|
BamaD -> RE: Gun sales vs crime stats in CA (3/23/2015 4:08:58 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: joether
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD
quote:
ORIGINAL: joether
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD
Yet in the years after the Port Arthur Massacre in Australia, not one mass shooting has taken place since 1996.
And yet their crime rate has not gone down.
Of course you thought you were quite logical, but the 3 stooges thought they were.
I did state they have not had any more massive shootings. That death by firearms has declined from both accidental and deliberate. Even suicide by a firearm have diminished. Why are people still dying from firearms?
Could be any number of reaons:
A ) People squirrels firearms away
B ) The black market
C ) Police action
D ) visitors by boat*
E ) stolen
*: That people arrive in the country's ports all day from other places in the world. That the owner, crew and/or passangers had one or more guns that were used to kill someone.
While researching your argument's idea, I came across THIS. Its a comparison between Australia and the United States. It breaks things down between two concepts: perception of crime and actual crime. That the two countries share similar perceptions. But that both countires are doing better than the other in certain areas.
However, I think we should be careful when comparing different countries to each other. The history, culture, people, and even events shape laws, regulations, and penalties.
And I didn't limit it to just guns, other weapons, as always, picked up the slack. You engage in typical anti-gun non-logic by ignoring this fact. When a gun death is replaced by a knife death you have gained nothing.
Anti-gun-non-logic? I think I stated things very logically. In fact, I have a pretty good handle on how the human mind handles stress and anxiety when faced with a difficult challenges. Yes, people will use weapons of any sort if they think it will accomplish the task. That firearms are very easy to use, conceal, transport, and dispose of after the fact. That in some cases, its much more preferred method of violence over all other forms combined. The crime rate in this nation has been in declined. Yet, no one can seem to make a decent argument that its mostly or solely contributed by 'honest and law abiding' citizens with access to firearms. As most of the cases in which someone used such an arm, it was in the hands of law enforcement. You know, that "...well regulated militia...." mentioned in the 2nd?
Second, you attack my post without even one clear and clean rebuttal. Why is that? Because the arguments made were really good and undeniable. Its a typical tactic of gun nuts, when faced with facts and reality, to push out fear and intimidation tactics. An each of those tactics have been taken down in the past; debunked as either silly or insane ramblings. You forget, that if enough people get tired of the bullshit, the 2nd amendment goes 'bye-bye'. Sandy Hook almost did that. So based on observation, if something happens that is worst than Sandy Hook, its a good bet most Americans will favor tighter run laws. How many kids have to die to some lunatic (or group of lunatics), BamaD?
I would not wish to know the answer to that question, BamaD. How about you? Irrelevant in how you answer, I suspect we'll both find out. It will be painful, violent, sad, and ugly. After that moment, *NO ONE* will give a shit about the viewpoints of gun nuts in the nation.
We can deal with these issues pro-actively, when things are calm and people are thinking clearly. Or reactively after one of those massive shootings, when emotions are running high and the demand for actual action is raging. Personally, I rather discuss things while we are calm, sensible, and relaxed. How about you?
Another gap in your so called logic is that you ignore that those of us on the pro gun side, as opposed to what gun grabbers claim, do want to do something about these things, just not the same things as you do. I must be terrible hoping for another school shooting so you can win a political argument.
|
|
|
|
