Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

UnderwaterMike wrote:You can't call it "Darwinism" when an innocent little kid is shot by an equally innocent little kid. Whether the five-year-old had shot before or not is irrelevant; kids that age do not have the cognitive capacity to understand logical relationships between their actions and potential consequences, nor do they fully understand the concept of permanence.

If the mother had been shot, I'd be tempted to say Darwinism -- except that wouldn't consider the terrible burden that the kid would feel for the rest of his life after shooting his mother.

Who the f*** keeps a gun in "a corner" when there are kids in the house? Mom and/or Dad need some quality time with the criminal justice system.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Of course it's natural selection. It's just that in our modern era, the mechanism isn't always instantaneous. If we were still hunter-gatherers, both parents of those poor little girls would have become saber-toothed tiger poop before they were old enough to breed. In a world that is not only without saber-toothed tigers but also full of self-appointed cradle-to-the-grave nannies, these two dumbasses cheated the odds and lived long enough to pollute the gene pool. But their stupidity caught up with them and vindicated Mr. Darwin because they ultimately proved too stupid to keep their offspring alive. Either way, "stupid" genes get eliminated from the gene pool. Natural selection is natural selection; whether or not there is a half-generation time lag, and whether it involves tiger poop or unsecured loaded weapons. Yes, it is truly horrible to contemplate dead children, but those are merely the unpleasant details.

dorminWS wrote:

UnderwaterMike wrote:You can't call it "Darwinism" when an innocent little kid is shot by an equally innocent little kid. Whether the five-year-old had shot before or not is irrelevant; kids that age do not have the cognitive capacity to understand logical relationships between their actions and potential consequences, nor do they fully understand the concept of permanence.

If the mother had been shot, I'd be tempted to say Darwinism -- except that wouldn't consider the terrible burden that the kid would feel for the rest of his life after shooting his mother.

Who the f*** keeps a gun in "a corner" when there are kids in the house? Mom and/or Dad need some quality time with the criminal justice system.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Of course it's natural selection. It's just that in our modern era, the mechanism isn't always instantaneous. If we were still hunter-gatherers, both parents of those poor little girls would have become saber-toothed tiger poop before they were old enough to breed. In a world that is not only without saber-toothed tigers but also full of self-appointed cradle-to-the-grave nannies, these two dumbasses cheated the odds and lived long enough to pollute the gene pool. But their stupidity caught up with them and vindicated Mr. Darwin because they ultimately proved too stupid to keep their offspring alive. Either way, "stupid" genes get eliminated from the gene pool. Natural selection is natural selection; whether or not there is a half-generation time lag, and whether it involves tiger poop or unsecured loaded weapons. Yes, it is truly horrible to contemplate dead children, but those are merely the unpleasant details.

I disagree; it's more like parental neglect. These were innocent kids, subjected to a bad environment. I generally disagree with people who argue that environmental factors, rather than individual responsibility, are to blame for crimes, but with kids -- especially preschoolers -- it's true.

That said, I did LOL at "tiger poop."

@UnderwaterMike:
Actually, we don't disagree - at least not about very much. The primary problem here is that the two of us are talking about different things.

YES, it was parental neglect. And YES, they were innocent kids. And YES, the poor little kiddies were subjected to a poor (read that DANGEROUS) environment. And NO, they didn’t deserve for that to happen to them. No argument from me about any of that.

And I'm certainly not saying the parents were blameless. I'm merely observing the obvious fact that they were stupid. CRIMINALLY stupid, as a matter of fact; but that is irrelevant to the mechanism of natural selection imposed by the universe we inhabit. And all that notwithstanding, that universe is a cold, mechanical and impersonal place. It doesn't care about how cute, innocent, loveable or blameless the kiddies are. And it is so arranged that genes that are not worthy of propagation get weeded out. It is a mistake to think that it makes any allowances for human emotions. It is a mistake to think that this is a sanction for being unworthy. It’s just the way the machine is built.

Very Tragic