Moveing Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 LisnpuppyIf you mean a debate post..then I have plenty. But I don't want to start posting and getting interested in a topic I will be moderating.Its because you look like you would see this as entertaining with popcorn and stuff, but this is death serios. This Guy Jason Alexander is lying, he says every year 100.000 would die by firearms, calls Hamilton a greate statesman when he was shoot for a reason and uses also the same empty phrases like Mao. And that people don't get that and join his brainless choir for guncontroll. Hey, this Movie Cinema was a gun free zone allready. The Concept of banning guns is idiocy. There was another shooting in Colorado this day, but the secound was ignored because the frenzied attacker was stoped by a gunowner. Banning guns is screwball moronism, its perilous. So screw Mao Alexanders Greater Good. I can't stand these people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Wow, would you look at that? Right to carry is enacted, and the murder rate plummets! Amazing. And Texas: Wow, imagine that! Same trend....... How are the first 2 graphs following the national trend and Florida and Texas aren't doing that very thing? Alone those graphs would show quite convincingly that banning carry or allowing weapon carry does next to nothing in each of those places> each individual city/state shown pretty much just follows the national trend in homicides. I'm not seeing any case being made that either one does much, considering each implementation of those rights are staggered on about an average of 7 years from each other and thus individually can't be suggesting that would directly affect the national trend. If the graph was doing something that was inverse to the national trend, or all state no/carry laws were brought in on a single year, perhaps then some sort of conclusion could be drawn. The fact that the laws changed, yet the locations still followed the national trend, should tell you that whether you ban them or not, makes no difference. The folks that use guns in the commission of a crime, aren't going to care that the illegal weapon they are carrying, while committing an illegal act.... is, in fact, illegal. The criminals STILL have the guns. Ban or no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagrant0 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Erm, not to make a big deal of it... But when you're trying to prove anything with bar graphs, you really need to make sure that they are ALL on the same scale. If the scale is different for any one graph, the interpretation can be misleading. It is also not exactly fair to compare crime statistics between two dissimilar places. Washington DC during the late 80's and early 90's was one of the cities with the highest crime in the country (Chicago and Detroit weren't much better). If you have high crime you have high crime related deaths regardless what gun policy is in effect since criminals couldn't care less about the law. Also. Unless I'm missing something in the OP, the argument is not about handguns or similar personal defense weapons. The argument is about allowing civilian access to military grade assault rifles (okay, they usually have to be converted to semi-automatic to be legal, but anyone who knows their way around a gun and can order parts can revert that). Yes, there is lots of reactionary opinions on the matter because of yet another idiot, but unless I'm mistaken, most sane people do not walk around with an assault rifle clipped to their jacket when they go out for groceries, or keep one in the back seat of their car should they suddenly happen to find a herd of deer that they want to massacre. Yeah, these weapons are fun to shoot, and there is a growing gun culture out there that is all about finding or building all sorts of ridiculous weapons. But it is excessive and in many cases ineffective when it comes to personal defense. Even from the standpoint of "Taking back our country", do you honestly believe that even a small group of armed civilians would last more than a few days against the U.S. military unless there was some interest in reducing collateral damage or apprehending you? Yes, you can be a patriot. Yes, you can be deeply concerned about the future of the country. But in this situation, at best, wherever you are making a base will be a crater or perpetual cloud of tear gas (hope you can drink water through that gas mask), or you end up barricading yourself in some public place with hostages... and just succeed in making yourself look like a lunatic as even other patriots distance themselves from your actions. It just does not work in reality, and you either end up dead or locked up as a terrorist. Meanwhile the country continues to go to crap because you're more personally invested in some sort of fantasy about taking a stand, than actually taking a stand against government figures who are only out for their own personal gain. If the country actually worked like it should, there wouldn't be a need to "take it back", nor would there be a need to kill or hold innocent ( "there are no innocent people, there are only those who are with us, and everyone else is against us" and you wonder why people look at you like a psychopath) people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Erm, not to make a big deal of it... But when you're trying to prove anything with bar graphs, you really need to make sure that they are ALL on the same scale. If the scale is different for any one graph, the interpretation can be misleading. It is also not exactly fair to compare crime statistics between two dissimilar places. Washington DC during the late 80's and early 90's was one of the cities with the highest crime in the country (Chicago and Detroit weren't much better). If you have high crime you have high crime related deaths regardless what gun policy is in effect since criminals couldn't care less about the law. Also. Unless I'm missing something in the OP, the argument is not about handguns or similar personal defense weapons. The argument is about allowing civilian access to military grade assault rifles (okay, they usually have to be converted to semi-automatic to be legal, but anyone who knows their way around a gun and can order parts can revert that). Yes, there is lots of reactionary opinions on the matter because of yet another idiot, but unless I'm mistaken, most sane people do not walk around with an assault rifle clipped to their jacket when they go out for groceries, or keep one in the back seat of their car should they suddenly happen to find a herd of deer that they want to massacre. Yeah, these weapons are fun to shoot, and there is a growing gun culture out there that is all about finding or building all sorts of ridiculous weapons. But it is excessive and in many cases ineffective when it comes to personal defense. Even from the standpoint of "Taking back our country", do you honestly believe that even a small group of armed civilians would last more than a few days against the U.S. military unless there was some interest in reducing collateral damage or apprehending you? Yes, you can be a patriot. Yes, you can be deeply concerned about the future of the country. But in this situation, at best, wherever you are making a base will be a crater or perpetual cloud of tear gas (hope you can drink water through that gas mask), or you end up barricading yourself in some public place with hostages... and just succeed in making yourself look like a lunatic as even other patriots distance themselves from your actions. It just does not work in reality, and you either end up dead or locked up as a terrorist. Meanwhile the country continues to go to crap because you're more personally invested in some sort of fantasy about taking a stand, than actually taking a stand against government figures who are only out for their own personal gain. If the country actually worked like it should, there wouldn't be a need to "take it back", nor would there be a need to kill or hold innocent ( "there are no innocent people, there are only those who are with us, and everyone else is against us" and you wonder why people look at you like a psychopath) people. The graphs were simply to illustrate that banning guns, has little to no effect on gun related crimes. The criminals STILL have guns, and are still quite willing to use them. I am going to do something I hate here.... I am going to mince some terms... So, bear with me. Assault Rifle: Defined as being selective fire. (capable of firing more than one round per trigger pull)Assault Weapon: Semi-auto rifle BASED ON and assault rifle. Folks seem to mix and match the terms, but, no matter which they use, we know to what they are referring. Also, I would point out that rifles are used in a very small percentage of crimes. Assault weapons in even fewer. Assault weapons are not the weapons of choice among drug dealers, gang members or criminals in general. Assault weapons are used in about one-fifth of one percent (.20%) of all violent crimes and about one percent in gun crimes. It is estimated that from one to seven percent of all homicides are committed with assault weapons (rifles of any type are involved in three to four percent of all homicides). However a higher percentage are used in police homicides, roughly ten percent. Source. Folks seem to want to present them as a scourge on the populace, but, the statistics (sorry...) don't support that conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moveing Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Washington DC during the late 80's and early 90's was one of the cities with the highest crime in the country http://www.harpers.org/media/image/blogs/misc/state_of_the_union.jpg Kellermann study <- The *censored*(Mostly know for the simpsons episode where lisa says the chance is higher to shoot a family member than a home invader) Gary Kleck study <- The real deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syco21 Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) claiming a right to gun ownership as a "free white male"Hmm, I don't recall saying this. Wonder why? http://i.imgur.com/NmHJp.jpg Edited July 24, 2012 by Syco21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marxist ßastard Posted July 24, 2012 Author Share Posted July 24, 2012 You took a picture of yourself holding a gun in front of one of my posts? Wow, there's some good subtext. in the end of the day your child will be forced to take vaccinations... it is child rapehttp://dealbreaker.com/uploads/2010/06/animated-siren-gif-animated-siren-gif-animated-siren-gif-drudge-report2.gif ANTI-VAXXER DETECTED http://dealbreaker.com/uploads/2010/06/animated-siren-gif-animated-siren-gif-animated-siren-gif-drudge-report2.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syco21 Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 You took a picture of yourself holding a gun in front of one of my posts? Wow, there's some good subtext.Best not make any assumptions, you have a proven track record of being horribly incorrect. :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marharth Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 You took a picture of yourself holding a gun in front of one of my posts? Wow, there's some good subtext.Best not make any assumptions, you have a proven track record of being horribly incorrect. :rolleyes:He is incorrect because he disagrees with you a lot. Okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moveing Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) You took a picture of yourself holding a gun in front of one of my posts? Wow, there's some good subtext. in the end of the day your child will be forced to take vaccinations... it is child rapeANTI-VAXXER DETECTED Oh yeah, i forgott that even forced vaccation is for the greater good. @ Syco21You know, i was thinking about the same thing. Edited July 24, 2012 by Moveing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts