Such is akin to claiming that engaging in illicit substances does not harm anyone if the person does not die from the dosage they take.
Such a statement appears to be an open admission on the part of yourself to engaging in improper behavior on the forum. In other words, an admission to being a troll without a legitimate reason for being present. But seeing as it was admitted by yourself to being a paid shill, what more can truly be expected?
When our country was ready to leave slavery behind, we had the Constitutional Amendments to address it, just as the Founders intended. The Second Amendment deserves no less IF that's what the people desire. To dismiss the intent of the Founders is to dismiss the Constitution.
Maybe you need to realize that attacking our right to self defense is a direct attack on our right to life. That seems pretty violent to me.
Maybe you need to realise that your right to gun ownership significantly increases the risk of death imposed on others. That seems pretty obvious to me
Maybe you need to realize that my right to gun ownership affects no one other than me. I am trained and experienced and responsible in my ownership, which improves my security and the security of my loved ones. You also need to realize that true freedom and liberty creates certain risks that we gladly accept to live in a free society. Only because you don't understand how things work beyond empty statistics and the end of your nose.
Evidence shows that the 'more guns=more crime' hypothesis is supported. You know that. Stop playing dumb
Ron, did you graduate high school ? Rediculous, is a Ridiculously Ridiculous way to spell Ridiculous.
Except for the simple fact that it does not. FBI data shows the majority of non-suicide deaths attributed to firearms are caused by those who cannot legally possess a firearm under any circumstances, meaning there is no right to firearms ownership in play for those that are directly at fault. Their acquisition of firearms is illegal, their possession is illegal, their use is illegal. The second amendment does not come into play at all in this matter.
It is not evidence, and it does not confirm the argument to be based on fact. It merely suggests such to be the case, but it makes no effort to demonstrate a cause and effect relationship is in place.
Any objective review of the available empirical research confirms what I've said. Of course there is variation in findings (e.g. Kleck versus Cook/Ludwig), but we know that the 'more guns=more crime' cannot be rejected. Anyone suggesting otherwise is either ignorant of the evidence, deliberately fibbing or part of a Trump post-truth society
The findings of the FBI supersede the supposed "studies" being presented by yourself. They have proven that the majority of all firearm-related homicides are the fault of those who cannot legally possess firearms under any circumstances.
There are crimes commited by means of firearms and most by Armed Criminals thst do a fair amount of killing and other harm sans firearms, You fixate on firearms as causal, and this is false reasoning, crime existed long before firearms, so to imply otherwise is spurious reasoning. Simply state your wish to eliminate all firearms without the elaborate falsehoods to justify your desires.
I must have missed the FBI job advert "you must be an econometrician". If you were serious about this subject, rather than a ideologue ranter, you'd refer to the peer reviewed academic research where gun effects are isolated. You've been informed of this obviousness, but you hide from it because you're comfortable in the sheepish ideologue routine
Go do that yourself. Tobacco claims half a Million lives here in the U.S. and countless lives Worldwide.
Deliberately misrepresenting me? Golly, didn't say that coming. I only refer to the scholarly research. Its called evidence-based rationality.
