Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Gun Control Again

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Gun Control Again
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 2341 of 5179 (719788)
02-18-2014 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 2338 by PaulK
02-18-2014 7:54 AM


Re: Misleading headline
All quotes from the article.
the annual risk of gun-related death in school is "well below one in two million,"
(Bolding mine)
So not the number of youngsters killed by guns, just the subset who happen to get killed by guns at school, against the total number killed in cycling accidents.
But it was a response to the Moms and Mayors who were saying this:
quote:
According to Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, there have been as many as 44 shootings, including 28 deaths, in schools and colleges nationwide since the devastating massacre at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., that had millions of Americans demanding change in gun regulations. To place the recent tally in particularly mind-numbing terms, the moms and mayors report highlighted the rate of more than three incidents per month -- and that would include the summertime when schools are essentially gun-free and student-free.
One need not read very deeply between the lines to get the intended message: Our nation's schools continue to be personal battle zones for gun-toting teens and post-teens, and we need to act fast before more young lives are needlessly and senselessly sacrificed to our country's love affair with guns.
So the author was just staying on topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2338 by PaulK, posted 02-18-2014 7:54 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2345 by PaulK, posted 02-18-2014 10:32 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 2342 of 5179 (719789)
02-18-2014 10:03 AM
Reply to: Message 2340 by New Cat's Eye
02-18-2014 9:53 AM


why federal laws and what they could say
... How about weed. A guy can drive over to Colorado, buy some weed, and then bring it back to his state where its still illegal.
Of course, while the analogy works, it doesn't support your position.
My position is that we do not need to sound the alarms and get the Feds involved, but instead should leave this up to the States.
Do you think we should have the Feds crack down on Colorado to protect all those people in the neighboring states from having weed illegally brought in?
But your example is better used to support some federal involvement to ensure that either laws are similar in all the states or that crossing state borders increases the legal penalties (which they do have the right to do).
Personally I see no reason why the feds should not
(a) require registered ownership of guns or have some means to track guns used in crimes back to the owner
(b) require background checks for all gun ownership transferals
(c) require ammunition and raw gun powder to have "marker micro-confetti" that can be tracked back to who purchased it and where.
There would be no impact on self-defense usage, or recreational usage.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2340 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 9:53 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2343 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 10:16 AM RAZD has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 2343 of 5179 (719791)
02-18-2014 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 2342 by RAZD
02-18-2014 10:03 AM


Re: why federal laws and what they could say
Personally I see no reason why the feds should not
In light of the heinous actions of the NSA, I'm not going to trust the Feds with something that purposefully provides them with more information about my guns.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2342 by RAZD, posted 02-18-2014 10:03 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2353 by RAZD, posted 02-18-2014 1:21 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2344 of 5179 (719792)
02-18-2014 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 2340 by New Cat's Eye
02-18-2014 9:53 AM


Re: wifebeating lunatics
Catholic Scientist writes:
My position is that we do not need to sound the alarms and get the Feds involved, but instead should leave this up to the States.
Do you think we should have the Feds crack down on Colorado to protect all those people in the neighboring states from having weed illegally brought in?
Politically I'm not particular about the source of the solution, but the border problems associated with state-level solutions make me lean toward a federal solution.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2340 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 9:53 AM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 2345 of 5179 (719794)
02-18-2014 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 2341 by New Cat's Eye
02-18-2014 9:57 AM


Re: Misleading headline
quote:
So the author was just staying on topic.
That doesn't make the headline any less misleading. 'Criminologist says: "Schools are Safe"' would be far more accurate.
And, really, it does look as if Coyote was mislead. Why else link to the article at all?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2341 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 9:57 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2346 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 10:43 AM PaulK has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 2346 of 5179 (719795)
02-18-2014 10:43 AM
Reply to: Message 2345 by PaulK
02-18-2014 10:32 AM


Re: Misleading headline
Why else link to the article at all?
It looks like a retort to the previous message that was just a badly described bare link.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2345 by PaulK, posted 02-18-2014 10:32 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2347 by Theodoric, posted 02-18-2014 11:17 AM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 2352 by PaulK, posted 02-18-2014 1:09 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 2347 of 5179 (719803)
02-18-2014 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 2346 by New Cat's Eye
02-18-2014 10:43 AM


Re: Misleading headline
Boy assumptions and assertions abound in one small sentence.
How do you know Coyote was responding to Dr. A? If he was it was it had absolutely nothing to do with what Dr. A posted. And as I said earlier I am not sure how the article can be easily interpreted as being pro-gun.
Badly described bare link?
More evidence, looks like an adequate description. If you have an issue with a bare link state that. Calling it badly described is just not accurate.

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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2346 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 10:43 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2348 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 11:34 AM Theodoric has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 2348 of 5179 (719804)
02-18-2014 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 2347 by Theodoric
02-18-2014 11:17 AM


Re: Misleading headline
How do you know Coyote was responding to Dr. A?
It looks like it because the bare link was called "some data" and then the next message right after it has the subtitle "some more data".
Badly described bare link?
The link was badly described because it didn't actually contain data. Its a news article announcing a report that is coming soon. I was expecting some numbers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2347 by Theodoric, posted 02-18-2014 11:17 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2350 by Theodoric, posted 02-18-2014 12:18 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 2349 of 5179 (719806)
02-18-2014 11:53 AM
Reply to: Message 2336 by Coyote
02-18-2014 1:00 AM


Re: Some more data
Coyote writes:
Criminologist: 'More Youngsters Killed in Bicycle Accidents' Than with Guns
The difference being that bicycles serve a useful purpose.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2336 by Coyote, posted 02-18-2014 1:00 AM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2354 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 1:55 PM ringo has replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 2350 of 5179 (719813)
02-18-2014 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 2348 by New Cat's Eye
02-18-2014 11:34 AM


Re: Misleading headline
Evidently you are using the word data differently than how most people do, because the article did provide data.
You can look up the definition on dictionary.com.

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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2348 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 11:34 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2351 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 12:21 PM Theodoric has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 2351 of 5179 (719816)
02-18-2014 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 2350 by Theodoric
02-18-2014 12:18 PM


Re: Misleading headline
Quote the data here then.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2350 by Theodoric, posted 02-18-2014 12:18 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2360 by Theodoric, posted 02-18-2014 4:36 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 2352 of 5179 (719822)
02-18-2014 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 2346 by New Cat's Eye
02-18-2014 10:43 AM


Re: Misleading headline
quote:
It looks like a retort to the previous message that was just a badly described bare link.
Doing poor imitations of your opponent's posts is hardly a winning strategy. And citing a misleading headline, if you know that it is misleading, is a little less than entirely honest.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2346 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 10:43 AM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 2353 of 5179 (719823)
02-18-2014 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 2343 by New Cat's Eye
02-18-2014 10:16 AM


Re: why federal laws and what they could say
In light of the heinous actions of the NSA, I'm not going to trust the Feds with something that purposefully provides them with more information about my guns.
... so you would be okay with ammo\powder having micro-confetti to track sources and buyers, but don't want to register your guns because of some kind of NRA paranoia, and you think they don't have all the information they need already?
So you're part of the problem?

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2343 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 10:16 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2355 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-18-2014 1:57 PM RAZD has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 2354 of 5179 (719828)
02-18-2014 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 2349 by ringo
02-18-2014 11:53 AM


Re: Some more data
Coyote writes:
Criminologist: 'More Youngsters Killed in Bicycle Accidents' Than with Guns
The difference being that bicycles serve a useful purpose.
Is that you admitting that their ultimate goal is not saving kids lives in schools?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2349 by ringo, posted 02-18-2014 11:53 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2356 by RAZD, posted 02-18-2014 2:59 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 2390 by ringo, posted 02-19-2014 10:42 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 2355 of 5179 (719829)
02-18-2014 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 2353 by RAZD
02-18-2014 1:21 PM


Re: why federal laws and what they could say
... so you would be okay with ammo\powder having micro-confetti to track sources and buyers,
I'm okay with it existing, but I wouldn't buy it or shoot it.
but don't want to register your guns because of some kind of NRA paranoia, and you think they don't have all the information they need already?
Regardless of what they already have, I am not going to help them by giving them more.
So you're part of the problem?
Come at me bro.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2353 by RAZD, posted 02-18-2014 1:21 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2358 by RAZD, posted 02-18-2014 3:18 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 2361 by Theodoric, posted 02-18-2014 4:38 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024