joether
Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: joether
What protection do you have against the flu? Since your many more times likely to get that nasty biological problem then confronted by one or more individuals hell bent on fucking with you.
While true, the comparison is beyond ridiculous. There has been no evidence of a flu virus making choices, or even being sentient. Adaptations are nothing more than survival of those viruses with a mutation that allows them to survive where other viruses don't. Viruses, too, have never been shown to choose to not attack a person based on "defenses" of that person.
Just because we have no evidence that God exists, does that mean he doesn't exist?
Just because we have not found sentience in the flu, does that mean it is mindless? Maybe. When you use words like 'sentient' in science, it means something much more than in layman's terms. A flu 'big' is a entity that thrives on other organisms that are usually bigger then it. As observed, the interaction between the flu and the human body holds negative results (feeling uncomfortable, sick, very ill, and death).
All the flu buy wants to do is eat, grow and exist. Sounds like Republicans :P
Your wrong again on whether a human defenses. That we have not proven the flu attacks or doesn't has not been shown (i.e. evidence). Maybe it does? Granted the chance it does with the evidence known so far would place it in the same category as God: "not very likely to exist at best".
A better analogy would be a bullet and the flu. Both enter the person and cause damage. After all, have we found sentience in bullets? Its sounds silly, but then, people think statues on walls of long dead people hold special powers.....
The bullet does not make a choice on whether or not to cut through the human body's defenses. Just as your thought process above. The difference between the bullet and the flu, is that we as humans, can control bullets far better than the flu. In order for bullets to cause the damage they do, means (usually) the presence of a firearm. So if the firearm were heavily regulated and only a smaller few allowed access; less bullets would be entering people's body, much like the flu.
How about you go ask the CDC how many in that organization would like the flu ban from being in use in America. Then ask whether bullets should be ban in as many reckless uses as we see today. I think they would agree that greatly toning down the level of reckless bullets being used is a good thing for Americas!
A very good point you made there DS. You get a cookie!
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: joether
quote:
ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
Fucking move to Detroit or Chicago and see how you like it.
Detroit and Chicago have some very nice people. A shame what is happening at the government level in Detroit. A good city with a lot of good history. But like all cities, they have their good times and bad. Right now, its a bad time for old Detroit.
But this has NOTHING to do with the topic....
1. Detroit is already out of bankruptcy, and is rebuilding. So, your veiled snipe at Republican governmental leadership is baseless.
1. Detroit's financial matters have....WHAT....to do with the topic? NOTHING!
Thanks to Republican 'economic policies' that and many other cities slipped down into bad financial shape. Or did you not observe/study the financial/economic issues of the Bush administration of 2000-2008? The recession took place due both to the Republican's tampering with laws (i.e. removing regulations), and not property managing a national economy. Once 'greed' was released into the economy, things went south in a hurry. The administration did an excellent job with keeping the nation's attention on places like Iraq and Afghanistan rather than on the local economy. Examine 2006. that is the year that things started to change for the worst; but the administration was able to bullshit circumstances. By 2007, it was apparent that the policies the Republican controlled government had instituted were failing the nation at all levels and in all industries.
Interesting and factual; but yet, no bearing on this discussion. You should have known that!
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: joether
quote:
ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
And to those who want to use the other hoplophobe mantra to get federal laws by saying that the guns used in crimes are bought from surrounding areas and brought in to Chicago, tell me them why those surrounding areas are not crime ridden like Chicago.
They are crime ridden. That you do not wish to look at the facts and figures is your problem. But we should help the CDC research this too....
Please cite your assertion that the surrounding areas of Chicago are crime ridden. The CDC doesn't need to research it. I'm sure there are plenty of universities or think tanks (for example, The Brady Center?) that can research it. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention has no business researching non-disease topics, either.
Cite that the areas around Chicago are crime ridden? What is your definition to 'crime ridden'? What characteristics are you defining as 'crime ridden'? Since each of those locations do have a crime rate. Each of them allow a much easier time in obtaining firearms. Each of them as of less economic value. You focus on the criminal going into Chicago for crime with the gun; yet do not stop an ask the most basic question: How did that criminal get the gun in the first place? Some got their gun through legal channels and others through shady means. How did the ones whom sold the gun by shady means, get the gun in the first place? Through either legal means (there are unscrupulous gun owners) or illegal ones (i.e. stealing from a gun owner's house).
Recently the neighbor of the San Bernardino shooters was arrested for purchasing the firearms that would later be used in the crime. There is your unscrupulous gun owner example right there!
As far as the CDC is concern, perhaps you should inform yourself of Their Mission Statement:
"CDC works 24/7 to protect America from health, safety and security threats, both foreign and in the U.S. Whether diseases start at home or abroad, are chronic or acute, curable or preventable, human error or deliberate attack, CDC fights disease and supports communities and citizens to do the same.
CDC increases the health security of our nation. As the nation’s health protection agency, CDC saves lives and protects people from health threats. To accomplish our mission, CDC conducts critical science and provides health information that protects our nation against expensive and dangerous health threats, and responds when these arise."
Its all there, blue and white for you!
Is gun violence and mass shootings a "...health, safety, and security threat..." to America? Go right ahead and spin the conservative bullshit....
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: joether
quote:
ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
BECAUSE PEOPLE THERE HAVE GUNS.
People in Chicago have guns too. Why does law enforcement find guns that originated more often from from states with very loose firearm laws, then tight ones? When we keep track of arms and whom is selling what to whom, things do not fall between the cracks to the criminal underworld as much. Or maybe you could point out to me all those atomic bombs in the hands of various gangs?
Its been interesting Termyn8or. Just like old times....
Please cite your proof.
That residents of Chicago have guns, legally? Or that when crimes found at a scene of a crime were traced to a point of origin to determine how they arrived in the lawbreaker's hands? That in a tiny number of such attacks, the firearm originated from within Chicago. Meanwhile the overwhelming number traced come from outside of Chicago; in places with very loose defined laws.
But you need something more concrete, right? Here is your cite: Tracing the Guns: The Impact of Illegal Guns On Violence In Chicago, May 27th, 2014. An its just 14 pages long. So that allows most conservatives the chance to read the document. Cus you all have problems for unknown reasons on the Iran Treaty that was 159 pages long!
Yes, the CDC should investigate the obvious threats and dangers to America on the firearm culture in America! Making recommendations to government on exactly how to minimize and/or neutralize the threat. They are given more funding to handle these studies and allowed freedom to operate. The only people who would be against this are either: ! ) Those making a profit off the suffering of others, or 2 ) Those to scared to have all their myths destroyed by scientific study and evidence. Which is basically the majority of conservatives in the nation!
< Message edited by joether -- 12/18/2015 11:08:57 AM >
|
RE: CDC and Firearms - 
Profile
.gif){kind=avatar}
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread