Posted on 09/16/2013 9:11:20 AM PDT by ConservativeDude
MOSCOW — An argument in southern Russia over philosopher Immanuel Kant, the author of "Critique of Pure Reason," devolved into pure mayhem when one debater shot the other. A police spokeswoman in Rostov-on Don, Viktoria Safarova, said two men in their 20s were discussing Kant as they stood in line to buy beer at a small store on Sunday. The discussion deteriorated into a fistfight and one participant pulled out a small nonlethal pistol and fired repeatedly. The victim was hospitalized with injuries that were not life-threatening. Neither person was identified. It was not clear which of Kant's ideas may have triggered the violence.
(Excerpt) Read more at wral.com ...
Tear-gas gun, most likely; they’re very common all over central Europe. No permit, no license, shoots tear-gas cartridges. You can carry them anywhere.
“Y’know Nietzsche says, that ‘out of chaos comes order’.”
“Oh, blow it out your ass, Howard.”
You KNOW what the gunny would have said...Kant was a pussycat....er, well you know what I mean.
interesting
So they were arguing, see... and the one guy, see, he sez
“I like Freude, but I’m really Junge at heart....”
and then the other guy, see, he sez, right before he pulled the trigger he sez
“We just Kant come to an agreement here...”
Badda bing...
.... and AFTER the guy got shot, the other guy, see, he sez:
“Yeah...DAT’S gonna leave a Marx!”
Try the Veal! Here till Tuesday!
I am a Brooksian.
/johnny
If that is an accurate description of Kant's philosophy of morality, I just can't see why anybody would respect it.
If some group of people propose an action to be "necessary", then that seems to just be his way of saying that some people are declaring it to be the right thing to do. Presumably he does not mean "necessary" in the usual sense that people actually always do the action...but that it is "morally necessary" even if people sometimes do not take such actions. So why doesn't he just say that the things that are good to do are the things people consider good to do?
Also different groups of people might come to different conclusions of what actions are "necessary". Does this mean that any differing view is moral? And how many people need to have this view to construct an independent morality? How about one crazed murderer? Does it take a while lot of Nazis? Under his view, can we call what the murderer did or the Nazis did wrong when the slaughtered innocents when they thought it was "necessary"?
Give me the natural law view of Locke anytime.
My first boyfriend was a paraplegic. We used to go skeet shooting a lot. He owned a .45, .38, and .22 revolvers, and 12 ga. and 20 ga. shotguns. You might be thinking quadriplegic.
LOL
Nonlethal pistol must be a starter’s gun. Shoots blanks I guess. They will burn the crap out of you at close range. The wad that hold in the GP will also cause injuries if shot at close range and at exposed skin.
looks like a regular handgun alright
Obviously not, thinking more about it. Any really determined shooter could get someone to rig up a gun to be shot by pulling the string-trigger with his TEETH. One could even get it done by sheer body weight pulling on a gerry-rigged trigger.
Where there's a will...
Shows that I haven't given it THAT much thought...until now.
That was a pretty obvious answer...that I didn't think about. THANKS.
I prefer to kill by words...yakyakyak. :o)
Even on the weight. They’re largely indistinguishable from the real deal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.