CDZ Law abiding citizens should be able to carry a gun, open or concealed in any state...

[danielpalos]

the right of well regulated militia of the People. i don't contradict myself; you merely have lousy reading comprehension.

THE second does not say the right of the militia

The people are the militia. you simply appeal to ignorance of the law.

Yes we know that so the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The wording is not the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The People are the Militia. There is no Individual Right to keep and bear Arms.

No the militia is the people and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

No, well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free State. The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militia of the whole People may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

 

[danielpalos]

prove that more guns means less crime.

I never said that

You said there would be more violence in Chicago without the gun laws so you prove it

yes, there would be more violence in Chicago or the US, without gun control laws. Prohibition is proof enough.

Prohibition had nothing to do with guns

yes, it did.

Read a fucking book

i did. you are merely special pleading and resort to fallacies of composition, like is habit and custom for the right wing.

 

[danielpalos]

the law of large numbers claims you have to be full of fallacy.

OK so then use the law of large numbers to prove that states with the harshest gun laws don't have higher murder rates than the states with the least restrictive gun laws

it is about population density not guns.

Murder rate are stated per 100,000 so density population density is accounted for

per number of guns in that population density. the right wing prefers to plead, so specially.

no it's per-capita
It has nothing to do with the number of guns since you only need one gun to murder a person

then, you cannot make the claim, that more guns equals less crime, since you don't keep those actual statistics.

 

[danielpalos]

Chicken and the egg

They may have more gun control as a response to more crime

And the gun control has not reduced the crime

yes, it has, even with more guns being acquired and possessed.

Really so then why despite all the harsh gun laws in IL doe they have 40 plus murders per weekend in Chicago?

it would be higher, without those gun control laws. only the right wing, never gets it.

Yeah...except states with little to no moronic gun control laws have really low gun murder rates......according to you that isn't possible...

They also have lower population densities.

 

[Skull Pilot]

no fucking shit Sherlock

and legal gun owners are less likely to become criminals not more likely simply because they own guns

gun control laws help ensure the health and safety of the State.

Then why do states with the most gun control have the most crime?

Chicken and the egg

They may have more gun control as a response to more crime

And that doesn't work does it.......? Chicago has strict gun control laws.....and is passing record numbers of shooting deaths....while New York and L.A. with strict laws have lower gun murder numbers...why? Because L.A. and New York put criminals in jail longer than Chicago does....

New Orleans has lax gun controls and has a similar gun death rate

Unfortunately for Chicago, they can establish gun controls in their borders but anything goes outside their borders

As a country, we have 2.5 million people in jail. Five times the number we had thirty years ago. Prisons have not made us safer

Yeah and how many of those people in jail are nonviolent offenders?

We need to keep violent people off the street and come up with some alternative punishments for non violent offenders

The fact is that most felony convicts only actually serve less than 4 years

You want to stop gun crimes?

The put people who commit crimes with guns in jail for a minimum of 20 years and let the guy who was carrying an ounce of weed or coke do community service

 

[Skull Pilot]

And the gun control has not reduced the crime

yes, it has, even with more guns being acquired and possessed.

Really so then why despite all the harsh gun laws in IL doe they have 40 plus murders per weekend in Chicago?

it would be higher, without those gun control laws. only the right wing, never gets it.

Yeah...except states with little to no moronic gun control laws have really low gun murder rates......according to you that isn't possible...

They also have lower population densities.

so what?

When the murder rate is expresses as X per 100,000 the population density factor is nullified

 

[danielpalos]

gun control laws help ensure the health and safety of the State.

Then why do states with the most gun control have the most crime?

Chicken and the egg

They may have more gun control as a response to more crime

And that doesn't work does it.......? Chicago has strict gun control laws.....and is passing record numbers of shooting deaths....while New York and L.A. with strict laws have lower gun murder numbers...why? Because L.A. and New York put criminals in jail longer than Chicago does....

New Orleans has lax gun controls and has a similar gun death rate

Unfortunately for Chicago, they can establish gun controls in their borders but anything goes outside their borders

As a country, we have 2.5 million people in jail. Five times the number we had thirty years ago. Prisons have not made us safer

Yeah and how many of those people in jail are nonviolent offenders?

We need to keep violent people off the street and come up with some alternative punishments for non violent offenders

The fact is that most felony convicts only actually serve less than 4 years

You want to stop gun crimes?

The put people who commit crimes with guns in jail for a minimum of 20 years and let the guy who was carrying an ounce of weed or coke do community service

more guns also seems to mean, more persons incarcerated.

 

[danielpalos]

yes, it has, even with more guns being acquired and possessed.

Really so then why despite all the harsh gun laws in IL doe they have 40 plus murders per weekend in Chicago?

it would be higher, without those gun control laws. only the right wing, never gets it.

Yeah...except states with little to no moronic gun control laws have really low gun murder rates......according to you that isn't possible...

They also have lower population densities.

so what?

When the murder rate is expresses as X per 100,000 the population density factor is nullified

high population densities affect people differently than low population densities.

the law of large numbers applies.

 

[Skull Pilot]

THE second does not say the right of the militia

The people are the militia. you simply appeal to ignorance of the law.

Yes we know that so the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The wording is not the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The People are the Militia. There is no Individual Right to keep and bear Arms.

No the militia is the people and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

No, well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free State. The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militia of the whole People may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

The militia is the people

You can't have a militia without the people but you can have people without a militia therefore the people have the right to keep and bear arms so as to form a militia when necessary

There is no mention of the bearing of arms for the country it is and always will be the people's right

 

[Skull Pilot]

Then why do states with the most gun control have the most crime?

Chicken and the egg

They may have more gun control as a response to more crime

And that doesn't work does it.......? Chicago has strict gun control laws.....and is passing record numbers of shooting deaths....while New York and L.A. with strict laws have lower gun murder numbers...why? Because L.A. and New York put criminals in jail longer than Chicago does....

New Orleans has lax gun controls and has a similar gun death rate

Unfortunately for Chicago, they can establish gun controls in their borders but anything goes outside their borders

As a country, we have 2.5 million people in jail. Five times the number we had thirty years ago. Prisons have not made us safer

Yeah and how many of those people in jail are nonviolent offenders?

We need to keep violent people off the street and come up with some alternative punishments for non violent offenders

The fact is that most felony convicts only actually serve less than 4 years

You want to stop gun crimes?

The put people who commit crimes with guns in jail for a minimum of 20 years and let the guy who was carrying an ounce of weed or coke do community service

more guns also seems to mean, more persons incarcerated.

more ILLEGAL guns


in case you didn't know there is a differene

 

[danielpalos]

The people are the militia. you simply appeal to ignorance of the law.

Yes we know that so the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The wording is not the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The People are the Militia. There is no Individual Right to keep and bear Arms.

No the militia is the people and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

No, well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free State. The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militia of the whole People may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

The militia is the people

You can't have a militia without the people but you can have people without a militia therefore the people have the right to keep and bear arms so as to form a militia when necessary

There is no mention of the bearing of arms for the country it is and always will be the people's right

The People are the Militia. Well regulated Militia of the People are necessary to the security of a free State, to keep the unnecessary one's, in-line.

 

[danielpalos]

Chicken and the egg

They may have more gun control as a response to more crime

And that doesn't work does it.......? Chicago has strict gun control laws.....and is passing record numbers of shooting deaths....while New York and L.A. with strict laws have lower gun murder numbers...why? Because L.A. and New York put criminals in jail longer than Chicago does....

New Orleans has lax gun controls and has a similar gun death rate

Unfortunately for Chicago, they can establish gun controls in their borders but anything goes outside their borders

As a country, we have 2.5 million people in jail. Five times the number we had thirty years ago. Prisons have not made us safer

Yeah and how many of those people in jail are nonviolent offenders?

We need to keep violent people off the street and come up with some alternative punishments for non violent offenders

The fact is that most felony convicts only actually serve less than 4 years

You want to stop gun crimes?

The put people who commit crimes with guns in jail for a minimum of 20 years and let the guy who was carrying an ounce of weed or coke do community service

more guns also seems to mean, more persons incarcerated.

more ILLEGAL guns

in case you didn't know there is a differene

statistics only cares about the law of large numbers.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yes we know that so the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The wording is not the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The People are the Militia. There is no Individual Right to keep and bear Arms.

No the militia is the people and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

No, well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free State. The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militia of the whole People may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

The militia is the people

You can't have a militia without the people but you can have people without a militia therefore the people have the right to keep and bear arms so as to form a militia when necessary

There is no mention of the bearing of arms for the country it is and always will be the people's right

The People are the Militia. Well regulated Militia of the People are necessary to the security of a free State, to keep the unnecessary one's, in-line.

you are rewriting the amendment

if you are going to quote the second amendment do it correctly

 

[Skull Pilot]

And that doesn't work does it.......? Chicago has strict gun control laws.....and is passing record numbers of shooting deaths....while New York and L.A. with strict laws have lower gun murder numbers...why? Because L.A. and New York put criminals in jail longer than Chicago does....

New Orleans has lax gun controls and has a similar gun death rate

Unfortunately for Chicago, they can establish gun controls in their borders but anything goes outside their borders

As a country, we have 2.5 million people in jail. Five times the number we had thirty years ago. Prisons have not made us safer

Yeah and how many of those people in jail are nonviolent offenders?

We need to keep violent people off the street and come up with some alternative punishments for non violent offenders

The fact is that most felony convicts only actually serve less than 4 years

You want to stop gun crimes?

The put people who commit crimes with guns in jail for a minimum of 20 years and let the guy who was carrying an ounce of weed or coke do community service

more guns also seems to mean, more persons incarcerated.

more ILLEGAL guns

in case you didn't know there is a differene

statistics only cares about the law of large numbers.

um no
Statistics can use small sample sizes quite accurately

 

[danielpalos]

The People are the Militia. There is no Individual Right to keep and bear Arms.

No the militia is the people and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

No, well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free State. The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militia of the whole People may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

The militia is the people

You can't have a militia without the people but you can have people without a militia therefore the people have the right to keep and bear arms so as to form a militia when necessary

There is no mention of the bearing of arms for the country it is and always will be the people's right

The People are the Militia. Well regulated Militia of the People are necessary to the security of a free State, to keep the unnecessary one's, in-line.

you are rewriting the amendment

if you are going to quote the second amendment do it correctly

you have have an incorrect argument not a valid rebuttal.

The People are the Militia. Well regulated Militia of the People are necessary to the security of a free State, to keep the unnecessary one's, in-line.

The fantastical right wing literally has nothing but fallacy.

 

[rightwinger]

The people are the militia. you simply appeal to ignorance of the law.

Yes we know that so the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The wording is not the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The People are the Militia. There is no Individual Right to keep and bear Arms.

No the militia is the people and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

No, well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free State. The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militia of the whole People may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

The militia is the people

You can't have a militia without the people but you can have people without a militia therefore the people have the right to keep and bear arms so as to form a militia when necessary

There is no mention of the bearing of arms for the country it is and always will be the people's right

There is a mention of bearing arms for the country

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yes we know that so the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The wording is not the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The People are the Militia. There is no Individual Right to keep and bear Arms.

No the militia is the people and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

No, well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free State. The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militia of the whole People may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

The militia is the people

You can't have a militia without the people but you can have people without a militia therefore the people have the right to keep and bear arms so as to form a militia when necessary

There is no mention of the bearing of arms for the country it is and always will be the people's right

There is a mention of bearing arms for the country

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state

that says nothing about the militia bearing arms for the country it merely states the necessity of a militia for the security of a free state
the people's right to keep and bear arms is not qualified in fact it is not to be infringed at all

 

[Skull Pilot]

No the militia is the people and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

No, well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free State. The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militia of the whole People may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

The militia is the people

You can't have a militia without the people but you can have people without a militia therefore the people have the right to keep and bear arms so as to form a militia when necessary

There is no mention of the bearing of arms for the country it is and always will be the people's right

The People are the Militia. Well regulated Militia of the People are necessary to the security of a free State, to keep the unnecessary one's, in-line.

you are rewriting the amendment

if you are going to quote the second amendment do it correctly

you have have an incorrect argument not a valid rebuttal.

The People are the Militia. Well regulated Militia of the People are necessary to the security of a free State, to keep the unnecessary one's, in-line.

The fantastical right wing literally has nothing but fallacy.

You cannot have a militia of the people if the people cannot keep and bear arms which is why the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

And the second amendment does not say

Well regulated Militia of the People are necessary to the security of a free State,

and FYI militia is not plural it is singular so once again brush up on your grammar

 

[rightwinger]

The People are the Militia. There is no Individual Right to keep and bear Arms.

No the militia is the people and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

No, well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free State. The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militia of the whole People may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

The militia is the people

You can't have a militia without the people but you can have people without a militia therefore the people have the right to keep and bear arms so as to form a militia when necessary

There is no mention of the bearing of arms for the country it is and always will be the people's right

There is a mention of bearing arms for the country

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state

that says nothing about the militia bearing arms for the country it merely states the necessity of a militia for the security of a free state
the people's right to keep and bear arms is not qualified in fact it is not to be infringed at all

Why not just say......The right to bear arms shall not be infringed
and leave it at that. Why was it necessary to say why?

 

[2aguy]

no fucking shit Sherlock

and legal gun owners are less likely to become criminals not more likely simply because they own guns

gun control laws help ensure the health and safety of the State.

Then why do states with the most gun control have the most crime?

Chicken and the egg

They may have more gun control as a response to more crime

And that doesn't work does it.......? Chicago has strict gun control laws.....and is passing record numbers of shooting deaths....while New York and L.A. with strict laws have lower gun murder numbers...why? Because L.A. and New York put criminals in jail longer than Chicago does....

New Orleans has lax gun controls and has a similar gun death rate

Unfortunately for Chicago, they can establish gun controls in their borders but anything goes outside their borders

As a country, we have 2.5 million people in jail. Five times the number we had thirty years ago. Prisons have not made us safer

Wrong...both New York and L.A. have the same gun control laws as Chicago...and combined they have a lower gun murder rate. Their gang members can also travel out of state to get guns...as is claimed by anti gunners about Chicago's gun violence...the difference....cultural factors...Chicago gangs are different from L.A. and New York, and punishment for being caught with an illegal gun...less than 2 years in Chicago and they fight increasing sentencing laws for criminals because of the race game.....

We are not locking up violent criminals for long enough sentences...repeat gun offenders....violent felons caught over and over again with illegal guns...get bail, and if they actually do time they are out in less than 2 years....we need to change that. That is how you stop gun crime...as the Japanese did with long prison sentences...