All of you realize that there is no factual evidence that gun control works right?

[mudwhistle]

Like zero.

Some places with lotsa gun control have more violence and some have less.

Some places with little gun control have more violence and some have less.

It is not a fact that gun control reduces violence.


Having the desire to strip hundreds of millions of people of their rights on a whim is pretty fucking low class.

Yes there is. Did you know that half the states that have gun strict gun laws have lower crime rates?

Link?

 

[NYcarbineer]

By the logic of the OP, all background checks should be ended and all restrictions on owning machine guns should be lifted.

That is where you people are at this point.

Sorry, that's a false assumption.

I'm for reasonable restrictions.

I don't go for restrictions on AR 15s just because it's popular.

I can do more damage with a shotgun.

Then you realize the OP's premise is horseshit.

 

[NYcarbineer]

By the logic of the OP, all background checks should be ended and all restrictions on owning machine guns should be lifted.

That is where you people are at this point.

Sorry, that's a false assumption.

I'm for reasonable restrictions.

I don't go for restrictions on AR 15s just because it's popular.

I can do more damage with a shotgun.

He said NO gun control works. If NO gun control works, then NO gun control laws are necessary.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Lets just make all gun crimes "hate" crimes. The stigma will prevent future occurences and the sentences will be longer . lol

 

[mudwhistle]

By the logic of the OP, all background checks should be ended and all restrictions on owning machine guns should be lifted.

That is where you people are at this point.

Sorry, that's a false assumption.

I'm for reasonable restrictions.

I don't go for restrictions on AR 15s just because it's popular.

I can do more damage with a shotgun.

Then you realize the OP's premise is horseshit.

Yes.

He's confusing gun-control with confiscation.

 

[mudwhistle]

Lets just make all gun crimes "hate" crimes. The stigma will prevent future occurences and the sentences will be longer . lol

So plugging someone should get a heavier sentence than disemboweling them and serving their brains with some Faber beans and a nice Chianti?

 

[Inthemiddle]

So how do you "factually know" that if the assault weapons ban was in place, that one less child would have been butchered in Newtown. Do yo have a factual response? Or will you continue to scribe conjecture and your unsubstantiated opinions.

Or maybe it isn't worth a child's life? Is it?

First mistake is thinking that there is anything just or right about infringing on people's liberties simply because "well, we don't know that it won't save ONE life." Infiltrating and dissolving the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints might save one child's life. we don't know that it won't, so based on your reasoning, we should ban that religion.

Second mistake is thinking that pointing out a lack of evidence is some kind of conjecture or an unsubstantiated opinion. That is an abhorrence of logic. A lack of evidence is a lack of evidence. There's no conjecture about it. The conjecture comes in because YOU believe that an assault weapons ban has any meaningful ability to accomplish anything. And THAT is the definition of an unsubstantiated opinion.

 

[Inthemiddle]

1. Gun control has been a major success in Australia as well as other countries.

Correlation does not imply causation.

 

[nitroz]

Yep. Because Gun control would do more bad than good.

Just fucking regulate it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

All of you realize that there is no factual evidence that gun control works right?

Just as there’s no ‘factual evidence’ anyone wants to take your guns.

I believe when this administration, and/or its subsequent iterations, gets enough "factual evidence" together and they think can take your guns.

They will.

And if this keeps you awake at night and fantasizing about taking preemptive action I suggestion you seek counseling immediately.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So how do you "factually know" that if the assault weapons ban was in place, that one less child would have been butchered in Newtown. Do yo have a factual response? Or will you continue to scribe conjecture and your unsubstantiated opinions.

Or maybe it isn't worth a child's life? Is it?

First mistake is thinking that there is anything just or right about infringing on people's liberties simply because "well, we don't know that it won't save ONE life." Infiltrating and dissolving the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints might save one child's life. we don't know that it won't, so based on your reasoning, we should ban that religion.

Second mistake is thinking that pointing out a lack of evidence is some kind of conjecture or an unsubstantiated opinion. That is an abhorrence of logic. A lack of evidence is a lack of evidence. There's no conjecture about it. The conjecture comes in because YOU believe that an assault weapons ban has any meaningful ability to accomplish anything. And THAT is the definition of an unsubstantiated opinion.

We generally don't let convicted pedophiles take jobs involving children. Why would we allow someone convicted of a gun crime to buy a gun?

 

[Inthemiddle]

Common sense and humanity suggest no one should have a gun unless they have been screened and earned a license.

*shakes head*

You know, I'm rather sad for you. You're so locked into a bitter, zealous crusade that you seem to be beyond all hope, beyond redemption. It's like you were driving cross country from New York to California, got lost along the way, ended up down in Bolivia somewhere, because you just couldn't recognize that you took a wrong turn in Kansas. You were so damn adamant to prove that that turn was the correct one, and since then you've been foolishly determined to create every instruction on the driving directions out of whatever road is before you. Your passenger is telling you that you're lost and you don't know where you are, but you aren't willing to hear it. Even when you do go back a couple miles because that next turn you were expecting didn't appear, you end up not even scratching the surface of just how far off the path you already were in the first place. All you had to do was ask for directions. But you couldn't swallow your pride. By the time you did decide to ask a few people, what they told you was so far away from what you were intent on believing was the correct road that you ended up fooling yourself into believing that "Oh see, I can do it, I'm not too proud, they're all just idiots so I'm better off not asking anymore anyway."

Allowing the government to "license" who has a right to protect him/her self from the government becoming too overbearing......well may as well lock your own shackles now.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Oh, so since there is NO EVIDENCE that these gun controls will save even one life, we need to back off, right? But if there is a one percent chance, why not try? Is a one percent chance of saving an innocent child's life worth the one percent.

YOU DAMN RIGHT IT IS!

How can there be a 1% chance that anyone knows about, if there is no evidence that it will work at all? You are arguing an impossibility of knowledge or inference. And it underscores the absence of intellectual support for the gun control desire.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Link?

Link? Seriously? You can't identify the clear flaw of logic that I employed there? *shakes head* There are idiots on both sides of this issue, I suppose.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Yep. Because Gun control would do more bad than good.

Just fucking regulate it.

What about speech control? Religion control?

 

[Inthemiddle]

We generally don't let convicted pedophiles take jobs involving children. Why would we allow someone convicted of a gun crime to buy a gun?

Who cares what you let them do. They're going to do it anyway. Can we move on to something that would be more than a token PR stunt?

 

[tjvh]

Why don't we just burn people at the stake who own guns... It's what the libtards really want.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Like zero.

Some places with lotsa gun control have more violence and some have less.

Some places with little gun control have more violence and some have less.

It is not a fact that gun control reduces violence.


Having the desire to strip hundreds of millions of people of their rights on a whim is pretty fucking low class.

This maybe one of the dumbest threads to date. It's obvious the gun nuts are a rather dumb breed, but to assert there is not evidence to suggest gun control doesn't work is down to earth stupid.

The evidence is clear. No gun control doesn't work, the bodies in Newtown are clear and convincing evidence.

Another stupid remark which needs to be laughed off is the assertion that "hundreds of millions of people" will have their rights taken away. Hundreds of Millions? And what rights are those? Common sense and humanity suggest no one should have a gun unless they have been screened and earned a license. Common sense suggests no one should sell or provide a gun to anyone not screened and licensed.

I've posted elsewhere what I think and believe ought to be done to mitigate the violence; the gun nuts have shown they really don't give a second's thought to the 20-first graders murdered last month. As callous conservatives their first and only concern is how is Newtown going to effect me.

You guys on the far right are unbelievably dumb.

And yet here you are Wry, exploiting the murder of twenty children (funny how you libs only exploit the children), while never mentioning the murdered adults, to advance your loony agenda.

It's become quite clear these last few weeks, that many of the libs don't give a shit about the children,.....in fact, many of them just love when incidents like SH happen, for dead children en masse give them more firepower to cackle on like the weak lil' caged hens they truly are.

Get used to it, Wry.....we are now seeing this country's worse generation coming of age....and no amount of gun control is going to stop the future carnage that will no doubt come.

We are now seeing the Xbox, internet, baby momma drama, who's your daddy, every child gets a trophy, heavily medicated generation coming of age.....and it's only going to get worse.

 

[martybegan]

Aside from strong background checks I'm very much against gun control and fiercely pro-2nd amendment but there's two points here.

1. Gun control has been a major success in Australia as well as other countries.

2. There is absolutely no evidence of future gun control or the government prohibiting your right to own a gun in the foreseeable future.

Results of the '96 Australian Gun Laws (updated 2009) (GunsAndCrime.org)

The data shows no real correlation between the ban and any crime. Trends appear to be independent of the ban implementation and completion.

 

[Darkwind]

So how do you "factually know" that if the assault weapons ban was in place, that one less child would have been butchered in Newtown. Do yo have a factual response? Or will you continue to scribe conjecture and your unsubstantiated opinions.

Or maybe it isn't worth a child's life? Is it?

How many children will die in poverty of starvation because of the 75k dollar debt you placed upon them before they drew their first breath crushed any hope and life they may have had?

Or is all this debt worth a child's life? Is it?