.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1772 days ago)
He does make a good point. Should we outlaw box cutters and fertilizer because they were used in mass killings? Why do people think we should ban the so-called "Assault Weapons" when murders from rifles of any kind is extremely low. Killings from people's hands and feet exceed the number of all rifle (including Assault rifles) murders so ban hands and feet instead of weapons that are not a problem.
ReplyVote up (126)down (147)
Original comment
He does make a good point. Should we outlaw box cutters and fertilizer because they were used in mass killings? Why do people think we should ban the so-called "Assault Weapons" when murders from rifles of any kind is extremely low. Killings from people's hands and feet exceed the number of all rifle (including Assault rifles) murders so ban hands and feet instead of weapons that are not a problem.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1772 days ago)
We _have_ limited fertilizer and box cutters though. Or have you not been in an airport since 1999? Perhaps firearms should have some limits as well? Or at least, shouldn't there be a conversation about that?
ReplyVote up (174)down (155)
Original comment
We _have_ limited fertilizer and box cutters though. Or have you not been in an airport since 1999? Perhaps firearms should have some limits as well? Or at least, shouldn't there be a conversation about that?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1772 days ago)
That was a federal building that was blown up with fertilizer -- not an airplane. Box cutters can kill people regardless if they are on an airplane or not. It just happens that the terrorists on 9/11/2001 used them on an airplane. Firearms do have some legal limits. You cannot bring them to a school or any federal building like a courthouse. You cannot bring them into a theater if the private company posts a notice that they do not want them inside (so that's why that theater was picked for the mass shooting). What other limits are you thinking about that isn't already there?
ReplyVote up (114)down (145)
Original comment
That was a federal building that was blown up with fertilizer -- not an airplane. Box cutters can kill people regardless if they are on an airplane or not. It just happens that the terrorists on 9/11/2001 used them on an airplane. Firearms do have some legal limits. You cannot bring them to a school or any federal building like a courthouse. You cannot bring them into a theater if the private company posts a notice that they do not want them inside (so that's why that theater was picked for the mass shooting). What other limits are you thinking about that isn't already there?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
RELATED POSTS
The gun modification that made the Las Vegas shooting so deadly
The gun modification that made the Las Vegas shooting so deadly
What it takes to buy a gun in Japan
What it takes to buy a gun in Japan
TYT - Guitarist at Vegas shooting changes mind on gun control
TYT - Guitarist at Vegas shooting changes mind on gun control
The Daily Show - Is it time to start talking about gun control?
The Daily Show - Is it time to start talking about gun control?
Armed and masked
Armed and masked "open-carry" activists enter police station