Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by chris155au, Nov 10, 2020.
Can you think of one important distinction between planes/prisons/federal buildings and schools?
Totally different ideologies would be the main difference, wouldn't you say?
It’s legal from the right’s POV only because he is immune from prosecution by them.
Fox News fanatics, would go crazy if Obama tried to coerce state representatives to disregard the electoral process and appoint only loyalists to cast electoral votes in favor of him. Election interference fraud. That’s why Trump was was impeached to begin with. The gop, long a haven for administrative criminal actions by a ratio of 100 to 1, thinks it’s fine to have a criminal in the White House. They always have since Nixon.
Sure. One favors the free democratic electoral process and the other wants an apartheid style white control of the Govt. by a ruling minority.
The violence you want to overlook in countries is part of the lawless regimes of the country itself. It’s funny. Right wing fanatics like Trump the leader of the GOP seems to love dictator ships like No. Korea whose Govt. completely bans any fire arm possession of its citizens, then routinely assassinates those who are in political opposition. These style Govts have unknown stats that are not to be compared with freely elected Govts.
Correct. That’s because those are the stats that are most important. There are few reliable stats coming out of other countries. They don’t allow a free press.
The leftist pieces of human waste who have been burning things down this year are all about the "free democratic electoral process?" THAT'S been their cause?
Yeah fine, that is certainly not merely investigating voter fraud, and I certainly don't think that it's a reasonable idea to disenfranchise millions of votes just because some votes were improperly handled by error or fraud. However, JUST the investigative efforts - do you acknowledge that all of that is following a legal process?
I don't think that's fair. Conservatives have been told a lot of lies about the 2020 elections. Most of those who are trying to interfere with the free democratic electoral process believe that it wasn't a free democratic electoral process. If someone believes what Trump says, just for one, they are going to believe a lot of things that aren't true.
Have you not yet figured out how to say everything in one post yet? Look, its easy, I'll do it right here for you.
I'm not comparing lawless regimes. I'm not comparing dictatorships. Stop trying to claim that I'm using those. I'm using YOUR criteria. The countries YOU chose to use by presenting that graph. All of them considered 1st world countries.
And no, those stats are not what's important. Unless all you want is to disarm the populace by using statistics that don't show the whole picture. IE: Selective use of information to push an agenda that you want...IE: Propaganda. The stats that are important are those which show the underlying cause of people wanting to commit suicide. Wanting to commit murder. Wanting to commit crimes in general. And guess what....its not guns making those people kill themselves or others. Its poverty. Lack of education. Mental illnesses. And other things...none of which is guns. The ONLY reason to try and ban guns is to control the populace. Nothing more. Nothing less. Any other argument provided is due to two reasons and only two reasons. 1: Ignorance. or 2: Control. Which one do you fall under?
Isn’t that what the left wants? A USA where only the state has AR-15s? Kim Jung Un would have a lot tougher time if his population has their own ARs to shoot back with. Which is why over in China they had no problem unleashing police to beat people with batons for protesting. They disarmed their population. I’d like China to try that over here and see how their baton beating cops do against our population.
IOW, rights are not dependent upon statistics.
The list of over 50 countries with higher homicide rates than the US that prohibit private gun ownership is included in the link I provided below(*). They include Brazil, Russia, Mexico, South Africa and many countries in South America that are no more different from the US than the cherry picked list you provided(1)
My point is simply that if draconian gun laws worked, they would work everywhere, not just in a few cherry picked countries that are very different from the US.
(*)"Intentional homicides (per 100,000 people) - Country Ranking"
(1) "The Mistake of Only Comparing US Murder Rates to "Developed" Countries"
EXCERPT " Note, however, that these comparisons always employ a carefully selected list of countries, most of which are very unlike the United States. They are countries that were settled long ago by the dominant ethnic group, they are ethnically non-diverse today, they are frequently very small countries (such as Norway, with a population of 5 million) with very locally based democracies (again, unlike the US with an immense population and far fewer representatives in government per voter). Politically, historically, and demographically, the US has little in common with Europe or Japan.
The US has the highest murder rate in the "developed world" — presumably because of its lax guns laws —we are told again and again.
Few people who repeat this mantra have any standard in their heads of what exactly is the "developed" world. They just repeat the phrase because they have learned to do so. They never acknowledge that when factors beyond per capita GDP are considered, it makes little sense to claim Sweden should be compared to the US, but not Argentina. Such assertions ignore immense differences in culture, size, politics, history, demographics, or ethnic diversity. Comparisons with mono-ethnic Asian countries like Japan and Korea make even less sense"CONTINUED
Just because you're blind to the multiple recreational and practical uses of guns doesn't mean that they don't exist.
"Top 50 Women in Competitive Shooting"
EXCERPT "From action pistol and bullseye champions, smallbore, high power and precision rifle masters, trapshooters and Olympic gold medalists—SSUSA has compiled this list of 50 (52 to be exact) female athletes that are influencing the ever-changing landscape of competitive shooting—for the better.
Note: This isn’t a ranking, though we purposely grouped the first four women at the front in recognition of the attention generated by their respective shooting careers. Otherwise it’s a random selection, with the goal of presenting female shooters from as many disciplines as possible."CONTINUED
"Unpublished CDC Study Confirms over 2 Million Annual Defensive Gun Uses"
EXCERPT "Now, a CDC study conducted on data from 1996, 1997, and 1998 has been uncovered. The study, which was never released to the public, shows approximately 2.46 million DGUs per year."CONTINUED
Since your opinion is not orthodoxy among people who study crime, its a bit much to suggest that someone can't disagree with you without being motivated by either ignorance or a desire for control.
-Great- way to deal with Redcoat cannons.
So, you -actually- means that rights have definitions.
Show me a single criminologist that will say that guns are the cause of crime. They will say that guns make crime easier. But they won't say that guns are the cause of crime.
The fact the vast majority of crime does not involve a gun proves your statement correct.
But suicide is another story.
Thus, they cause crime. Knife crime is difficult to commit.
And there won't be a single psychologist that says that guns cause suicide. They'll say the guns make it easier to commit suicide, but they won't say that guns are the cause of suicide.
Guns make a difference between suicide and an unsuccessful attempt.
Correlation =/= causation.
Did you know that in the UK they are trying to ban sharp knives? Why? Because they have a crime problem involving knives.
Focusing on the object does NOTHING to address crime. It will just change the object used.
Irrelevant. You're still not fixing the causes of suicide.
Separate names with a comma.