Antigun groups once again display ignorance

I've got an idea

We'll put it to the guy getting paroled. You can get out on parole and accept that you won't be able to get a gun, ever, or you can serve your full sentence.

Oddly, I think most people will take not having a gun for 10-20 years less prison but that's just me

You were asked first.

And I wasn't asked the question, but this is a discussion board so I can answer as well as the original interrogated. No, i have no problem with putting convicted felons back on the streets, are you suggesting that all jail sentences for violent felonies should be life without parole?

And finally, what is it with you how serious a penalty you guys seem to think not being able to buy a gun is? The person is being told they can't purchase or possess a firearm, not being castrated

 

You’re absolutely right. Just mind your own damn business then.

 

I've found that generalizing about any group turns out to be flawed.

I don't expect people who either oppose guns or don't know anything about them to use the proper terminology nor do I believe that a lack of knowledge about guns means a person is ignorant.

To paraphrase a cliche' "Some of my best friends are anti gun people"

 

Oh we're familiar with the proclivity of liberals to want violent felons released from jail.

It's why cities under liberal "leadership" are murderous hell holes.

 

Your advocacy of laws that permit crazies and criminals to arm readily arm themselves threatens my life, and that most definitely is my business.

 

2nd question touch a nerve? WHY do you act as if anyone threatening your guns is emasculating you?

 

They have national borders between them in Europe they don't here and lets not forget Most of Europe not including recent Immigrants is 5 or so years older than we are on average. That alone makes a significant difference in crime statistics.

 

You want to attribute the drop to the new law. This is a post hoc fallacy.

 

There you go, putting up that old, tired post hoc fallacy of yours.

 

Why do you believe felons having legal access to non-firearms for the last 50 years is an issue that needs suddenly and immediately to be addressed?

 

There's no need. Your position is inane.

 

Been this way for 50 years. Your perceived problem doesn't exist.

 

You know this statement is false, as you know the law forbids criminals and crazies from having guns.

 

Bullshit as usual

 

My understanding is that you oppose such laws

 

In the absence of any other immediate cause why shouldn't I?

All the examples of Post Hoc seen as a fallacy I have seen have very little to no logical connection between the two events, but you are using an example where the connection is clear and unmistakable. Post Hoc does not mean you can simply deny all cause and effect relationships

 

This is a intentionally false understanding as you know you cannot cite a single post from me that ever even implied such a thing.

 

Simple: Correlation does not prove causation.
How do you not know this?

 

No meaningful response, eh? As per the norm.

 

Superior about the knowledge is readily apparent.

 

Are you saying that all cause and effect relationships are false?

 

I said exactly what I said: Correlation does not prove causation.
So, when that's all you offer -- and that IS all you offer - your argument fails as a post hoc fallacy.

 

And as this thread proves...you got it backwards

 

Yes... because felons, under a 50-year old law, having legal access to $1000 non-firearms is a critical threat to public safety that must be immediately addressed.

 

And neither does it dismiss it out of hand as you are trying to do