Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes the numbers speak for themselves, firearms go up, crimes go down abroad, but in democrat held cities, with strict gun laws the statistics either remain the same or fluctuate slightly less or significantly more...
The numbers of children killed in a school, a gun free zone speak for themselves to the effectiveness of a gun free zone...
Oh good, I remind you of someone.
You don't remind me of anyone. What's that say?
I sometimes confuse you with NVplumber, but then I notice the different tone, reason and logic, and I remember you are not NVplummer...
By "firearms go up, crimes go down abroad" are you saying the numbers tell us that crime rates are going down overseas?
Okay, "reading between the lines" like you do, I suspect that's not what you mean. I know what you mean. You're saying that as gun control laws have become more common and wider-spread over time -- as gun enthusiasts forever complain -- crimes have gone down. Is that it?
Oh, wait, maybe you are saying that more guns are the reason crimes have gone down?
So many ways to believe as we wish, and for so many reasons, but all the more interesting is this cause/effect rationale regarding "democrat held cities." In other threads having more to do with other socio-economic issues, the common complaint among conservatives is that people in poorer areas tend to vote for Democrats, like in Detroit for example. Yes, and there are reasons for that...
Along with that truth is that in poor areas, where Democrats tend to get the votes, crime is also higher. Like in Detroit again for example. What does this tell us? If we really do apply sound reason and logic, unbiased critical thinking, is it intelligent to conclude the higher crime rates are because of the Democrats in office?
Apparently you also didn't understand how it is you remind me of the guy who drowns crossing the river, because he doesn't understand averages, but no surprise there either. That I remind you of no one says you don't get out much!
I sometimes confuse you with NVplumber, but then I notice the different tone, reason and logic, and I remember you are not NVplummer...
By "firearms go up, crimes go down abroad" are you saying the numbers tell us that crime rates are going down overseas?
Okay, reading between the lines, I suspect that's not what you mean. I know what you mean. You're saying that as gun control laws have become more common and wider-spread over time as gun enthusiasts forever complain, crimes have gone down. Is that it?
Oh, wait, maybe you are saying that more guns are the reason crimes have gone down?
More lawful owners, less crimes committed against them. Seems to be a "trend" that armed law abiding citizens = deterrence to criminal element.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
So many ways to believe as we wish, and for so many reasons, but all the more interesting is this cause/effect rationale regarding "democrat held cities." In other threads have more to do with other socio-economic issues, the common complaint among conservatives is that people in poorer areas tend to vote for Democrats, like in Detroit for example. Yes, and there are reasons for that...
Along with that truth is that in poor areas, where Democrats tend to get the votes, crime is also higher, but if we really do apply sound reason and logic, is it intelligent to conclude the higher crime rates are because of the Democrats in office?
It's intelligent to point out democrats have no legitimate plan nor productive way to address the issues. If they want to champion and grandstand on gun legislation, I'll take them serious when Baltimore, Detroit, New Orleans, St. Louis, Chicago, Los Angeles etc start to have a decrease a significant decrease in their homicides.
In otherwords... don't worry about what I'm doing in my back yard, when yours is inundated with and plagued with death. Your rules, your city, keep them there.
I especially don't want to hear any legislation proposed by ANY Californian. Jerry Brown revokes the mandatory 10 year enhancement for committing a crime while being armed. And a jury let a killer go on the basis of, oh he didn't know he was handling a firearm...
That and not holding the BLM, more specifically the agent, accountable for that pistol walking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Apparently you also didn't understand how it is you remind me of the guy who drowns crossing the river, but no surprise. That I remind you of no one says you don't get out much!
I get out plenty. I just don't associate with anyone bent on curbing rights to fit their agenda. Agree to disagree fine, but hold the opinion the rights of all should be curtailed of current and future generations for the actions of few. No.
You tried hard to get myself and others baited with your hypothetical napoleonic battle of 1000 357s vs 100 of insert weapon here.
That failed...
Pfft...
What failed -- with you -- was the effort to have a reasoned intelligent discussion by way of a hypothetical question. Other than with you, I don't think the effort failed, but I can't say I'm convinced I wouldn't do better with my 100 guys using high capacity accurate long range weapons against 1,000 guys advancing on an open field with .357s. That argument may have failed I think, with all due respect to NVplummer who can be awfully convincing with all manner of additional considerations taken into account.
Still, I think there is considerable value to be able to shoot your opponent before your opponent gets within range of shooting at you, not to mention at higher volume. Just saying...
What failed -- with you -- was the effort to have a reasoned intelligent discussion by way of a hypothetical question. Other than with you, I don't think the effort failed, but I can't say I'm convinced I wouldn't do better with my 100 guys using high capacity accurate long range weapons against 1,000 guys advancing on an open field with .357s. That argument may have failed I think, with all due respect to NVplummer who can be awfully convincing with all manner of additional considerations taken into account.
Still, I think there is considerable value to be able to shoot your opponent before your opponent gets within range of shooting at you, not to mention at higher volume. Just saying...
High capacity long range weapons? Last I checked, M1 Garand and M1A aren't "high capacity" nor is there a 300 win mag 338 Lapua nor 50 cal high capacity long range weapon...
If your theory of getting within range and higher volume were true, every soldier and marine would be toting M60s chambered in 7.62x51 with modern optics achieving 1 inch groups or better at 100 yards...
That was based on a phone poll. You really think that people give an honest answer?
When it comes to this sort of research; polls, focus groups, etc., they sure do help confirm or refute misconceived notions on the one hand, and they sure are easy to dismiss when they contradict our preconceived notions too! Which gets us back to whatever the Hell we want to believe regardless what the other guy might be able to Google up contrary to our beliefs. Always something to keep in mind when it comes to the question of wasting still more time in these threads...
When it comes to this sort of research; polls, focus groups, etc., they sure do help confirm or refute misconceived notions on the one hand, and they sure are easy to dismiss when they contradict our preconceived notions too! Which gets us back to whatever the Hell we want to believe regardless what the other guy might be able to Google up contrary to our beliefs. Always something to keep in mind when it comes to the question of wasting still more time in these threads...
I've never answered yes to any poll that asks if I own firearms.
I've also contributed to the poll on favorability of Clinton taking the white house too
Why? Built everyone up to believe the beast was going to win... Surprise!
When it comes to this sort of research; polls, focus groups, etc., they sure do help confirm or refute misconceived notions on the one hand, and they sure are easy to dismiss when they contradict our preconceived notions too! Which gets us back to whatever the Hell we want to believe regardless what the other guy might be able to Google up contrary to our beliefs. Always something to keep in mind when it comes to the question of wasting still more time in these threads...
On many of the other gun threads, a lot of people said they would never tell a pollster that they owned guns. People lie on the polls all the time.
At least two things straight up; 1) interesting that gun purchases went up when Obama was POTUS for all those reasons and now again as Trump is POTUS for still more reasons, so that ultimately gun sales go up regardless of POTUS or reason. 2) This record of 16 million sounds like a wopping big number, but again with the numbers and what they tell us. That's not really a whole lot of Americans as a percentage. 6.5% as the article notes. Amazing what just 6.5% of Americans can do to reduce crime in America...
On many of the other gun threads, a lot of people said they would never tell a pollster that they owned guns. People lie on the polls all the time.
I don't see how this isn't obvious. Polls have an assumption of anonymity but no basis for that premise. Would you answer an HR poll at your office where the response was critical about something or someone specific at the company? My answer: not unless I know (and I mean KNOW) that it's truly anonymous (which excludes all electronic polling almost by default).
On many of the other gun threads, a lot of people said they would never tell a pollster that they owned guns. People lie on the polls all the time.
The fallacy with all that is that you are implying that people now lie but used to tell the truth. In fact there is almost certainly some lying...both ways...but there is no reason to believe the lying has changed over the years which still says that gun ownership is down over time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
