Org Mobile Site
Thread: Newtown School Shootings
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit:
The reason our murder rate is so high is because of gangs involved in the drugs. (Yay for the big government paternalism/nanny state behind the war on drugs)
Take away those killings - or live were they aren't likely to occur - and I believe our murder rate is not much higher than Europe.
So... compare the killings in Europe with gangs included to those in the USA without...The reason our murder rate is so high is because of gangs involved in the drugs. (Yay for the big government paternalism/nanny state behind the war on drugs)
Take away those killings - or live were they aren't likely to occur - and I believe our murder rate is not much higher than Europe.
Given how restricted guns are in many European countries this will likely make the difference even greater.
Honestly, keep your guns: knock yourselves out :)
http://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Su...-Gang-Problems
The total number of gang homicides reported by respondents in the NYGS sample averaged nearly 2,000 annually from 2006 to 2010. During the same time period, the FBI estimated, on average, more than 16,000 homicides across the US.
So the actual homicide rate is closer to 16k not 11k and the rate per 100k people is 4.8 not 4.2
Also the gang murders are 12%.
So 12% off 4.8 goes back to almost 4.2. Wow still 3.5 times that of UK.
If I was told to year a helmet that would make me die 3.5 times more likely then without it, I would be questioning the manufacturers motivation in proclaiming it was for my protection. I would also tell him were to shove said helmet and that I don't care for his scare tactics.
The total number of gang homicides reported by respondents in the NYGS sample averaged nearly 2,000 annually from 2006 to 2010. During the same time period, the FBI estimated, on average, more than 16,000 homicides across the US.
So the actual homicide rate is closer to 16k not 11k and the rate per 100k people is 4.8 not 4.2
Also the gang murders are 12%.
So 12% off 4.8 goes back to almost 4.2. Wow still 3.5 times that of UK.
If I was told to year a helmet that would make me die 3.5 times more likely then without it, I would be questioning the manufacturers motivation in proclaiming it was for my protection. I would also tell him were to shove said helmet and that I don't care for his scare tactics.
Originally Posted by Papewaio:
http://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Su...-Gang-Problems
The total number of gang homicides reported by respondents in the NYGS sample averaged nearly 2,000 annually from 2006 to 2010. During the same time period, the FBI estimated, on average, more than 16,000 homicides across the US.
So the actual homicide rate is closer to 16k not 11k and the rate per 100k people is 4.8 not 4.2
Also the gang murders are 12%.
So 12% off 4.8 goes back to almost 4.2. Wow still 3.5 times that of UK.
If I was told to year a helmet that would make me die 3.5 times more likely then without it, I would be questioning the manufacturers motivation in proclaiming it was for my protection. I would also tell him were to shove said helmet and that I don't care for his scare tactics.
FBI statistics also show a 46.76% drop in the violent crime rate since 1991. What do you make of that?http://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Su...-Gang-Problems
The total number of gang homicides reported by respondents in the NYGS sample averaged nearly 2,000 annually from 2006 to 2010. During the same time period, the FBI estimated, on average, more than 16,000 homicides across the US.
So the actual homicide rate is closer to 16k not 11k and the rate per 100k people is 4.8 not 4.2
Also the gang murders are 12%.
So 12% off 4.8 goes back to almost 4.2. Wow still 3.5 times that of UK.
If I was told to year a helmet that would make me die 3.5 times more likely then without it, I would be questioning the manufacturers motivation in proclaiming it was for my protection. I would also tell him were to shove said helmet and that I don't care for his scare tactics.
EDIT: The murder rate decreased even further, by 51% over two decades.
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name:
FBI statistics also show a 46.76% drop in the violent crime rate since 1991. What do you make of that?
EDIT: The murder rate decreased even further, by 51% over two decades.
Congratulations! You've shot down to 3.5 times that of the UK - result!!!FBI statistics also show a 46.76% drop in the violent crime rate since 1991. What do you make of that?
EDIT: The murder rate decreased even further, by 51% over two decades.
What is the population difference of the most at risk groups of perpetration and victimization? If blacks commit 8 times the murders of their white counterparts and Hispanics commit some other multiplier above, what multiplier of blacks and hispanics does the US have over the UK as a percentage of the population? 2x? 3x? 8x? 15x?
White people have a higher statistical success rate at gun related homicide, but black people have more practice. Some discussion of demographics when reviewing the rate out of 100k is in order. More homogeneous societies where the history of poverty from immigration and racism is modern are expected to have lower rates. Prove me wrong. None of this is to say that white people wouldn't have such high homicide rates if they were in similar situations of poverty, but the number must be controlled for this if we are comparing. Apples to apples!
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...55534169,d.dmQ
White people have a higher statistical success rate at gun related homicide, but black people have more practice. Some discussion of demographics when reviewing the rate out of 100k is in order. More homogeneous societies where the history of poverty from immigration and racism is modern are expected to have lower rates. Prove me wrong. None of this is to say that white people wouldn't have such high homicide rates if they were in similar situations of poverty, but the number must be controlled for this if we are comparing. Apples to apples!
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...55534169,d.dmQ
Prove you wrong? You've not offered anything to prove you right!
Control numbers of what exactly? Unless you can offer some evidence that the mere colour of one's skin makes one shoot others then I'm at a loss to the point of what you're saying.
Control numbers of what exactly? Unless you can offer some evidence that the mere colour of one's skin makes one shoot others then I'm at a loss to the point of what you're saying.
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg:
What is the population difference of the most at risk groups of perpetration and victimization? If blacks commit 8 times the murders of their white counterparts and Hispanics commit some other multiplier above, what multiplier of blacks and hispanics does the US have over the UK as a percentage of the population? 2x? 3x? 8x? 15x?
White people have a higher statistical success rate at gun related homicide, but black people have more practice. Some discussion of demographics when reviewing the rate out of 100k is in order. More homogeneous societies where the history of poverty from immigration and racism is modern are expected to have lower rates. Prove me wrong. None of this is to say that white people wouldn't have such high homicide rates if they were in similar situations of poverty, but the number must be controlled for this if we are comparing. Apples to apples!
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...55534169,d.dmQ
So you are saying that the US has more blacks than the UK, so naturally has more murders? Nice!What is the population difference of the most at risk groups of perpetration and victimization? If blacks commit 8 times the murders of their white counterparts and Hispanics commit some other multiplier above, what multiplier of blacks and hispanics does the US have over the UK as a percentage of the population? 2x? 3x? 8x? 15x?
White people have a higher statistical success rate at gun related homicide, but black people have more practice. Some discussion of demographics when reviewing the rate out of 100k is in order. More homogeneous societies where the history of poverty from immigration and racism is modern are expected to have lower rates. Prove me wrong. None of this is to say that white people wouldn't have such high homicide rates if they were in similar situations of poverty, but the number must be controlled for this if we are comparing. Apples to apples!
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...55534169,d.dmQ
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
Congratulations! You've shot down to 3.5 times that of the UK - result!!!
You know, I think I am done with this thread. It's obvious that this thread has just become a nice circlejerk among certain europeans who figure that the only statistic that matters is that their number is lower than the US number. You all more or less know me, I am not exactly an American patriot like some of the more right wing American members here. But the arrogance towards the US in general is just insufferable for me.Congratulations! You've shot down to 3.5 times that of the UK - result!!!
It's very frustrating to try and explain the differences between US and Europe and get these one liner responses that either outright dismiss the argument or just a rehash of the same statistical argument "we have less deaths, we are more civilized, listen to us."
Someone pointed out that Canada has a fair share of guns and does not have the same problem as the US. Obviously, this is a multifaceted problem involving American culture, more specifically I have made the case that the problem is our terrible mental healthcare, and indeed out healthcare in general. But again, the reaction is to refocus the argument on how not why.
It has been pointed out that the demographics are different for the US, our border situation is different, our neighbors are different (who exactly is the Mexico of Europe?), our history is different, our individual states are different themselves. But no, such things are dismissed as "gang violence is only 12%, you are still barbarians." or "You are saying african americans commit a large portion of overall gun crimes against other african americans? Racist!"
The US is not as urban nor as homogeneous as European countries are, falling back on European attempts at multiculturalism as a defense against the homogeneous argument is laughable. As if a policy that is a few decades old counters an entire culture built upon three centuries of any man, woman and child across the world staking a claim in North America.
Even worse is when I point out that despite the rampant proliferation of guns and the victories of gun culture over the past two decades, we have seen gun related crimes and violent crime in general per capita decline by tremendous amounts. The US is improving, we are becoming more responsible but people want to cave into the immediate emotions now, or they don't want to admit that in the long run there could be a different way than the European model. Instead you get responses like the one I quoted above. Nothing like a few days of condescension from people who live 8 time zones away when 18 of your fellow Americans, kids no less, have been killed.
What's even more sad is when the American liberals hop onto the bandwagon and start painting everyone willing to break the circle as some absolutist extremist. As if the Assault Weapons Ban stopped the kids in Columbine from killing as many fucking students as they wanted. As if the Connecticut ban on handguns for anyone under 21 stopped the 20 year old killer from obtaining a handgun. As if a fucking 30 round magazine is what makes the difference between a massacre and a single murder. Because we all know that if you only have 8 bullet magazines, the killer will need to spend an extra 10 seconds swapping out magazines, which makes the difference for people running at 2% of the speed of a bullet (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i...ed+of+a+bullet).
Obviously though we are just savages who are ignorant of how best to save lives. If only we were as careful with guns as say, Norway, nothing like this would have happened.
I am just done here. No one wants to talk about the real statistics that matter. The fact that there are 3 times more mentally ill people in jail in the US than in actual treatment facilities. We have no other place to put them. http://gawker.com/5968818/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother
This will likely be my last post in this thread. I am really done reading this. I hope American society continues to improve as it has over the past two decades and shows the world that with enough emphasis on responsibility and improving mental health care we can indeed live in a society where we enjoy the freedom to own guns and live safely as well.
The United States homicide rate is 4.2 out of 100k per anum avg
The United Kingdom homicide rate is 1.7 out of 100k per anum avg
In the U.S., whites commit 1 homicide to every 8 committed by blacks. Hispanics commit some multiplier (2-3x) of homicides to every 1 by whites, but it is a number between 2 and 8
In the U.S., non-hispanic Whites make up 63.7% of the population, blacks are 12.6%, hispanics make up around 16%
In the U.K., non hispanic whites make up 92% of the population, blacks make up around 2%, hispanics don't register.
here is an article from the CDC, "the conservative d-bags council"?, no wait, the federal center for disease control...
The United Kingdom homicide rate is 1.7 out of 100k per anum avg
In the U.S., whites commit 1 homicide to every 8 committed by blacks. Hispanics commit some multiplier (2-3x) of homicides to every 1 by whites, but it is a number between 2 and 8
In the U.S., non-hispanic Whites make up 63.7% of the population, blacks are 12.6%, hispanics make up around 16%
In the U.K., non hispanic whites make up 92% of the population, blacks make up around 2%, hispanics don't register.
here is an article from the CDC, "the conservative d-bags council"?, no wait, the federal center for disease control...
Originally Posted by :
Can anyone break those figures down for me? To pretend that homogeneity and heterogeneity don't enter into the figures is a lie. I like a cosmopolitan society, but I don't like people to lie to me or themselves about reality. Make it about class or status as it relates to race, but weigh the numbers fairly. This isn't aryan race crap, I think people are inherently equal and certain subsections of society have been unfairly disadvantaged due to deeply rooted emotions. It just doesn't mean that I'm going to lie to myself.During 2007, homicide rates were highest among persons aged 15--34 years, and the overall unadjusted rate for males was approximately 4 times that of females (9.8 versus 2.5 deaths per 100,000 population, respectively. Unadjusted homicide rates were highest among blacks (23.1 deaths per 100,000), followed by AI/ANs (7.8) and Hispanics (7.6), then whites (2.7) and A/PIs (2.4)
Good question to ask is who exactly shares the top spots in the gun deaths list besides the US.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rate
Gee, El Salvador, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Panama. In fact, with the exception of swaziland and a few others, the vast majority of the countries at the top are all in the Americas.
Looks to me that we are simply reaping the benefits of our war on drugs. Latin America has become a battle ground over drugs and the blood inevitably spills over to where the selling actually goes on. No wonder out of all the countries in the Americas, Canada which the least involved in the war has the lowest death rate from guns.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rate
Gee, El Salvador, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Panama. In fact, with the exception of swaziland and a few others, the vast majority of the countries at the top are all in the Americas.
Looks to me that we are simply reaping the benefits of our war on drugs. Latin America has become a battle ground over drugs and the blood inevitably spills over to where the selling actually goes on. No wonder out of all the countries in the Americas, Canada which the least involved in the war has the lowest death rate from guns.
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name:
Good question to ask is who exactly shares the top spots in the gun deaths list besides the US.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rate
Gee, El Salvador, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Panama. In fact, with the exception of swaziland and a few others, the vast majority of the countries at the top are all in the Americas.
Looks to me that we are simply reaping the benefits of our war on drugs. Latin America has become a battle ground over drugs and the blood inevitably spills over to where the selling actually goes on. No wonder out of all the countries in the Americas, Canada which the least involved in the war has the lowest death rate from guns.
Europe also, largely, participates in the "war" on drugs, and we have gang violence - but still fewer homicides. Consider the Zinmmerman thread - one American shot another in a restaurant after they got into an argument and he was shoved.Good question to ask is who exactly shares the top spots in the gun deaths list besides the US.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rate
Gee, El Salvador, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Panama. In fact, with the exception of swaziland and a few others, the vast majority of the countries at the top are all in the Americas.
Looks to me that we are simply reaping the benefits of our war on drugs. Latin America has become a battle ground over drugs and the blood inevitably spills over to where the selling actually goes on. No wonder out of all the countries in the Americas, Canada which the least involved in the war has the lowest death rate from guns.
Gangs aren't your problem, nor are the number of guns (there are more per capita in Canada) the issue is your attitude to guns.
I mean, hell's bells, who on earth needs a SCAR for hunting unless he's hunting men?
If you're going to look at the total murder rate for the US there's no grounds for going after rifles of any kind - which make up a fraction (~3%) of total firearm homicides.
I think all you Europeans need to read that again.
That's your response? I respond point-by-point and your critique is that I had two arguments to support my position, neither of which, apparently, you could find fault with?
It's interesting, Lemur. You made all those claims about the need for more legislation and regulation. But you haven't responded to any critiques and now you're shifting into vaguely blaming the NRA for various things. It's all ad hominem attacks. You've got nothing.
Also, to expand on ACIN's point; why does Norway get praised for not having a knee jerk reaction to their terrorist madman, but if the US does the same thing, it's because we're all stupid violent idiots?
CR
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
So... compare the killings in Europe with gangs included to those in the USA without...
Given how restricted guns are in many European countries this will likely make the difference even greater.
Or, you know, your comparison is invalid. Because the gangs in Europe simply do not compare to the gangs in North America - namely American and especially Mexico - that have sprouted up as a result of the drug war.So... compare the killings in Europe with gangs included to those in the USA without...
Given how restricted guns are in many European countries this will likely make the difference even greater.
Originally Posted by :
The total number of gang homicides reported by respondents in the NYGS sample averaged nearly 2,000 annually from 2006 to 2010. During the same time period, the FBI estimated, on average, more than 16,000 homicides across the US.
From your site:The total number of gang homicides reported by respondents in the NYGS sample averaged nearly 2,000 annually from 2006 to 2010. During the same time period, the FBI estimated, on average, more than 16,000 homicides across the US.
*Because of the many issues surrounding the maintenance and collection of gang-crime data, caution is urged when interpreting the results presented below. For more information regarding this issue, see:
Originally Posted by :
Congratulations! You've shot down to 3.5 times that of the UK - result!!!
No, we've had a drastic drop in murders while having a drastic increase in guns.Congratulations! You've shot down to 3.5 times that of the UK - result!!!
I think all you Europeans need to read that again.
Originally Posted by :
Note CR's self-conflicting mish-mash of reasoning, beginning with how any regulation is impractical, but always coming back to how any regulation is a violation of fundamental rights and an imposition of the Nanny State. (So why bother to argue the practicality in the first place, if we're proceeding from a priori truths?)
Really? Note CR's self-conflicting mish-mash of reasoning, beginning with how any regulation is impractical, but always coming back to how any regulation is a violation of fundamental rights and an imposition of the Nanny State. (So why bother to argue the practicality in the first place, if we're proceeding from a priori truths?)
That's your response? I respond point-by-point and your critique is that I had two arguments to support my position, neither of which, apparently, you could find fault with?
Originally Posted by :
From CR's stated perspective, there is no regulation of firearms in the U.S.A. that can ever be legitimate. Or of there is, he's avoiding mentioning it. How is that not "absolutist"? Or at least a very good imitation of absolutism?
Wrong. But don't let me get in the way of you misstating your opponent's position. Again.From CR's stated perspective, there is no regulation of firearms in the U.S.A. that can ever be legitimate. Or of there is, he's avoiding mentioning it. How is that not "absolutist"? Or at least a very good imitation of absolutism?
Originally Posted by :
and things such as the gun show loophole (which they fight strenuously to maintain) put a hole below the waterline in their credibility.
Oh, you mean how the anti-gun folks would like to require a background check for all gun sales between individuals, effectively eliminating gun sales between private parties? Yeah, that's stupid and uselessly restrictive as well.and things such as the gun show loophole (which they fight strenuously to maintain) put a hole below the waterline in their credibility.
Originally Posted by :
It's illegal for ATF to release any statistical information about makes, models, or types of guns used in crimes. No specifics, mind you, just statistics, and it's been illegal since 2003. Thanks, guys.
Blame the sue-happy anti-gun nuts who would use that info to sue any gun companies if one model showed up more often than another.It's illegal for ATF to release any statistical information about makes, models, or types of guns used in crimes. No specifics, mind you, just statistics, and it's been illegal since 2003. Thanks, guys.
It's interesting, Lemur. You made all those claims about the need for more legislation and regulation. But you haven't responded to any critiques and now you're shifting into vaguely blaming the NRA for various things. It's all ad hominem attacks. You've got nothing.
EDIT: In fact, let's take a quick look at that opinion article from the NYT:
that's a pathetic argument.
Originally Posted by :
It’s just common sense that we need a radical reduction in the number and kind of guns for sale.
So he's got no backing for this statement in terms of statistics, just a gut feeling. And then again states without evidence that guns have to be tightly regulated, whilst complaining:It’s just common sense that we need a radical reduction in the number and kind of guns for sale.
Originally Posted by :
On the contrary, they often plausibly present themselves as tough-minded empiricists, opposing facts to liberal emoting.
Gee, I wonder why that is. Why that could possibly be. How it could be that the anti-gun liberals, who always are trying to emotionally exploit these tragedies, could possibly be cast as people pushing laws based on fear and emotions, while the pro-gun people responding with facts and statistics are the empiricists. In short he says without any backing guns have to be banned, complains that pro-gun folks have all the evidence on their side, and then blames the NRA.On the contrary, they often plausibly present themselves as tough-minded empiricists, opposing facts to liberal emoting.
that's a pathetic argument.Also, to expand on ACIN's point; why does Norway get praised for not having a knee jerk reaction to their terrorist madman, but if the US does the same thing, it's because we're all stupid violent idiots?
CR
What happened in Norway cannot be compared, that was a terrorist attack not your ordinary rampage. He had planned it for years. Norway deserves a lot of respect for how it dealt with it, they just trialed him. For me at least, I saw a monster that frightened the hell out of me becomming something utterly pathetic.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
What happened in Norway cannot be compared, that was a terrorist attack not your ordinary rampage. He had planned it for years. Norway deserves a lot of respect for how it dealt with it, they just trialed him. For me at least, I saw a monster that frightened the hell out of me becomming something utterly pathetic.
And you think Columbine was spontaneous?What happened in Norway cannot be compared, that was a terrorist attack not your ordinary rampage. He had planned it for years. Norway deserves a lot of respect for how it dealt with it, they just trialed him. For me at least, I saw a monster that frightened the hell out of me becomming something utterly pathetic.
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name:
And you think Columbine was spontaneous?
Not like this. Breivik is a terrorist who planned his massacre for years. Just because terrorism usually comes from the left doesn't mean it can't also come from the right, that's what happened here. It wasn't his specific goal to kill as many as he could, he wanted to whipe out an entire generation of future labour-leaders. It's ice-cold logic in the most twisted way.And you think Columbine was spontaneous?
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Just because terrorism usually comes from the left doesn't mean it can't also come from the right, that's what happened here.
it does? Just because terrorism usually comes from the left doesn't mean it can't also come from the right, that's what happened here.
What Left wing terrorist groups are you referring too?
Originally Posted by Sir Moody:
it does?
What Left wing terrorist groups are you referring too?
Just about every one?it does?
What Left wing terrorist groups are you referring too?
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit:
That's your response? I respond point-by-point and your critique [...]
Oh, I'm sorry, I don't speak Wall of Text.That's your response? I respond point-by-point and your critique [...]
Bottom line is that you are putting yourself over in this thread as someone who believes that any regulation of firearms is a violation of a fundamental right. You can huff and puff about how this misrepresents the deep logic of your position, but in your haste and heat to discredit the EVIL GUN GRABBERS, you have not bothered to flesh out your own position beyond GUNS GOOD and GUN GRABBERS BAD.
Sheesh, you even write off the value of statistical reporting because it might be used by evil gun grabbers. I mean, seriously, take a look at your own posts in this thread, man. There's absolutely no reason to get into a point-by-point wall of text rebuttal game that only you and I will read, certainly not if you're as entrenched and utterly convicted as you make yourself out to be. I got all my arguing-with-an-immovable-object out of my system with Gawain back in the day; the only reason I would wade into it now would be to sway the audience, but I don't see anyone in this thread that's wavering.
So how's about we play find-the-common-ground? That might be a more interesting game to play before the Mayan Apocalypse. Is there any regulation of firearms that seems both sensible and constitutionally legitimate to you? If so, what?
Originally Posted by Lemur:
Oh, I'm sorry, I don't speak Wall of Text.
Bottom line is that you are putting yourself over in this thread as someone who believes that any regulation of firearms is a violation of a fundamental right. You can huff and puff about how this misrepresents the deep logic of your position, but in your haste and heat to discredit the EVIL GUN GRABBERS, you have not bothered to flesh out your own position beyond GUNS GOOD and GUN GRABBERS BAD.
Sheesh, you even write off the value of statistical reporting because it might be used by evil gun grabbers. I mean, seriously, take a look at your own posts in this thread, man. There's absolutely no reason to get into a point-by-point wall of text rebuttal game that only you and I will read, certainly not if you're as entrenched and utterly convicted as you make yourself out to be. I got all my arguing-with-an-immovable-object out of my system with Gawain back in the day; the only reason I would wade into it now would be to sway the audience, but I don't see anyone in this thread that's wavering.
So how's about we play find-the-common-ground? That might be a more interesting game to play before the Mayan Apocalypse. Is there any regulation of firearms that seems both sensible and constitutionally legitimate to you? If so, what?
In NY, we are about 2-3 weeks away from a wholesale Semi-Auto gun ban where Andrew Cuomo has said that confiscation is on the table. You should have seen the line at the store. They are going to have a major problem on their hands if they don't de-escalate this situation. Gun owners are being treated like criminals and threatened by the government with punitive force (confiscation) because one crazy person committed a terrible crime in another state. You guys are nuts and creating a potentially dangerous national situation because of poorly understood data and a hair-trigger response.Oh, I'm sorry, I don't speak Wall of Text.
Bottom line is that you are putting yourself over in this thread as someone who believes that any regulation of firearms is a violation of a fundamental right. You can huff and puff about how this misrepresents the deep logic of your position, but in your haste and heat to discredit the EVIL GUN GRABBERS, you have not bothered to flesh out your own position beyond GUNS GOOD and GUN GRABBERS BAD.
Sheesh, you even write off the value of statistical reporting because it might be used by evil gun grabbers. I mean, seriously, take a look at your own posts in this thread, man. There's absolutely no reason to get into a point-by-point wall of text rebuttal game that only you and I will read, certainly not if you're as entrenched and utterly convicted as you make yourself out to be. I got all my arguing-with-an-immovable-object out of my system with Gawain back in the day; the only reason I would wade into it now would be to sway the audience, but I don't see anyone in this thread that's wavering.
So how's about we play find-the-common-ground? That might be a more interesting game to play before the Mayan Apocalypse. Is there any regulation of firearms that seems both sensible and constitutionally legitimate to you? If so, what?
There are 270 semi-auto rifle homicides per year on average, nationwide out of 9k gun homicides. You guys are nuts.
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg:
You guys are nuts and creating a potentially dangerous national situation.
That sounds rather ominous. My position, as I've stated three times elsewhere in this thread, is that gun ownership should be roughly as regulated as motor vehicle ownership. If that's treating gun owners "like criminals," well ...You guys are nuts and creating a potentially dangerous national situation.
And in reference to drone's note, the NRA has unveiled its proposal (they would not take questions, so no follow-up): Armed guards in every school in America.
Details here.
Person A committed an horrific crime. People B,C,D,E,F who have no knowledge of this person should feel shame for this, repent, and have assets seized from them because of the crime.
Again, 270 semi-auto rifle homicides per year and we should be punished.
I understand how it felt to have GWB as your President and how we held you over the coals for 8 years. I know that it is making the politics of the Democratic party want to exact revenge on the GOP and it's supporters and Obama is going to make this term hurt. Remember how it felt to have us on the run 4 years from now.
Again, 270 semi-auto rifle homicides per year and we should be punished.
I understand how it felt to have GWB as your President and how we held you over the coals for 8 years. I know that it is making the politics of the Democratic party want to exact revenge on the GOP and it's supporters and Obama is going to make this term hurt. Remember how it felt to have us on the run 4 years from now.
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg:
Person A committed an horrific crime. People B,C,D,E,F who have no knowledge of this person should feel shame for this, repent, and have assets taken from them because of it is not a reasonable way to pursue justice.
To go back to the motor vehicle analogy, I seem to remember that when an 80-year-old driver plowed through a crowd in a mall, there was, in fact, a push to re-test old people more frequently to retain their drivers' licenses. Exact same scenario; someone graphically demonstrates a problem in the system, so people look at it and ask, "Are there adjustments we should make to the system?"Person A committed an horrific crime. People B,C,D,E,F who have no knowledge of this person should feel shame for this, repent, and have assets taken from them because of it is not a reasonable way to pursue justice.
If not, then not. If so, then what?
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg:
Person A committed an horrific crime. People B,C,D,E,F who have no knowledge of this person should feel shame for this, repent, and have assets seized from them because of the crime.
Again, 270 semi-auto rifle homicides per year and we should be punished.
I understand how it felt to have GWB as your President and how we held you over the coals for 8 years. I know that it is making the politics of the Democratic party want to exact revenge on the GOP and it's supporters and Obama is going to make this term hurt. Remember how it felt to have us on the run 4 years from now.
A gun is a tool for killing things - explain why you need a semi auto.Person A committed an horrific crime. People B,C,D,E,F who have no knowledge of this person should feel shame for this, repent, and have assets seized from them because of the crime.
Again, 270 semi-auto rifle homicides per year and we should be punished.
I understand how it felt to have GWB as your President and how we held you over the coals for 8 years. I know that it is making the politics of the Democratic party want to exact revenge on the GOP and it's supporters and Obama is going to make this term hurt. Remember how it felt to have us on the run 4 years from now.
And don't say "to do a follow up when hunting" because if you don't kill the animal with the first shot the meat will be no good anyway.
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit:
Also, to expand on ACIN's point; why does Norway get praised for not having a knee jerk reaction to their terrorist madman, but if the US does the same thing, it's because we're all stupid violent idiots?
CR
Because it's seen as a worse case of buissness as usual, rather than an exception.Also, to expand on ACIN's point; why does Norway get praised for not having a knee jerk reaction to their terrorist madman, but if the US does the same thing, it's because we're all stupid violent idiots?
CR
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit:
Also, to expand on ACIN's point; why does Norway get praised for not having a knee jerk reaction to their terrorist madman, but if the US does the same thing, it's because we're all stupid violent idiots?
CR
I'll serve: your past is taken into account when judging your actions today. So, if you were all stupid violent idiots before, something shocking happens and you continue as you did before, you all remain stupid violent idiots. As you were, then.Also, to expand on ACIN's point; why does Norway get praised for not having a knee jerk reaction to their terrorist madman, but if the US does the same thing, it's because we're all stupid violent idiots?
CR
Seriously though: Norway's attitude towards safety, security and fire arms was comparatively sensible to begin with. The USA, not so much.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO