Reply With Quote
whatever it takes.
just think of all the kids that will be saved from a life of food stamps and slushees!
whatever it takes.
That's 200. Now for the remaining 10's of thousands. Better get cracking.
Maybe 200 is a large enough sample size for him to think it proves his point
I wasn't trying to prove anything. I don't think CHL is the answer to the school shootings. I've said as much. Interesting though how you assumed I was for CHL in classrooms.
lol @ your accusing someone of making false assumptions.
LOL I have two stalkers.
lol now you're reading my posts
I didn't assume anything. Merely stated that you posted 200. What? Were you just trying to be disingenuous or was it an accident?
I was showing WC that it's starting. That's why I didn't quote anyone. Odd that you said "better get cracking" as if it was my intention to build the "teachers with CHL" database.
I wasnt looking for teachers with a CHL. Lrn2read.
What exactly were you looking for then with the "better get cracking" comment posted after I posted a link to an article about 200 educators taking a handgun class?
This is a bbs. You have the ability to look at different posts other than the one right in front of you. You responded to this: You responded with the non sequiturous (just made that word up) link to 200 teachers taking a shooting class. It had about zero to do with my post.
Using a factual error on my part to draw attention to the outstanding reduction in mass shootings in Australia following the semi auto ban is not very good technique.
In the 14 years before the ban, Australia had 8 mass shootings. In the 14 years since, they have had one.
Off the cuff I was wrong. There was one and not none shootings, but as I said the last time it in no way mitigates the efficacy of the ban.
You obviously have no interest in arguing the point though because we talked about all this. That's why you are boring.
You cannot have your cake and eat it too. There was a mass shooting in 2002, 6 years after the ban. The ban did not stop a student with a mental illness from legally acquiring enough fire power to do what he did. I don't see how me pointing that out to you is anything but correcting your misconception based on ignorance of the facts. Still, I had to point it out to you what, like half a dozen times before you even acknowledged it, which tells me you're more interested in scoring e-points than in having a real conversation.
There was a second ban in 2002. Those who disregard the 2nd Amendment use Australia ad nauseum, but most don't even know about the 2002 shooting or the subsequent ban, you included. Like I said, you folks just like to talk, learning is a side dish. You post a study on Australia's gun ban and you don't even know what you're talking about. What's really amusing is how you folks think this is the first time I have ever encountered the Australia defense. It's not my first rodeo.In the 14 years before the ban, Australia had 8 mass shootings. In the 14 years since, they have had one.
Right, you being wrong in no way changes the point you're trying to make, be it hogs/javelinas or mass shootings. You're right by default.Off the cuff I was wrong. There was one and not none shootings, but as I said the last time it in no way mitigates the efficacy of the ban.
You keep saying that but you keep returning.You obviously have no interest in arguing the point though because we talked about all this. That's why you are boring.
What is this? Post ty cliches and hope that someone buys it?
I've been posting here for years and this is the forum that I post on most. I don't think it is hyperbole that this is one of the best sports forums on the interwebs. That's why I come back.
My cake is that gun bans across most NATO states have resulted in much lower gun crime and deaths. France Germany Britain Canada Australia. You know all the countries of the world that are most like us. There being one shooting in the 8 years instead of the none that I had initial thought does not change that 1 is a much lower gun crime number than 14. You would get more mileage by saying that I am clueless because I make factual errors over this meandering bull you are laying out.
You do know how arguments are formed right? 'Australia had no mass shootings since the ban' is an argument I made but it is not my central argument. You understand the significance of that in terms of what you are trying to say
What is your argument? What will banning AR-15's do to stop these insane mass shootings? Answer that, and that alone.
Fuzzy forgets that we have criminal elements that they don't, and that the whole culture is different.
WC forgets that he is a stupid mother er that makes up and inserts it for the truth.
You really think that there is no organized crime in Europe and/or Asia, nor poverty and the crime breeding ghettos it engenders. That's nice.
That a type of ban used by our NATO allies who have seen success at mitigating gun related, accidents, crimes and deaths as well as mass shootings should be a strong US policy consideration. Specifically that the Canadian, Australian, UK and French bans have shown success and we should look to see what is most effective. I think the most obvious success story is the semiautomatic ban that all of them have to one degree or another.
You should have been able to figure that out. I have not exactly been demure.
You didn't answer the question. You just said that other people banned them and they have a lower gun related death rate. You didn't address how banning the AR-15 would accomplish that task. Frankly it's because you don't know. I find it strange that an engineering mind conclude that, because a different country has a result we would like, that it's because of one thing such as gun bans and not because of a core cultural and political difference historically. I never could understand how a critical thinking mind could accept theism, and I cannot accept how you can come to such shallow conclusions except that you have no interest in the deaths themselves, just in trying to win some liberal forum points. That's why I don't take you seriously, you ignore logic and reasoning when it suits you, and you turn a blind eye to critical thinking if you think you're in danger of losing a bit of forum cred.
How Many People Have Been Killed by Guns Since Newtown?
Deaths since Newtown: 307
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a..._shooting.html
Wow, people died?
AR-15 ban? Go fight your men of straw on someone else's time. I am not advocating an AR-15 ban. I am advocating a ban akin to ones that have owrked in our allies. I am very consistent in saying this and you are guing a different policy.
This is what I mean when I say you dance around the point and try to frame things in a certain light. You really suck at arguing and just meander around throwing against the wall. It's really boring. I have about 6 hours worth of games to watch here so it will give you time to think of something both germane and not inane.
Try harder.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
