• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Denial! A characteristics of our species!

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Asher
The left will fail miserably with their futile attempts to convince the masses into believing a bunch of fabricated facts. Much the same way that they failed in your last election.

James

Not so. The left did well, just the Electoral College failed us and now we have a liar and fool with no core values, not conservative nor liberal, just impulsive situational reactivity!

If you value him, why don't you Canadians grow your own clone or simply adopt him!

Asher
 

Jerome Marot

Well-known member
Since the theme of this thread is denial and since we seem to have departed from photography, I would like to remind the participants of an unfortunate characteristic of denial. People will only develop denial for issues to which they are very strongly attached. That is simple logic: it takes a compelling force for someone to start to negate reality. The consequence is people in denial would first need to break that strong emotional attachment to change their opinion about what they deny.

It follows that it is normally impossible to make people in denial change their opinion by logic alone, that is by having a courteous conversation about the subject, whatever the subject happens to be. It simply will not work. In the best case, the conversation will run in circles. In the worst case, aggression may occur.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Thanks, Jerome,

Of course I feel guilty for taking energy away from pictures. But to follow your comment, today we have to very serious mass shootings, (at a practice match for a charity baseball game, Republicans v Democrats in Washington DC, and just now a UPS office in San Francisco). Still it is unlikely to persuade lawmakers that gun purchases should require background checks, mental competence and safety training and follow up certifications.

Believing in loose gun laws is akin to the right to believe in the Buddha, Jesus, Trump, Le Pen or Katl Marx!

Mostly only death, natural
or otherwise, ends such belief!

Asher
 

James Lemon

Well-known member
Thanks, Jerome,

Of course I feel guilty for taking energy away from pictures. But to follow your comment, today we have to very serious mass shootings, (at a practice match for a charity baseball game, Republicans v Democrats in Washington DC, and just now a UPS office in San Francisco). Still it is unlikely to persuade lawmakers that gun purchases should require background checks, mental competence and safety training and follow up certifications.

Believing in loose gun laws is akin to the right to believe in the Buddha, Jesus, Trump, Le Pen or Katl Marx!

Mostly only death, natural
or otherwise, ends such belief!

Asher

Alcohol and prescription drugs kill 566% more people than guns do.

James
 

James Lemon

Well-known member
Let's assume that is true.

So one justifies the other?

That is denial?[/QUOT

Asher

Simply stating an observation is not denial. Yet every time someone is killed by someone with a gun it's all over MSM. Although the deaths from alcohol and prescription drugs far exceed the deaths of people killed by guns it doesn't get much attention. One has to wonder why it's not on the top of the left wings laundry list.

James
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
When we talk about alcohol, we can discuss that issue, same with drugs. Each of these had no bearing on the deaths due to gun crime and accidents.

There is no justification for opposing background checks or refusal to sell to mentally ill people or those with social media record of hate-mongering against minorities. Also there is no justification to allowing folk to own a gun without minimal safety training!

It can't be that 100% of folk who want to own weapons should be permitted to do so. Just like driving a motorbike, we want safety and anyone can train and apply.

Asher
 

James Lemon

Well-known member
When we talk about alcohol, we can discuss that issue, same with drugs. Each of these had no bearing on the deaths due to gun crime and accidents.

There is no justification for opposing background checks or refusal to sell to mentally ill people or those with social media record of hate-mongering against minorities. Also there is no justification to allowing folk to own a gun without minimal safety training!

It can't be that 100% of folk who want to own weapons should be permitted to do so. Just like driving a motorbike, we want safety and anyone can train and apply.

Asher

Really? Are you suggesting that someone who commits an act of violence with a gun could not be under the influence of some kind of mood altering substance legal or not?

Would you recommend background checks for someone who wanted to purchase alcohol to reduce alcohol related death? Or maybe you would create speacial lanes for drunk drivers. Apparently Tiger Woods was stoped by the police recently.

Background checks are not necessarily the solution to prevent people from killing others with guns.
Yet the MSM ramble on like a broken record about gun laws every time someone gets killed by a gun like they themselves are on the threshold of mental illness.

Emotional responses and bandaid solutions will not address the problem.

James
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Jerome,

It follows that it is normally impossible to make people in denial change their opinion by logic alone, that is by having a courteous conversation about the subject, whatever the subject happens to be. It simply will not work. In the best case, the conversation will run in circles. In the worst case, aggression may occur.

Well said.

Best regards,

Doug
 

James Lemon

Well-known member
Since the theme of this thread is denial and since we seem to have departed from photography, I would like to remind the participants of an unfortunate characteristic of denial. People will only develop denial for issues to which they are very strongly attached. That is simple logic: it takes a compelling force for someone to start to negate reality. The consequence is people in denial would first need to break that strong emotional attachment to change their opinion about what they deny.

It follows that it is normally impossible to make people in denial change their opinion by logic alone, that is by having a courteous conversation about the subject, whatever the subject happens to be. It simply will not work. In the best case, the conversation will run in circles. In the worst case, aggression may occur.

Hi, Jerome,



Well said.

Best regards,

Doug

Jerome,Doug

I don't cling to any principles I just make it up as I go.

James
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Jerome,Doug

I don't cling to any principles I just make it up as I go.

James

Is that true or itself denial? After all, James, most ideas we cling too are gathered from the market place. Liberals tend to get infected with their memes and conservatives likewise with their own. The rest is likely, as not, merely justification.

Few of us have original ideas that we created ourselves!

Asher
 
Top