|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: for the record (re: guns thread) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: No, but NOT having a gun on you reduces the chances of you shooting someone by quite a lot, doesn't it? And HAVING the gun on you increases the chances of you shooting someone compared to not having it, doesn't it?
quote: Oh? I thought that people who have them legally only use them in SELF DEFENSE. But hey, if your argument is that the only reason people use guns is for murder, then we definitely should ban them outright, shouldn't we? I'm sure you didn't mean to say this, so perhaps you might consider thinking through your arguments a bit more before posting.
quote: I have addressed this many times between the two threads, jon. It is precisely BECAUSE killing people is so EASY with guns that, when the violence that is inevitably going to happen occurs, more people die. It is quite difficult to beat or stab someone to death. It takes a long time. It takes quite a lot of strength or skill. Someone can run away from a beating or a stabbing in many cases. Let me ask you. Is any of this sounding at all familiar? I repeated it over and over again in the previous thread.
Easy access to guns in the US is hardly a "mystical" idea. It is quite thoroughly documented. quote: Dude, compared to other industrialized nations, the US has relatively unfettered access to guns. Read the first thread. I already did my research and turned it in. Don't blame me if you haven't read it yet.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Jon.
Read the OP. Then, tell me who has the comprehension problem.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Gunshows.
Edited by nator, : No reason given. Edited by nator, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Look, I am starting to think that you are just making us jump through hoops, then pretending that you don't understand why we are leaping through those silly things, to get your jollies or something.
Read the OP. Say something substantive about it.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
It is quite difficult to beat or stab someone to death. It takes a long time. quote: Right. Through years and years of disciplined training. On the other hand, someone with no training at all can buy a gun in a store and aquire the even more deadly ability to kill instantly, from a distance, instantly. The point there, though, is someone with a gun can kill many people in a few seconds, even if the potential victims are running away. Even the best martial artist can't do that. Not even close. This has got to be the eighth or ninth time I've said this over the course of two threads. Why is this so incredibly difficult for pro-gunners to understand? I am truly mystified.
quote: It is clearly not comparing the US with other rich, western industrialized nations with stable governments, so you will get misleading results, which you did. The US has five times the rate of gun murders than the Swiss, and three times the Swiss overall gun deaths.
quote: That's not what the Constitution says for WHY we should have that right. It says:
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. There is nothing in there about "protecting yourself against criminals". And it says that gun ownership should be connected to being part of a well-regulated militia. How many current gun owners are part of a well-regulated militia, do you think? Edited by nator, : No reason given. Edited by nator, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Correct.
quote: And much more stringent requirements for how gun owners secure their weapons, requiring training, licensing and registration of all firearms, requiring a paper trail of all guns sold to anyone, anywhere, requiring child safety locks on all guns commonly sold for "personal protection", etc., but basically, yes, that's right.
quote: The statistics report that the legitimate use of a gun in self-defense is very rare, and that having guns in a home greatly increases the chances that someone in that household will be injured or killed by it. Statistically, it is a stupid concept.
quote: Says who? Most criminals in Japan, the UK, and other nations comparable to the US don't have guns. OTOH, given the money that the gun manufacturers make and the lobbying power that the insane people at the NRA have, we are not likely to see that change for the better. Edited by nator, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: I hope you weren't referring to my posts, Jon. I've been direct. I've been blunt. I have not, however, engaged in any ad hominem. I repeatedly tried to stop Nuggin from attacking you, if you recall.
quote: Why not? They are "arms", aren't they?
quote: Actually, landmines would be a great deal more useful to repelling a military force than handguns.
quote: But that's the argument about civilian ownership of handguns. Are they "more detrimental to the decurity of a free state than they are neccessary"? All of the statistics I have found indicate that they kill far more people than they keep secure through homicide, suicide, and accidental shootings.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: So, is the yearly deaths of 30,000 people from guns (which includes homicide, suicide, and accidental shootings merely a misconception? What sort of misconception? What facts are incorrect? Is the fact that the lethal violence rate in the US is so much higher than that of comparative nations a misconception, too? What sort of misconception? What facts are incorrect?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Modulous may believe you but I sure as hell don't. Please do not play games, Jon. I caught you in the error of repeatedly "strawmanning" my position. The OP of this thread documents this. You repeated and repeated and repeated your strawman, which is why I had to correct it at least seven times in the original Guns thread. You never once, in several hundred posts and despite seven seperate, nearly identical corrections, clarified your definition of violence to mean murder only. Now, several hunderd more posts later in another thread, you are trying to pass off some malarkey that you meant "murder" when you were saying "violence". If you had meant "murder", you would have said "murder", wouldn't you? Particularly since I kept correcting you? I may be a lot of things, but gullible ain't one of 'em. Edited by nator, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Do you happen to know the population density of anywhere in Vermont compared to, say, Los Angeles?
Vermont is mostly mountains and trees, rat. Burlington is the largest city and it has just under 40,000 people in 15 square miles. The next largest city in Vermont has only 17,000. LA has over 4 million people in 500 square miles. According to Wiki, the population densities for the two cities are: Burlington: 3,682.0/sq miLA: 8,567/sq mi In fact, the population of the entire state of Vermont is only just over 600,000. That means that the population of the single city of Los Angeles is over six and a half times the size of the population of the whole state of Vermont. Compare apples to apples if you want to make your case. Edited by nator, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: It isn't one or the other. It is more complicated than that. And... ...as I have repeated innumerable times since the first time nearly 600 posts ago... I never said that guns were the cause of violence.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024