|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Gun Control Again | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7 |
What does creationism have to do with gun control? Does creationism define and control everything in your life and every opinion you have?
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
No such thing as EVER understanding the position of a creationist on this ugly excuse for a forum. Ah that's right, that's why I don't bother to spend the time trying to discuss things with you: You don't bother to reciprocate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1503 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined:
|
If a person decides they want to get a firearm and kill folks there is very little anyone can do to stop them.
There are so many firearms available today even if fully banned folks would still find a means to obtain them. The genie has been let out of the bottle, pandora has opened the box. The guns are here and here to stay. I am beginning to think we have this gun problem because it has become part of the American culture."You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Faith writes:
It isn't that we don't understand the positions you take. It's more like we don't understand why anybody would take such idiotic positions - or where they get the chutzpah to "argue" them.
No such thing as EVER understanding the position of a creationist on this ugly excuse for a forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Legislation is of little practical worth if it isn't enfoced.
That's what I meant by 'theoretically banned'.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2950 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
Is that all? According to this site, there have already been 34 shootings in Chicago alone this year in January 2014... you know, where guns were practically banned. The continued go-to comparison of the gun nuts. Chicago! You can ban all guns in violent, inner cities, where the ENTIRE system has failed the public, and of course there will still be violence. There are plenty of places where strict gun laws have helped, along with better police presense and stronger community support, that has dramatically reduced gun violence. I've presented NY in this thread before as one of those cities, that stepped up their police force and banned guns/added strict gun laws. Where gun violence has drastically reduced. - Oni Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7 |
NY doesn't count, cuz, well just cuz.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 611 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
One thing that is not mentioned is that the last couple of years, the homicide rate in Chicago has been going down drastically. Yes, a lot of gun violence so far this month.. but when you compare it with other cities the same size, it isn't THAT much higher.
Let's see, in Chicago, there were 441 killed by gun violence in 2012IN 2013, it was down to 371.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Legislation is of little practical worth if it isn't enfoced. Yeah, and it is worthless if it is practically unenforceable.
That's what I meant by 'theoretically banned'. Well, "banned" only means prohibited, rather than made vanished. Chicago's law was a complete failure. Not only did it fail to achieve the results they wanted, it was also ruled as unconstitutional. Given there's another ~80% of the state of Illinois, which has a small fraction of the crime1, that has to be bothered by their impeding legislation2, and that the large amounts of money it costs could have been better spent, Chicago's law ended up at a negative worth in my opinion. 1. From Message 1303,
quote: 2. Not only did they fail to keep up with renewing people's cards on time, but they spent waay too much money doing a bad job (half a million dollars to the cops for overtime in 2 years). See the Auditor General's report from 2012
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
The continued go-to comparison of the gun nuts. Chicago! I live in Illinois, this is what affects me.
You can ban all guns in violent, inner cities, where the ENTIRE system has failed the public, and of course there will still be violence. Illinois wasted millions of dollars making the other 80% of the state also use these stupid plastic FOID cards (that didn't help the problem), because Chicago has such a problem. There are way better ways to reduce violence in Chicago than making the state police ensure that southern Illinois deer hunters have a little plastic card.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2105 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
Its the government.
It doesn't have to make sense.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
CS writes: Yeah, and it is worthless if it is practically unenforceable. Why is Chicago specifically such a lots cause where NY and other places have succeeded? Implementation specifics rather than innately "unenforable" would seem to be the issue.
CS writes: Well, "banned" only means prohibited, rather than made vanished. There is prohibited in theory and prohibited in practise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Why is Chicago specifically such a lots cause where NY and other places have succeeded? Because Chicago's legislation sucked and they're a bunch of crooks up there anyways. Have you seen how many of our governors went to prison?
Implementation specifics rather than innately "unenforable" would seem to be the issue. Well, how do you enforce their gun-ban, short of searching every individual that leaves their house?
There is prohibited in theory and prohibited in practise. What's the difference? Neither magically make the prohibited item vanish. And, in this case specifically, how do you go from prohibiting the possession of guns outside of the home in theory, to prohibiting the possession of guns outside of the home in practice? Exactly how is that enforced?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
You seem to be suggesting that it's the practical implementation of prohibiting outside the home but not inside the home that makes Chicago's particular attempt at prohibiting guns unworkable.
Perhaps an approach that is more along the lines of NY would be more feasible....? How do they do it there?
Straggler writes: There is prohibited in theory and prohibited in practise. CS writes: What's the difference? It's the difference betwen Percy saying "CS, as Admin I prohibit you from posting at EvC" whilst turning a blind eye to your continued posting as a variety of different user names and Percy saying "CS, as Admin I prohibit you from posting at EvC" whilst actively stopping any new user accounts you create from posting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
You seem to be suggesting that it's the practical implementation of prohibiting outside the home but not inside the home that makes Chicago's particular attempt at prohibiting guns unworkable. That's just one part. Another part is focusing millions of dollars on making sure deer hunters in the southern portions of the state are carrying around a little plastic card. That money could have been spent on something that actually had an impact on the crime in Chicago.
Perhaps an approach that is more along the lines of NY would be more feasible....? How do they do it there? I don't know.
It's the difference betwen Percy saying "CS, as Admin I prohibit you from posting at EvC" whilst turning a blind eye to your continued posting as a variety of different user names and Percy saying "CS, as Admin I prohibit you from posting at EvC" whilst actively stopping any new user accounts you create from posting. Okay, now how do you enforce that in regards to prohibiting guns from being possessed outside of the home?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024