Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 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
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 3031 of 5179 (745261)
12-20-2014 11:16 PM
Reply to: Message 3024 by Faith
12-20-2014 7:01 PM


Re: guns / crime
I'm back to simply not trusting statistics. I can't analyze them myself and even from the discussion between you and HBD it appears there are just too many ways to get things wrong whether fabricated or not.
Statistics are only a tool, a tool that must be used properly to be effective. But, you cannot say anything meaningful about a set of data without statistics. How you get past the trust issues is you learn how to interpret statistical reports. It is a valuable skill to have as data can be manipulated to say what you want, or at least so it appears to say something it doesn't. As with that chart you posted, Percy noted some serious red flags that should have alerted you that something just wasn't right.
If you can't analyze them yourself, then you need to rely on others who know better how to understand them. What you can't do is simply ignore what the data says once it is properly interpreted.
that's just one of too many questions that need answering to make statistics meaningful.
That statement sounds like "... to make statistics mean what I want them to mean." Typically what one should do is define the parameters the data will describe, then collect the data, analyze it and then accept the results. The original hypothesis was that as gun ownership increases, gun deaths would decrease. Was it not? That hypothesis is not supported by the data we have. All these "questions" are just avoiding what the data says. You could keep looking for data that support your position or propose a new hypothesis. Perhaps you could hypothesize that the more people who are allowed to open carry the fewer gun deaths there would be.
And please do remember that the foundational reason for the Second Amendment was the lesson learned in Europe, and in fact in the Colonies under King George, that if the people don't own means of self-defense it's their own government that will subjugate them. That is not something you can measure by statistics at this time
Do you seriously think armed citizens could stand up against the government (i.e. the army) in an all-out fight?
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3024 by Faith, posted 12-20-2014 7:01 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3032 by Faith, posted 12-20-2014 11:23 PM herebedragons has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 3032 of 5179 (745262)
12-20-2014 11:23 PM
Reply to: Message 3031 by herebedragons
12-20-2014 11:16 PM


Re: guns / crime
I believe what I said about the issues without referring to the statistics is valid. I've been listening to arguments at You Tube, statistics are the least of the arguments.
As for that question Do I think armed citizens could stand up against the government? Well, first, they did in the Revolutionary War. But the main point is I don't think the government would attempt such a thing as long as we're armed. We're scattered all over the nation, we're everywhere.
It's only if we're so restricted in their use or they've been confiscated, which, remember, Hitler did before rounding up the Jews, that we'd have the problem. And besides, I think Americans would prefer to die defending ourselves against a corrupt government than let them tyrannize us without a fight.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3031 by herebedragons, posted 12-20-2014 11:16 PM herebedragons has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3034 by NoNukes, posted 12-20-2014 11:38 PM Faith has replied

NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 3033 of 5179 (745263)
12-20-2014 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 3026 by Faith
12-20-2014 8:51 PM


Re: guns / crime
OK I'm going to apologize for losing my temper at you, NN,
I didn't see your post. No harm, no foul.
You said nothing substantive that could be answered.
That's right. You have no answers.
What should I make of an excuse for not believing in statistics that says that you believe it is possible that the statistics might be found to support your point? Doesn't that demonstrate a non objective viewpoint?
Did you take my suggestion to research the NRA's action is suppressing research or was that too non-substantive to bother with.
for your trashing of what I thought was a perfectly good post
Neither of us are not above criticism. If you don't anyone to point out what seem to be flaws, post to your blog. I promise that I won't even see it there.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3026 by Faith, posted 12-20-2014 8:51 PM Faith has not replied

NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 3034 of 5179 (745264)
12-20-2014 11:38 PM
Reply to: Message 3032 by Faith
12-20-2014 11:23 PM


Re: guns / crime
We're scattered all over the nation, we're everywhere.
Uhm, who is this we? You don't have any guns.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3032 by Faith, posted 12-20-2014 11:23 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3035 by Faith, posted 12-20-2014 11:42 PM NoNukes has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 3035 of 5179 (745265)
12-20-2014 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 3034 by NoNukes
12-20-2014 11:38 PM


Re: guns / crime
I might have some if it looked like that was going to happen. Or even if I don't I'm with the ones who do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3034 by NoNukes, posted 12-20-2014 11:38 PM NoNukes has not replied

NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 3036 of 5179 (745266)
12-20-2014 11:45 PM
Reply to: Message 3022 by herebedragons
12-20-2014 12:04 PM


Re: The Relationship between Guns and Gun Murders
I noticed that the District of Columbia is by far the highest for gun murders/capita (an extreme outlier for sure).
DC is interesting because the gun laws are strict in the district but pretty lax in some of the surround areas. The gun laws are strict in an attempt to impact crime, but that strategy simply cannot work in DC.
Still, I'll bet far fewer ordinary people are shooting their nieces when they find them in closets or shooting boyfriends in bedrooms when their daughters lie about not knowing them.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3022 by herebedragons, posted 12-20-2014 12:04 PM herebedragons has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 3037 of 5179 (745268)
12-21-2014 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 3030 by faceman
12-20-2014 10:48 PM


Re: The Relationship between Guns and Gun Murders
Have you ever been to any of those cities Percy? I've been to most (both the top and the bottom) and the main difference is very easy to spot. It's night and day (or black and white). The problem is cultural and no amount of gun laws will fix that.
Yes, not only is it people and not guns that kill people, we can also identify differences among cultures or neighborhoods of people that make for differences in rates of gun crimes and gun murders. But that gets us rapidly into Political Correctness territory where we'll be accused of racial profiling at least, racism at worst, and all sorts of other perfidious violations of Political Correctness.
However, the information, were it taken seriously and unemotionally, might tell us more about the questions related to gun rights and gun control than just about anything else we've discussed here.
Washington D.C. for instance, with its enormous crime rate and homicide rate and gun problems in general, is 50% black. This is the sort of thing I had in mind when I mentioned different demographics of different areas having a big impact on the statistics. It isn't necessarily ethnic or racial, but it seems to be in Washington D.C. Other areas may have their own demographic explanations. But lumping these areas in with non-crime-infested areas and pretending to come up with a statistic that reflects America as a whole gives a false picture. Sometimes the general problem of different locations is mentioned in passing but I haven't seen it sorted out in any way that really tells us anything about guns in this country. \
The argument in general, though, is about lumping together the bad quys with the good guys. It just needs to be made more specific if you want to get any meaningful picture of the gun situation in America.
ABE: Didn't think to save the info but on one Wikipedia article concerning Washington D.C. I came across the information that one large area of crime is "hate crime" against homosexuals. Who commits this crime is not named, if it should happen to be predominantly blacks or whites or some other identifiable group for instance. Seems to me this might be useful information.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3030 by faceman, posted 12-20-2014 10:48 PM faceman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3045 by herebedragons, posted 12-21-2014 3:46 PM Faith has replied

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


Message 3038 of 5179 (745270)
12-21-2014 7:00 AM
Reply to: Message 3027 by herebedragons
12-20-2014 10:27 PM


Re: guns / crime
herebedragons writes:
How did you find it? The reference from the website for that chart in footnote 4 does not contain that data.
The link to the data is in The Guardian article listed on the chart.
Oh. I went to the footnote where it references the original source ("Firearm ownership, Small Arms Survey 2007; Crime, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime"), searched for that and came up dry.
Thanks for the references for statistical packages.
What is the criteria for being "similar to the US?"
Western culture and values, and not third world, which is basically Europe and North America, not because they're superior but because they're similar. They're very likely to classify in similar ways and to gather statistics in similarly thorough and high quality ways, and they have no special circumstances like political unrest, e.g., Honduras, whose firearm murder rate was actually used for comparison with the US in the Guardian article. Similarity is why the comparison between the US and Canada is so much more meaningful than a comparison between the US and Honduras.
Cultural differences also have a big influence on statistics. Check out suicide rates (List of Countries by Suicide Rate). Some countries like Haiti even report a zero suicide rate. Is there anyone who believes the suicide rate in Egypt is 1 per million each year or anywhere near that figure? Some countries do not make such statistics available (or, more likely, do not collect such statistics). For example, Saudi Arabia isn't on the list.
So to get meaningful comparisons I believe you have to compare figures from similar countries, otherwise other factors will confound the comparison.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3027 by herebedragons, posted 12-20-2014 10:27 PM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3042 by herebedragons, posted 12-21-2014 3:03 PM Percy has replied

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


(3)
Message 3039 of 5179 (745271)
12-21-2014 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 3024 by Faith
12-20-2014 7:01 PM


Re: guns / crime
Faith writes:
Then you ask how I can support my convictions without statistics?
No, I asked how, without statistics, you could support your contention that more guns mean fewer gun deaths.
I can barely see the writing on that graph let alone even begin to have a way to interpret it. Sorry.
Here's a bigger version of the graph, which you could have also viewed by going back to the original article that you yourself referenced (Guns in Other Countries):
Moving on:
I'm back to simply not trusting statistics. I can't analyze them myself and even from the discussion between you and HBD it appears there are just too many ways to get things wrong whether fabricated or not.
Your competence at analyzing data seems to vary according to whether the data agrees with you. As soon as the data goes against you you throw up your hands and cry, "This is all too complicated, the relationship could be anything." Lack of comprehension is not a grounds for reaching conclusions.
Somewhere on that page it says that the UK only counts homicides if that's been established in court, but the US counts them at the time of commission. If so that would make for a discrepancy that renders all US-UK comparisons invalid.
For that particular fact your referenced article in turn references the article Fear in Britain by Dave Kopel of the Independence Institute, a gun rights advocacy organization. Mr Kopel simply states this baldly with no supporting documentation, I can find no support for it, and it makes no sense. I'm sure there's some kernel of truth buried in there somewhere, but who knows what it is.
What we do know is the UK's firearm homicide rate is very similar to other western countries with similarly low gun possession rates. Their firearm homicide rates are much lower than ours.
Your referenced article frequently argues that countries with low gun prevalence have higher violent crime rates, and we could argue that point if you want to bring some (gasp) statistics forward, but the recent point being made in this thread is a different and more direct one, that more guns means more gun deaths. How anyone could believe anything else is possible is difficult to fathom.
I have to do more research than I'm up to, in an area I don't feel I have any ability to judge.
If you believe you do not have the ability to judge then why do you keep rendering judgments?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3024 by Faith, posted 12-20-2014 7:01 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3043 by Faith, posted 12-21-2014 3:15 PM Percy has replied

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


Message 3040 of 5179 (745272)
12-21-2014 8:03 AM
Reply to: Message 3030 by faceman
12-20-2014 10:48 PM


Re: The Relationship between Guns and Gun Murders
faceman writes:
Have you ever been to any of those cities Percy? I've been to most (both the top and the bottom) and the main difference is very easy to spot. It's night and day (or black and white). The problem is cultural and no amount of gun laws will fix that.
I went through the list, turns out I've been to only eight of them. I agree that the problems are deep-rooted, but it must still hold true that fewer guns will translate into fewer gun deaths. Whether gun prevalence reductions can be accomplished with gun laws is a separate question. There's a huge reservoir of guns out there.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3030 by faceman, posted 12-20-2014 10:48 PM faceman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3044 by Faith, posted 12-21-2014 3:32 PM Percy has replied

Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 3041 of 5179 (745276)
12-21-2014 11:49 AM


There's a publicly available paper on international comparisons of gun homicides here:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...485564/pdf/cmaj00266-0071.pdf
It's quite old now but...
Results: Positive correlations were obtained between the rates of household gun ownership and the national rates of homicide and suicide as well as the proportions of homicides and suicides committed with a gun. There was no negative correlation between the rates of ownership and the rates of homicide and suicide committed by other means; this indicated that the other means were not used to "compensate" for the absence of guns in countries with a lower rate of gun ownership.
Conclusion: Larger studies are needed to examine more closely possible confounding factors such as the national tendency toward violent solutions, and more information on the type and availability of guns will be helpful in future studies. Nevertheless, the correlations detected in this study suggest that the presence of a gun in the home increases the likelihood of homicide or suicide.
It goes on to say:
Unfortunately, any further waiting for more convincing evidence may jeopardize more rigorous approaches to gun control, since beyond a certain point significantly reducing the number of guns in the hands of private citizens becomes a hopeless task. Therefore, the crucial policy question is: How much time do we have left to wait for more research, particularly in countries where gun ownership is not widespread and where social policies aimed at restraining its increase might be most beneficial in terms of reducing violence?
Pity no-one took any notice. And still aren't.
Similar results in this later one (not public)
Firearm Availability and Homicide Rates across 26 High-Incom... : Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
Results: In simple regressions (no control variables) across 26 high-income nations, there is a strong and statistically significant association between gun availability and homicide rates.
Conclusion: Across developed countries, where guns are more available, there are more homicides.
The point surely is that not only is it difficult to imagine the circumstances whereby more guns could feasibly lead to fewer deaths by guns, it's also backed up by several empirical studies.
Game over really unless Faith can find some contrary evidence from somewhere we can trust.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 3042 of 5179 (745280)
12-21-2014 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 3038 by Percy
12-21-2014 7:00 AM


Re: guns / crime
So to get meaningful comparisons I believe you have to compare figures from similar countries, otherwise other factors will confound the comparison.
I understand the justification for comparing figures from similar countries. What my concern was is the objective criteria for such exclusion/inclusion. For example, I would not have included Israel on the list because of all the social unrest regarding the Palestinians.
Of course, we are not trying to submit our findings for publication, but without a more rigorous method of decieding which countries to include, it is not much use as a statistic.
Some good criteria might be democratic style government, median income to average income ratio similar (I might have to think about this some more, but the idea would be to compare the gap between rich and poor), no military type conflict in the last 10 years, urban/rural ratio similar... those types of criteria.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3038 by Percy, posted 12-21-2014 7:00 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3094 by Percy, posted 12-22-2014 6:30 AM herebedragons has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 3043 of 5179 (745282)
12-21-2014 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 3039 by Percy
12-21-2014 7:55 AM


Re: guns / crime
No, I don't spend time trying to analyze statistical data no matter where it comes from. If I can't rely on the analysis given then forget it. This is true for statistics on either side, but yes I do particularly distrust those from your side, not because I think you all are necessarily any more devious but because bias affects statistics and it's your bias I oppose. There are too many different ways to put the numbers together to trust either side.
As for the graph yes I did finally go and look at it yesterday and I see the problem but I don't understand the problem. It all looks screwy but I don't know if that's just a weird error, incompetence or intentional fabrication or what/
But some of my problem looking at graphs has to do with their brightness because of my eye problem. I can't look at them very long.
\
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3039 by Percy, posted 12-21-2014 7:55 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3047 by herebedragons, posted 12-21-2014 4:02 PM Faith has replied
 Message 3095 by Percy, posted 12-22-2014 7:58 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 3044 of 5179 (745283)
12-21-2014 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 3040 by Percy
12-21-2014 8:03 AM


The relationship is NOT between guns and murders but PEOPLE and murders
I went through the list, turns out I've been to only eight of them. I agree that the problems are deep-rooted, but it must still hold true that fewer guns will translate into fewer gun deaths. Whether gun prevalence reductions can be accomplished with gun laws is a separate question. There's a huge reservoir of guns out there.
Don't know how you're going to accomplish fewer guns except by confiscation then. Is that what you're suggesting? As usual that would only penalize the good guys for the problem caused by the bad guys. If the greater number of deaths by guns occurs in the crime-ridden areas and you take guns away from people in the areas with less crime you are accomplishing nothing.
If the statistics are skewed by crime-infested areas why is the focus of gun control always on the NRA guys who are not responsible for those statistics?
The Wikipedia article about crime in DC says they have been working to find ways to reduce it for years, and laws against guns have accomplished absolutely nothing. Except to penalize the good guys who don't live in DC.
Although you say you aren't necessarily talking about more laws, that's what "fewer guns" normally means -- stricter controls which penalizes the good guys because the bad guys don't obey laws. There are already gun control laws that are making life difficult for the good guys when the problems they are supposed to solve were caused by the bad guys, who are not affected by the laws. My brother has told me about some that affect him in ways that are nothing but a hassle he doesn't deserve, all because of the information on his driver's license that he's a registered gun owner. Even if he left his gun at home they can strip and search his vehicle in some states because of that information on his license. Some people could have guns in every nook and cranny of their vehicle and not get searched because they aren't responsible enough to have that information on their license.
\
Saw a You Tube interview of a fifteen year old girl who has been shooting since she was eight and hoped to get a shooting scholarship to Harvard, but some new stupid niggling law that restricts her practice is going to prevent that. You punish the good guys with your laws and you do not solve the problems which are caused by the bad guys.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3040 by Percy, posted 12-21-2014 8:03 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3049 by herebedragons, posted 12-21-2014 4:07 PM Faith has replied
 Message 3098 by Percy, posted 12-22-2014 9:39 AM Faith has not replied

herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 3045 of 5179 (745284)
12-21-2014 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 3037 by Faith
12-21-2014 12:53 AM


Re: The Relationship between Guns and Gun Murders
The argument in general, though, is about lumping together the bad quys with the good guys. It just needs to be made more specific if you want to get any meaningful picture of the gun situation in America.
I don't understand your reasoning here. You want to talk about how gun ownership effects gun deaths or crime but then you want to exclude the bad guys who are killed by guns and regions with high crime rates. I live in a small village of about 350 households. Its quite rural with a lot of hunters, so I would guess at least 80% of those households own 1 or more guns. There has not been a gun murder in the village as long as I have lived here (16+ years). Is that the kind of statistics you want? Do you think that supports your premise?
Washington D.C. for instance, with its enormous crime rate and homicide rate and gun problems in general, is 50% black. This is the sort of thing I had in mind when I mentioned different demographics of different areas having a big impact on the statistics.
It is not disputed that differing demographics affect the rate of gun deaths. But what you are trying to do is connect that the demographic of 50% black to the crime problem and to make it worse, you imply that we shouldn't consider those communities when talking about gun deaths. What you are doing, whether you mean to or not, is devaluing the lives of the members of those communities. Sure, if you want to show that gun ownership does not cause more gun deaths, you could choose demographics like the village I live in. But if you really want to talk about gun deaths, you need to include ALL communities, all Americans.
Do think the solution to D.C.s homicide problem is to introduce more guns? Maybe get more guns into the hands of whites? Or would reducing the proportion of blacks to say 30% help reduce the crime problem?
The argument in general, though, is about lumping together the bad quys with the good guys. It just needs to be made more specific if you want to get any meaningful picture of the gun situation in America.
Again, you are suggesting that the deaths of bad guys is unimportant. You want to exclude the bad guys from the data and then claim that not many people are dying from gun violence? Do we care about people who are being killed by guns or not?
I came across the information that one large area of crime is "hate crime" against homosexuals. Who commits this crime is not named, if it should happen to be predominantly blacks or whites or some other identifiable group for instance. Seems to me this might be useful information.
What would it be useful for? Is this another demographic that should be excluded from gun violence statistics?
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3037 by Faith, posted 12-21-2014 12:53 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3046 by Faith, posted 12-21-2014 3:58 PM herebedragons has 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