0
rushmc

Obama? or the NRA?

Recommended Posts

Quote



We can't eliminate road accidents so let's not try.

We can't eliminate skydiving deaths so let's not try.



You missed my point entirely. Creating useless laws that don't work is worse then not creating any new laws. There are things that can be done. I gave one example, but you, among others seem to think the only solution is more laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Biden said nothing of the sort.


You are creating a strawman.



Someone is

:D

Quote

"Nothing we are going to do is fundamentally going to alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down," Biden said, echoing remarks President Barack Obama made in January when he said "there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely."



Shoddy logic (as I expect from you) combined with a self-serving strawman.

Reserves don't prevent every skydiving death completely, yet I'm sure you jump with one.

Seat belts don't prevent every senseless traffic fatality completely, but I'm sure you wear one.

And dozens of other examples where just because we can't "prevent every [fill in the blank] completely" doesn't mean that we can't make an improvement.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


Biden said nothing of the sort.


You are creating a strawman.



Someone is

:D

Quote

"Nothing we are going to do is fundamentally going to alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down," Biden said, echoing remarks President Barack Obama made in January when he said "there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely."



Shoddy logic (as I expect from you) combined with a self-serving strawman.

Reserves don't prevent every skydiving death completely, yet I'm sure you jump with one.

Seat belts don't prevent every senseless traffic fatality completely, but I'm sure you wear one.

And dozens of other examples where just because we can't "prevent every [fill in the blank] completely" doesn't mean that we can't make an improvement.

You use very poor logic in attempting to compare gun laws to reserves and seat belts. There is no direct correlation between gun laws and lowering crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote


Biden said nothing of the sort.


You are creating a strawman.



Someone is

:D

Quote

"Nothing we are going to do is fundamentally going to alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down," Biden said, echoing remarks President Barack Obama made in January when he said "there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely."



Shoddy logic (as I expect from you) combined with a self-serving strawman.

Reserves don't prevent every skydiving death completely, yet I'm sure you jump with one.

Seat belts don't prevent every senseless traffic fatality completely, but I'm sure you wear one.

And dozens of other examples where just because we can't "prevent every [fill in the blank] completely" doesn't mean that we can't make an improvement.


You use very poor logic in attempting to compare gun laws to reserves and seat belts. There is no direct correlation between gun laws and lowering crime.

Another self-serving claim from someone who's afraid his access to his toys is threatened.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote


Biden said nothing of the sort.


You are creating a strawman.



Someone is

:D

Quote

"Nothing we are going to do is fundamentally going to alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down," Biden said, echoing remarks President Barack Obama made in January when he said "there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely."



Shoddy logic (as I expect from you) combined with a self-serving strawman.

Reserves don't prevent every skydiving death completely, yet I'm sure you jump with one.

Seat belts don't prevent every senseless traffic fatality completely, but I'm sure you wear one.

And dozens of other examples where just because we can't "prevent every [fill in the blank] completely" doesn't mean that we can't make an improvement.


You use very poor logic in attempting to compare gun laws to reserves and seat belts. There is no direct correlation between gun laws and lowering crime.


Another self-serving claim from someone who's afraid his access to his toys is threatened.


Wow! stooping to insults. Very impressive!

Should I post the link to the Harvard gun control study or the one from Austria?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

They must have worked to some degree....



A very subjective observation.
Have you ever heard about the plastic ripcord?



Yep. Add to that:

Anti-wind blast handles.
Belly band pilot chutes.
Capewells.
Flinger pack opening bands.
Pack closure cones.

There's a long list of parachute gear innovations which turned out to be bad ideas.
Just because something is new and different, doesn't mean it's good.
And that's true of both parachute gear and gun control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

We can't go looking for them (just think of the headlines "cops looking for illegal guns door to door.")

There aren't any records of felons or crazy people who own guns.

The police do confiscate them when they're taken from criminals. Unless, of course, they actually belong to law-abiding people and were stolen.

So how do we go about enforcing the current gun laws? And is curing really always better than prevention?

I'm all for a pre-certification for gun purchase system like rushmc described as existing in Iowa.

Wendy P.



ummm, there are indeed records of crazy people and felons who own guns. In fact last week I was reading that there was a backlog of 40000 felons who own guns just in california alone that they seem not to want to do much about.

And I'm sure that california isn;t alone. I imagine there are thousands like them in most states. It would probably make sense for the gov't to start going after those guns before they try to start taking away the right to buy guns from law-abiding people.
If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


Biden said nothing of the sort.


You are creating a strawman.



Someone is

:D

Yes, but what you don't do is take away someone's right to buy a rig just because there's a chance they may die jumping.

You don't take away someone;s right in many states to ride a motorcycle without a helmet just because there's a chance they may die in an accident.

In many states you don't make a person wear a seatbelt when they choose not to wear one, and you don't take away their car over it.

Your examples seem to all be making people have something else to make them safer, but for gun control you're trying to take something away from them (even if it is just the right to buy more).

Quote

"Nothing we are going to do is fundamentally going to alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down," Biden said, echoing remarks President Barack Obama made in January when he said "there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely."



Shoddy logic (as I expect from you) combined with a self-serving strawman.

Reserves don't prevent every skydiving death completely, yet I'm sure you jump with one.

Seat belts don't prevent every senseless traffic fatality completely, but I'm sure you wear one.

And dozens of other examples where just because we can't "prevent every [fill in the blank] completely" doesn't mean that we can't make an improvement.
If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote



Why would the banners want to do this when Biden and others have already admitted on tape that the bans (as proposed) would not stop mass murders like those at Sandy Hook?



Seat belts don't stop traffic fatalities either, but they sure help.

Sprinklers don't stop all building fires, but they sure help.

Reserves don't stop all skydiving fatalities, but they sure help.

Your argument is silly.



So with the massive increase in gun purchases since Obama took office, I assume you can show that gun deaths per 100,000 have increased by some corresponding amount?

Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote


Biden said nothing of the sort.


You are creating a strawman.



Someone is

:D

Quote

"Nothing we are going to do is fundamentally going to alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down," Biden said, echoing remarks President Barack Obama made in January when he said "there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely."



Shoddy logic (as I expect from you) combined with a self-serving strawman.

Reserves don't prevent every skydiving death completely, yet I'm sure you jump with one.

Seat belts don't prevent every senseless traffic fatality completely, but I'm sure you wear one.

And dozens of other examples where just because we can't "prevent every [fill in the blank] completely" doesn't mean that we can't make an improvement.


You use very poor logic in attempting to compare gun laws to reserves and seat belts. There is no direct correlation between gun laws and lowering crime.


Another self-serving claim from someone who's afraid his access to his toys is threatened.
I tend to be a bit different. enjoyed my time in the sport or is it an industry these days ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

It hasn't been in Iowa.

Wendy P.



Has it done anything to reduce crime?



Iowa tends to be a low crime state to begin with

I did however (to be honest) find out yesterday that private sellers are asked to see permits to purchase or weapons permiits (what is required by an ffl) but private sells would suffer no consequenses should they not do so

Everyone I know DOES do this

But it is not required by law
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

BACKGROUND CHECKS WON"T WORK.



That only means they won't work all of the time. That's not a winning argument against the efficacy of background checks (even if it's shouted in all-caps).

Here's one news source (after a very quick search) that says that according to FBI statistics, about 1 million people since 1998 have been turned down for gun purchases because they failed a background check.

http://permianbasin360.com/fulltext?nxd_id=243962


There is no SINGLE ONE measure to solve the problem, just like there is no one single rule by which to raise children - you put together a web of measures to address various issues, to close various loopholes; some trial and error; keep some that work, chuck some that don't work, and try to put together a responsible overall process.

I realize this argument is totally lost on those who just cross their arms across their chests and resist, resist, resist; but whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

It hasn't been in Iowa.

Wendy P.



Has it done anything to reduce crime?



Iowa tends to be a low crime state to begin with

I did however (to be honest) find out yesterday that private sellers are asked to see permits to purchase or weapons permiits (what is required by an ffl) but private sells would suffer no consequenses should they not do so

Everyone I know DOES do this

But it is not required by law




It just shows there is no direct correlation between crime and gun control laws. I personally suspect that gun laws have little to no affect on reducing crime. Iowa is a low crime area and would probably remain that way no matter what the gun laws are. I don't think the availability of guns causes people to be more or less violent then they would normally be. But the availability does affect those who follow the laws and their ability to defend themselves against the criminal elements in society. No matter what the laws are criminals will still have access to firearms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote


Biden said nothing of the sort.


You are creating a strawman.



Someone is

:D

Quote

"Nothing we are going to do is fundamentally going to alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down," Biden said, echoing remarks President Barack Obama made in January when he said "there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely."



Shoddy logic (as I expect from you) combined with a self-serving strawman.

Reserves don't prevent every skydiving death completely, yet I'm sure you jump with one.

Seat belts don't prevent every senseless traffic fatality completely, but I'm sure you wear one.

And dozens of other examples where just because we can't "prevent every [fill in the blank] completely" doesn't mean that we can't make an improvement.


You use very poor logic in attempting to compare gun laws to reserves and seat belts. There is no direct correlation between gun laws and lowering crime.


Another self-serving claim from someone who's afraid his access to his toys is threatened


The 2nd amendment is about protecting the citizens from a tyrannical government. Just like your government did to its citizens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

So with the massive increase in gun purchases since Obama took office, I assume you can show that gun deaths per 100,000 have increased by some corresponding amount?



More support for that view:

Since Obama has been in office, more than 60 million gun background checks have been done. That's more than the entire population of the UK. That's 20% of the population of America. And yet with all those additional guns sold, crime rates are still going down.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/20130205_1998_2013_monthly_yearly_totals.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

So with the massive increase in gun purchases since Obama took office, I assume you can show that gun deaths per 100,000 have increased by some corresponding amount?



More support for that view:

Since Obama has been in office, more than 60 million gun background checks have been done. That's more than the entire population of the UK. That's 20% of the population of America. And yet with all those additional guns sold, crime rates are still going down.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/20130205_1998_2013_monthly_yearly_totals.pdf



And, JohnR, the homicide RATE in the US is still way higher than that of any other western developed nation including the UK.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

So with the massive increase in gun purchases since Obama took office, I assume you can show that gun deaths per 100,000 have increased by some corresponding amount?



More support for that view:

Since Obama has been in office, more than 60 million gun background checks have been done. That's more than the entire population of the UK. That's 20% of the population of America. And yet with all those additional guns sold, crime rates are still going down.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/20130205_1998_2013_monthly_yearly_totals.pdf



And, JohnR, the homicide RATE in the US is still way higher than that of any other western developed nation including the UK.



There is no indication that new gun laws will change that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

And, JohnR, the homicide RATE in the US is still way higher than that of any other western developed nation including the UK.



Fred, the murder rate with knives in the US is higher than the murder rate by all means in the UK. And I don't think gun control laws have any effect upon knife murders.

Meanwhile, the number of successfull armed self defense stories in the US is also way higher than in other western developed nations. (Why exclude eastern nations?)

Americans probably have a lot more fun recreating with guns than others too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



We can't eliminate road accidents so let's not try.

We can't eliminate skydiving deaths so let's not try.



How do you like those warning labels on your gear? Do you believe they prevented a single death?
How high are we going? Oh about 9000. Oh Mr. Pilot! How high are we going? Oh about 12000! That's the ticket!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0