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.
So Harrier just admitted that Harrier is trolling because Harrier started this thread with a reductive premise and when called on it Harrier just says, "that's not the thread." If the subject, all points of discussion, and solution of Harriers thread is made by Harrier in the first post then what's the point of Harrier staring the thread?
/Harrier
TROLLING - a word that can be used to falsely describe your political opponents argument when you have absolutely no argument yourself. (from the Liberal Lexicon - Fully updated and revised edition - 2013).
Maybe Harrier should understand complexity. This situation in Chicago is caused by a myraid of social, economic, political, and criminal factors. It is much more complex than "Gun bans don't work." That type of reductionism leads to people quibbling over dichotomous political issues instead of investigating solutions that could have real impact on the problem.
You said it - The problem in Chicago has many causes. But there is no evidence that gun laws in Chicago or Illinois have anything to do with the recent very high murder rates.
TROLLING - a word that can be used to falsely describe your political opponents argument when you have absolutely no argument yourself. (from the Liberal Lexicon - Fully updated and revised edition - 2013).
Political opponent, really? Are we running against each other for some office?
I'd say making a basing a thread on some false premise with the intent of antagonizing those who call you out on it is the classic definition of the word. But hey, it's the bread and butter around these parts so I should know better than to question it.
You said it - The problem in Chicago has many causes. But there is no evidence that gun laws in Chicago or Illinois have anything to do with the recent very high murder rates.
The point is that they have been ineffective.
Some of you apparently don't understand that concept - or you are being willfully ignorant.
Noting that Harrier is debating liberals, he thinks that it is the latter.
OP clearly doesn't understand what a "rate" is. When you compare Chicago's homicide rate to other major cities in America it is on the higher end of average. Atlanta is probably as bad as Chicago but Atlanta's city population is much smaller.
People on the Chicago forum frown on any threads that discuss their crime statistics and often ask why the threads aren't in P&OC.
Besides, this thread isn't specifically about Chicago - it is about the fallacy of left-wing gun control policy.
Harrier, would it be ok with you if I posted this thread on the Chicago forum myself? I really think they'll change their "i don't care" additudes once they read it.
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.
