Reply With Quote
You've still not answered the two questions I posed. According to you, more guns equal more gun crime, correct?
Please explain how there are a million+ more guns in circulation, yet gun crimes have gone down in the last ten years?
and what about the two other videos I posted.
You've still not answered the two questions I posed. According to you, more guns equal more gun crime, correct?
Please explain how there are a million+ more guns in circulation, yet gun crimes have gone down in the last ten years?
Non sequitor and more proof you suck at critical thinking.
Your dumbass basically makes the case for me though. If you admit that someone else having guns means easier access for criminals getting guns then you open the whole can of worms dumb . Try arguing a point instead of being contrary to everything me.
You are the one making the argument that gun sales have gone up and crime has gone down. I am not making that assertion so why do I get to be research ? Look up your own premise, lazy ass.
they weren't posted at first you know that mang. How you doing anyway? was kinda rough for you a couple of months ago I gathered. Hope all is well with you and the family.
So you can use misleading jargon and refuse to define it because, as I said before, you want to bring these "facts" into the argument that aren't actually facts. What do you mean by "circulation?" How are guns in circulation, are they just out there for the taking?
Then you used the same link to say that the gun crime stats don't necessarily indicate anything related to the ban. Way to kick your own ass.Your example is . I posted a study indicating that gun related incidents dropeed at a faster rate post ban in Australia. You posted what you thought was an indication that Melbourne gun crimes were up but obviously did not read your google effort because it also had the Melbourne chief of police stating that gun homicides were down across the country.
I laid it out there, you just don't like seeing yourself in the mirror.This is what I am talking about lame tactics. Now youre just full of .
Yet fewer guns in Australia = less gun related crime.
Are you and Cosmored the same person?
You're boring.
The link I gave was from the British Public Health department which was all about the efficacy of the ban. Your desire to characterize is full of .
Your article specifically had the Melbourne police chief saying that homicide rates were down just like they were across the country. What specifically did my link say? Trying to obfuscate by changing labels and what things seem to be is your game not mine.
So anyway what heinous use of the word 'circulation' did I use, semantics boy?
You're an idiot.
I am not making making an argument, I am just stating two facts. I don't need to link facts, imagine this message board if everyone was asked to link well known facts. Where are your links disputing my facts?
Privately owned guns are not in circulation. Unlike your lose meaning, they do not change hands promiscuously on a daily basis. Your jargon reeks of too much anti-gun exposure. You pretend terms aren't important but you pick these terms to suit your point, and when you're called on them you scoff at the person pointing it out as making a semantics argument. You're the one misusing semantics, and for a reason.
Nice characterization, semantics boy.
And it is a semantics argument. Is the gun once sold by the manufacturer in the public circulation? Does circulation imply moving at all times? No. Now you are trying to paint the word circulation as some liberal plot. As I said it's an obfusscation.
It's a word; youre a bag. C'est la vie
No. It's owned by a private citizen.Tell that to your local paramedicDoes circulation imply moving at all times? NoIt's a liberal talking point for the anti-gun crowd. It conjures up images of 300 million guns that are just out there for the taking, that a simple change to a law would suddenly do away with.Now you are trying to paint the word circulation as some liberal plot. As I said it's an obfusscation.
Yes, you're naive as , these are things we know, but you could at least avoid the dishonesty.
The forum is comprised of words. lol trying to down play the importance of terminology in political debates. It depends on what your definition of the word "is" is.It's a word; youre a bag. C'est la vie
Are you going to try and argue the point or are you just going to spend all day trying to discredit who you think I am and a single word choice? Words have multiple meanings. Playing thought police is fun I guess but poisoning the well will not dissuade me from my point.
Fact is that when a gun is sold to the public, it does move around. During the last ban the amount of sales of banned guns was marked. We were just regaled for weeks about TSA filliping his guns, there are gun shows, and even simple acts like a mother who likes going out to the range giving access to her kids. Thats what I mean by circulation. The only one with conjured images is you. For the rest of us talking about private goods in public circulation like iPhones or Stratocasters its not conjuring images of free fenders for all. And ffs bringing up the medical definition as if its germane.
Your afraid to talk the point. You don't want to talk about the effects of our NATO allies gun policy or the studies that I link. The one time you did try and engage on that level you werre made a fool off your google search. No you want to paint me as a young naive office worker using big scary words like 'circulation' to try and confuse the local dumb s. It's typical fearmongering obfuscating bull that we see here all the time.
And just to make a point. When I said the word 'circulation' did anyone other than semantics boy get the image of '300m guns just out there for the taking?'
Your point is built on false premises. No need to argue against that which hasn't been established.
My guns haven't been moving around.Fact is that when a gun is sold to the public, it does move around. During the last ban the amount of sales of banned guns was marked. We were just regaled for weeks about TSA filliping his guns, there are gun shows, and even simple acts like a mother who likes going out to the range giving access to her kids. Thats what I mean by circulation. The only one with conjured images is you. For the rest of us talking about private goods in public circulation like iPhones or Stratocasters its not conjuring images of free fenders for all. And ffs bringing up the medical definition as if its germane.You've yet to make one.Your afraid to talk the point.
You've not established causation. Anyone can post two different things that changed around the same time. The US has more guns than ever and lower crime. You've stated that there's no established causation. The same is true in other NATO countries. If gun numbers do not effect crime, they don't effect crime. What's to argue?You don't want to talk about the effects of our NATO allies gun policy or the studies that I link.
You are a naive cubicle dweller, I never called you young. You should just hold on to your heirloom and those of us who didn't buy our guns out of fear (like you did) will keep on keeping on.The one time you did try and engage on that level you werre made a fool off your google search. No you want to paint me as a young naive office worker using big scary words like 'circulation' to try and confuse the local dumb s. It's typical fearmongering obfuscating bull that we see here all the time.
You thought "bad man, knife no good, I need a gun" then after nothing happened you think "need to get rid of guns, guns bad" so you think that should be imposed on everyone. Bungee cord gun owners like you who dabble but will give it all up on a whim have no place in the discussion, you're naive to the facts but are just courageous enough to pretend you aren't. That's why you've been dealt a fresh one every time you try to step up.
What makes you say I am a cubicle dweller? You keep saying this in an effort to characterize such to ridicule, al fallacy, but your labels are unsubstantiated. You dont know hsit about me or my past and are being honorless again.
This is not about you. What you do with your gun is not germane to a nationwide policy discussion beyond being a random anecdote.
I never said get rid of all guns. More characterization. More of you being honorless. Do not speak for me. I didn't say guns were bad. I said semiautomatics are not necessary for defense and them being out in circulation endangers public security and health. I have over and again stated that I get the need for selfdefense.
As for causation. When the gun bans were passed for example in Britain in 1920, they were passed with the intention of reducing gun violence crime etc. When you look at the efficacy of a policy you look to see if the intended results happened. They have. You just want to blanket dismiss by the lame ass causation skepticism a la David Hume conveniently choosing the disposition that suits your ideology. This is not analogous to correlating background radiation and quasar activity. It's a policy discussion.
On a final note. Everyone deserves a place in this discussion. Your attempts to characterize me to take away my right to speak on policy discussion that effects all Americans is once again you displaying your lack of honor.
BTW, it's the "always have been" that's the point. You cannot take a country who's founding fathers explicitly protected the existing right to bear arms, who's been exercising that right for 300+ years, change a few laws and expect Australia. There are other factors that are much different as well that you refuse to consider, but this one is very big. You think you can just change the diet of a 60 year old obese man and make him have the same results as a man who was never obese in the 1st place? Good luck.
"I am a US citizen and might as well deal with it."
All enemies will be dealt with once it pops off, you can bet on that. I can imagine if a civil war ever got underway there would be a lot of executions of traitors.
Because you brag about your job when WC pipes up. People like you sit in front of monitors all day and attend meetings that get little to nothing accomplished. You're either not working at all or you sit in a cubicle (which allows you to respond here).
It most certainly is germane. My gun is not in circulation. How many gun owners are there? How many of them move guns regularly? Dealers do, and some people trade them like trading other items, but like liberal media, you ignore facts and just go for the eye catching phrases.. WOW 300 million guns in circulation? Holy , that's a gun for everyone in the US. That means I can walk outside and will likely see one.This is not about you. What you do with your gun is not germane to a nationwide policy discussion beyond being a random anecdote.
Why did your grandfather use one?I never said get rid of all guns. More characterization. More of you being honorless. Do not speak for me. I didn't say guns were bad. I said semiautomatics are not necessary for defense and them being out in circulation endangers public security and health. I have over and again stated that I get the need for selfdefense.
I don't have to dismiss what you've not established. See, you keep pawning off the onus of proof to others. It belongs to you.As for causation. When the gun bans were passed for example in Britain in 1920, they were passed with the intention of reducing gun violence crime etc. When you look at the efficacy of a policy you look to see if the intended results happened. They have. You just want to blanket dismiss by the lame ass causation skepticism a la David Hume conveniently choosing the disposition that suits your ideology. This is not analogous to correlating background radiation and quasar activity. It's a policy discussion.
Do you really need to speak here? I can understand you wanting to speak up when a group of people get together to talk about things you feel you know something about because you were in a low level debate on a forum where you have to do some Wikisearch, but you really should get some information together including personal experience if you want to contribute. Any 15 year old can argue using tactics of shifting the burden of proof, or are you going to use the "I don't need to know in order to have an opinion" approach? If so, there's a long line ahead of you.On a final note. Everyone deserves a place in this discussion. Your attempts to characterize me to take away my right to speak on policy discussion that effects all Americans is once again you displaying your lack of honor.
I am not banking on any internal wars, but if the market crashes mass hysteria will ensue and there will be liberals knocking on doors seeking protection from the assembled gangs who develop to take advantage of it (think LA riots).
[/QUOTE]
You are an individual anecdote. We know you think you are so important.
I have said that I have studied systems and modeling and work with microcontrollers. That's it. You are ignorant and assumptive ie go the WC route.
MY grandfather was an officer under Bradley and then Patton. He used one because he was fighting the Wehrmacht. He had two guns, a French made Luger and a BAR that he brought home. Those were the only guns that he had them locked up. He was not afraid like you are. He had honor.
bring it on tough guy.
So your GF used one for defense. Got it.
You are an individual anecdote. We know you think you are so important.
I have said that I have studied systems and modeling and work with microcontrollers. That's it. You are ignorant and assumptive ie go the WC route.
MY grandfather was an officer under Bradley and then Patton. He used one because he was fighting the Wehrmacht. He had two guns, a French made Luger and a BAR that he brought home. Those were the only guns that he had them locked up. He was not afraid like you are. He had honor.
Why did he lock them up? He realize you're too stupid to be shown how to properly treat a gun? That's too bad. My GF bought me my first shotgun when I was 8 years old and I was hunting alone at age 10. I killed my first solo hunt prey at age 10. My grandfather didn't treat me like a girl.
So when did you serve, which branch and what was your MOS?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions