Recommended Posts
rhaig 0
QuoteIf the gun is within reach, the drunken idiot full of anger will use it to kill his family (or his cattle ).
yeah... that right there makes me take you seriously.
yeah...
Rob
And more drive-by shooting
And more women and children shot by yet another idiot
QuoteQuoteI've asked you for a singular example.
You asked? I thought it was tsisson. Is it your another account?
Yes, I asked, and quite clearly. Post 197.
"You can cite an example where there was a ratio of 1 gun per person where they then successfully removed them from the equation and crime (not gun crime) went down markedly? Outside of a country that just finished a war within its borders, pretty unlikely. "
QuoteQuote
Fucking hilarious. Your examples included drug dealing and a hitman wearing a mask.
You obviously understood that the list I provided was not all-inclusive, don't you?
My point was it wasn't inclusive at all.
QuoteYes, I asked, and quite clearly. Post 197.
"You can cite an example where there was a ratio of 1 gun per person where they then successfully removed them from the equation and crime (not gun crime) went down markedly? Outside of a country that just finished a war within its borders, pretty unlikely. "
This is a completely different question comparing to what you asked here (see the tsisson quote you replied to), which was HOW to remove the guns.
Your other question has been already answered at least twice, the most recent being post #200.
QuoteQuoteYes, I asked, and quite clearly. Post 197.
"You can cite an example where there was a ratio of 1 gun per person where they then successfully removed them from the equation and crime (not gun crime) went down markedly? Outside of a country that just finished a war within its borders, pretty unlikely. "
This is a completely different question comparing to what you asked here (see the tsisson quote you replied to), which was HOW to remove the guns.
Your other question has been already answered at least twice, the most recent being post #200.
I see no relevant example there. (hint: Europe isn't)
QuoteQuoteFacts are obvious, these are deadly shootings, effected by persons with weapons
Yep... And in every single case the weapon didn't do the shooting.
I do find this funny from a person who admits to breaking Federal Law and completing a straw purchase in Florida in the 2000
"I bought a hand gun in Fort Lauderdale in '00 by just by showing my credit card"--christelsabine
No matter that the law requiring paperwork has been in place since 1968, and a MANDATORY 3day wait has been in place in FL since May 5, 1991.
Then of course you just changed your story:
"The guy in the Fort Lauderdale shop just asked me if I have cash, no need for a credit card."
So you either:
A. Lied
B. Participated in an illegal transaction.
So which is it?
And why did you buy a gun in the US if you only need them for hunting?
Why do YOU buy guns? Only for hunting when hungry?
Yep, I bought a gun. Like many others did and still do. Even aliens.
Do not tell me that every gun shop is working properly and according to law requirements. THAT would be a lie.
The shop owner wanted to see cash (instead of a credit card deal, of course).
And now you tell me: Where is the connection to actual thread, please? Or are you just fishing for arguments? *Solid* arguments like that one from your post?
"And in every single case the weapon didn't do the shooting."
That's a punchy argument?? It needs little brain to realize it's just moronic.
dudeist skydiver # 3105
QuoteQuoteIf the gun is within reach, the drunken idiot full of anger will use it to kill his family (or his cattle ).
yeah... that right there makes me take you seriously.
yeah...
Yes, you should. It's happening in your country on a daily basis.
That is a serious matter. Even the story with the cattle.
dudeist skydiver # 3105
QuoteI see no relevant example there. (hint: Europe isn't)
It is right there, under your question. How could you miss it? I'll even quote it for you:
Each crime requires different measures to lower it. For example more auditing on Medicare would reduce insurance fraud and will have no effect on gun crimes or DUI. Increasing DUI penalty and implementing "sobriety tests" will lower the number of drunk drivers and will have no effect on insurance fraud and gun crime. Restricting guns will lower the gun crime, and will have no effect on insurance fraud and DUIs. Different crimes require different approaches, and while there is no single approach to lower ALL the crime at the same time, focusing on lowering specific crimes works really well.
In short, gun restrictions are supposed to lower gun crime. They are not supposed to lower insurance fraud or DUI. For those types of crime other measures are needed.
That was the question.
You obviously understood that the list I provided was not all-inclusive, don't you?
Unless you have a working mind reader, I'd say it is pretty naive for you to tell me what I meant to say. Please address what I actually said, not what you think I wanted to say, and please ask clarifications if you don't understand the point.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites