quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: KYsissy

Or you could go straight to the source and it is pretty clear what those numbers represent.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/self-reported-gun-ownership-highest-1993.aspx

Interestingly, those number don't appear to match the ones Nosathro linked. Also interesting is the fact that there are no links provided for the alleged "sources" cited under the page's "Verification" header.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Just0Us0Two

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

Since this is suppose to be about the 2nd Amendment here is something interesting.

http://www.theonlinerocket.com/news/2013/09/26/second-amendment-often-misrepresented/

And I did not write this article.

As I pointed out in my last post you can find a link to "prove" anything.

I also find it amusing that this supposed expert has a glaring error in the 3rd paragraph. "For example one can own military style weapons, but cannot own a machine gun." I was going to say that perhaps he can't get a machinegun, depending on what state he lives in, but he lives in PA. The Federal government hasn't made MGs illegal, just costly and requiring a specific permit. I know for a fact that PA allows class 3 firearms, including belt-fed MGs. I've seen plenty of MGs for sale, all it takes is an application, a squeaky clean record, time, and money.

I haven't read the rest of the article yet. When someone gets something that simple wrong right at the beginning, I tend to lack faith in the rest of what they have to say. Maybe I'll finish it later.

You know what is interesting 42% of the gun owners in the US have a High School diploma or less.

http://www.statisticbrain.com/gun-ownership-statistics-demographics/

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

Look at the data without prejudicial blinders and it's quite clear

.

Why are you saying that to me instead of BitYakin? My interpretation of the figures was the same as yours.

You're bright enough to have been able to spot it immediately.

So you were saying that was in fact BitYakin who had prejudicial blinders?

Aye
He should have known better than to take a nosathro post and its interpretation at face value.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

You know what is interesting 42% of the gun owners in the US have a High School diploma or less.

http://www.statisticbrain.com/gun-ownership-statistics-demographics/

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitYakin

WOW who'd have thought the percentage of people who own guns education level pretty much MATCHES the education level for the WHOLE COUNTRY

Actually, I could be wrong but the statistic in the link looks like it means that 42% of those who have a 'High School Education or Less' own a gun. The higher the level of education a person has, the lower the likelihood of his/her owning a gun.

quote:

you are correct, I didn't even look at the chart, I accepted that he'd have something as basic as THAT correct!

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

you are correct, I didn't even look at the chart, I accepted that he'd have something as basic as THAT correct!

BY, the gun debate is a political debate. People should look at the original facts where possible, I would suggest.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitYakin

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

you are correct, I didn't even look at the chart, I accepted that he'd have something as basic as THAT correct!

BY, the gun debate is a political debate. People should look at the original facts where possible, I would suggest.

yes yes I should have gone an looked at the link myself, still no reason to say I am prejudiced or blind!

if you had pointed out that nos misinterpeted the data from the beginning I MIGHT have conceded the point right away!

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Of course you can be appalled, what I am saying is that when you have murder rate of 1.1% and pass strict gun laws which bring your murder rate down to 1% at a time when rates are dropping throughout the western world it doesn't really have that much bearing on the effects of gun control.
You said that the only people who mention UK crime on their sites are gun owners implying that that was enough to prove their unreliability.
So you think we should have very strict gun control that doesn't count for the hicks?
After all you have pointed out that if we would just adopted UK rules self defense wouldn't be an acceptable reason to own a firearm.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: KYsissy

Or you could go straight to the source and it is pretty clear what those numbers represent.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/self-reported-gun-ownership-highest-1993.aspx

Interestingly, those number don't appear to match the ones Nosathro linked. Also interesting is the fact that there are no links provided for the alleged "sources" cited under the page's "Verification" header.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Self defense alone wouldnt be a reason, whats wrong with that ?

Then how could you say they should be allowed to have one to defend themselves.