RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

BamaD -> RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (8/31/2014 7:38:49 AM)

B) Do you deny that there are well over 100 million legitimate gun owners in this country?
Does it matter??? Is it relevant??
As above, you see it as an advantage, I don't.
The US have 3x more actual gun Deaths, than we have as 'offences'. Fact.
That makes for over 100 million legitimate and legal nutcases!!
===============================================

Another fact having nothing to do with the UK



BamaD -> RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (8/31/2014 7:40:50 AM)

C) Do you deny that you view us as trigger happy nuts?
For the majority of you in the US... YES!!!
==============================================

Your unsupported opinion based either on bad information or bad analysis.



BamaD -> RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (8/31/2014 7:42:35 AM)

D) Do you deny that the law allows us to gun down people because they might possibly be a threat.
And that's the problem.
You are allowed to kill people on the idea of possibly being a threat whereas we only allow that as a last resort and an actual threat; and only then, not with lethal force.
And don't give me that crap about last resort in the US because it is clear that your opinion (and several others on here) believe you have a god-given right to shoot people first without considering other non-lethal tactics.
============================================

I should have said that you believe that is what our laws say. They say no such thing.



BamaD -> RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (8/31/2014 7:47:39 AM)

G) There are not 100,000 people killed by us trigger happy gun nuts so we aren't trigger happy gun nuts
Interesting. But again, your unsubstantiated numbers, not mine or backed-up with creditable links.
So you don't consider more than 32,000 deaths as being unnecessary and caused by gun nuts??

=============================================

Most of those are suicides take away guns and they still have bridges.
The vast majority of the remainder are gangs, they won't become pacifists because you make them change tool, they will just use even more brutal means to kill. Once more you misrepresent ether by being misinformed or willfully.



BamaD -> RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (8/31/2014 7:50:18 AM)

According to Wiki, the UK has a 0.25 firearms death rate per capita compared to the US figure of 10.30.


Our murder rate, including firearms homicides has dropped 50% in the last 20 years. You with all your great guns laws have made no progress.


If you are incapable of realizing that if your assumptions were correct there would dead bodies all over then you aren't very bright.
Of course there are no studies to prove it, doing a study on the effects of your delusions would be like doing a study on what the world would be like if Harry Potter was real.



freedomdwarf1 -> RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (8/31/2014 8:28:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

According to Wiki, the UK has a 0.25 firearms death rate per capita compared to the US figure of 10.30.


Our murder rate, including firearms homicides has dropped 50% in the last 20 years. You with all your great guns laws have made no progress.


If you are incapable of realizing that if your assumptions were correct there would dead bodies all over then you aren't very bright.
Of course there are no studies to prove it, doing a study on the effects of your delusions would be like doing a study on what the world would be like if Harry Potter was real.

Oh right... so 50% of what would have left you with more than 32,000 deaths. Wow!!
Regardless of the percentages, that's still 3x what we have in offences.
And interestingly, those stats I linked to doesn't show a 50% drop.
It shows an increase, not a drop, in the death rate.
Show me where there is statistically proven to be a 50% fall in gun death rates in the US.
I'm not cherry-picking murder rates or any other specific number; I'm talking total gun deaths.

You say we haven't made progress??
We have 7 years of constant falls in numbers.
You can't make that claim for the US, because, for most years it is increasing.

50% of some stupidly high and unnecessary number compared to everywhere else.
You just don't geddit do you?
I would say the delusions are on you, not me.
And.... there are more than 32,000 dead bodies in the US.
That number isn't insignificant.
But you seem to revel in an (unsubstantiated and unproven) idea that it has dropped by 50%.


You must be a real dunce if you think 32,000+ deaths stacks up favourably against 11,000 offences (not deaths).
Jeeez... What a myopic PoV.



thompsonx -> RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (8/31/2014 8:43:23 AM)

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

And as I keep telling you.... compare the stats.
US gun deaths (and accidents) outrank every other first world country. [:)]

Since first world means aligned with the u.s., and not a euphimism for poor and impoverished, what is you point?


You're a bit behind thompson....

You are more than a bit ignorant.

The concept of the First World originated during the Cold War, involving countries that were aligned with the United States, France and the United Kingdom. These countries were largely market economies and generally democracies.


Countries like s.korea[8|]Nicaragua[8|]Chili[8|]Iran[8|]are not exactly the poster child for democracies and market economies.


After the fall of the Soviet Union, the term "First World" arguably


I am pretty sure that morons argue but to what purpose? The definition was 1st world was the u.s. and it's possie. 2nd world was da kommies and their possie. What does your source over at wiki say about the third world and how it came about and how the west continually seeks to denigrate it by using the term third world to mean impoverished?


took on a new meaning, coming to be largely synonymous with developed countries.


As if russia and china are not developed[8|]Last I heard they had nukes and flushing toilets and what not.

Whichever way you wanna slice the cake.... have a look and see if you can provide something concrete that shows something contrary to what I posted.


Perhaps if you were to actually read,comprehend and respond to what I posted and not your agenda this discussion might proceed.

And considering this thread is specifically about guns and restrictions, let's not include other non-gun figures.

Your premis that the number of firearms is indicative of firearms murders has already been shown to be faulty. Lets see if their is possibly some other cause that might account for the disparity of gun murders in the u.s. and the corresponding lack of such in countries with a higher rate of gun ownership.



freedomdwarf1 -> RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (8/31/2014 9:08:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

And as I keep telling you.... compare the stats.
US gun deaths (and accidents) outrank every other first world country. [:)]

Since first world means aligned with the u.s., and not a euphimism for poor and impoverished, what is you point?


You're a bit behind thompson....

You are more than a bit ignorant.

The concept of the First World originated during the Cold War, involving countries that were aligned with the United States, France and the United Kingdom. These countries were largely market economies and generally democracies.


Countries like s.korea[8|]Nicaragua[8|]Chili[8|]Iran[8|]are not exactly the poster child for democracies and market economies.


Did I say it was??? PFFFFTT!!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


After the fall of the Soviet Union, the term "First World" arguably


I am pretty sure that morons argue but to what purpose? The definition was 1st world was the u.s. and it's possie. 2nd world was da kommies and their possie. What does your source over at wiki say about the third world and how it came about and how the west continually seeks to denigrate it by using the term third world to mean impoverished?


Wasn't my definition. And operative word being "was"!! [:D]
And, FWIW, 'third world' tends to mean 'everywhere else'.
It states that quite clearly.
But of course, you didn't bother to read it.



quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
took on a new meaning, coming to be largely synonymous with developed countries.


As if russia and china are not developed[8|]Last I heard they had nukes and flushing toilets and what not.

'First world' is considered to be the members of the G7/G8 group of countries, not whether they have flushing toilets or not. [8|]


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Whichever way you wanna slice the cake.... have a look and see if you can provide something concrete that shows something contrary to what I posted.


Perhaps if you were to actually read,comprehend and respond to what I posted and not your agenda this discussion might proceed.

I did read and comprehend.
Your 'definition' of first-world is considered incorrect by today's meanings.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

And considering this thread is specifically about guns and restrictions, let's not include other non-gun figures.

Your premis that the number of firearms is indicative of firearms murders has already been shown to be faulty. Lets see if their is possibly some other cause that might account for the disparity of gun murders in the u.s. and the corresponding lack of such in countries with a higher rate of gun ownership.

Nope. Not faulty - and not my premise either.
I have consistently quoted deaths, sometimes an absolute number and sometimes per capita, for comparison.



thompsonx -> RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (8/31/2014 10:26:44 AM)


ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

These countries were largely market economies and generally democracies.


Countries like s.korea[8|]Nicaragua[8|]Chili[8|]Iran[8|]are not exactly the poster child for democracies and market economies.


Did I say it was??? PFFFFTT!!!

Yes...notice your own quote.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


After the fall of the Soviet Union, the term "First World" arguably


I am pretty sure that morons argue but to what purpose? The definition was 1st world was the u.s. and it's possie. 2nd world was da kommies and their possie. What does your source over at wiki say about the third world and how it came about and how the west continually seeks to denigrate it by using the term third world to mean impoverished?


Wasn't my definition. And operative word being "was"!! [:D]
And, FWIW, 'third world' tends to mean 'everywhere else'.
It states that quite clearly.
But of course, you didn't bother to read it.

Just because you and wiki say so does not make it so. All you need do is look the phoquing term up to find it's real meaning not one you choose to ascribe to it.



quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
took on a new meaning, coming to be largely synonymous with developed countries.


As if russia and china are not developed[8|]Last I heard they had nukes and flushing toilets and what not.

'First world' is considered to be the members of the G7/G8 group of countries, not whether they have flushing toilets or not. [8|]

And yet you still persist in defining third world out of your asshole. Instead of actually acting like an adult and looking it up.


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Whichever way you wanna slice the cake.... have a look and see if you can provide something concrete that shows something contrary to what I posted.


Perhaps if you were to actually read,comprehend and respond to what I posted and not your agenda this discussion might proceed.

I did read and comprehend.
Your 'definition' of first-world is considered incorrect by today's meanings.

That would be your ignorant unsubstantiated (except by wiki the source of questionable validity)opinion.



quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

And considering this thread is specifically about guns and restrictions, let's not include other non-gun figures.

Your premis that the number of firearms is indicative of firearms murders has already been shown to be faulty. Lets see if their is possibly some other cause that might account for the disparity of gun murders in the u.s. and the corresponding lack of such in countries with a higher rate of gun ownership.

Nope. Not faulty - and not my premise either.
I have consistently quoted deaths, sometimes an absolute number and sometimes per capita, for comparison.




You have consistantly refused to acknowledge any other cause for the death rate than the number of firearms which has been shown to be a faulty metric.



BamaD -> RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (8/31/2014 5:56:33 PM)

Oh right... so 50% of what would have left you with more than 32,000 deaths. Wow!!
Regardless of the percentages, that's still 3x what we have in offences.
And interestingly, those stats I linked to doesn't show a 50% drop.
It shows an increase, not a drop, in the death rate.
Show me where there is statistically proven to be a 50% fall in gun death rates in the US.
I'm not cherry-picking murder rates or any other specific number; I'm talking total gun deaths.


Are you really too stupid to realize that suicides cannot be counted with murders.
Are you really too stupid to realize that the murder rate has dropped rapidly?
Are you too stupid to realize that CNN has admitted that the crime rate, including the murder rate has dropped 30% in the last 15 years, that is better than merry old England can even hope for.
Are you too stupid t realize that your claim that our crime rate is climbing is an absolute lie someone fed you?



Lucylastic -> RE: California's gun restrictions are working! (8/31/2014 6:16:13 PM)

The level of incidents in 2013 at an estimated 7.5m crimes is 25% lower than that seen five years ago. The ONS says this is 60% lower than the 19m crimes that were officially estimated to have taken place in 1995

taken from the guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/24/falling-crime-levels-no-one-year-wonder
btw, if you have ever seen the list of "crimes" reported list, compared to the US figures that includes all non violence related crime.
Id give you a list but you wouldnt read it.



Page: <<   < prev  14 15 16 17 [18]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875