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.
If not guns, it'll be bombs, knives, machetes, axes, shovels, baseball bats, ice picks, swords, hammers, and lastly the favored weapon on the mafia's most prolific killer, poisons. If you think you're gonna address evil by simply taking guns away you're just kidding yourself.
Don't forget a politician's favorite, they will drown you in BS.
No. Again read for content. Two of the numerous contingents of the insane may well self eliminate. But there will be others. Later versions of the Trumpie for instance.
Self-evident statements generally require little, if any support. However. . .
1) Pro gun control arguments are generally put forth as a response to a tragedy.
2) The contention is that controlling guns would either prevent or significantly reduce the number of lives lost.
3) A significant number of lives are lost due to things such as knives, swimming pools, cars, stair cases, etc.
4) Given that all lives have value, #3 should be addressed with the same fervor as gun crime is addressed. In fact, given the number of lives lost to factors other than guns, it would be reasonable for those causes to addressed with greater fervor than the gun issue.
5) While #3 is not really an arguable point (the data is clear and pretty much irrefutable), the same gun control advocates are not only silent on the other significant causes of death, but attempt to short-circuit such conversations by deriding those who would entertain such arguments as "ridiculous."
6) Given the significant number of deaths brought about by preventable causes other then guns, and the fact that no workable gun control solutions currently exist (or have been put forth), failure of #4 above is prima facie evidence that gun control advocates don't care about lives, but rather they care about control.
7) You have clearly engaged in #5 above.
As such, it is clear that you really don't care about saving lives.
QED
However is right...
1) Not true. There are people devoted to finding ways to avoid other sources of tragedy nearly full time, all the time. Tragedies simply tend to bring those efforts and arguments to the forefront amidst all else that goes on in our lives on an ongoing basis. This same dynamic applies to a great many other issues like aircraft safety, children's toys and crib safety, fire prevention and on and on. Plane goes down killing all aboard and that becomes the story of the day and renewed/heightened focus on flight safety, for example. Nothing unique to the subject of gun control there.
2) The contention is that all manner in which to possibly prevent or reduce tragedies should be seriously considered, evaluated and action determined according to what constitutes sound public policy. Of course that's the contention and the essence of the debate over what works and what doesn't.
3) True. There are countless ways we can die, be killed and/or suffer from tragedy. This is not a point confused by anyone far as I know and generally not worth making. Note, stair cases are now built to code as a result of too many stair case accidents occurring because steps were too narrow or too steep back in the old days (I had an old home with such a stair case that would not be built or meet code today).
4) "Fervor" is a hard thing to measure and awfully subjective. Some people, who have lost a loved one due to Paddock for example, are likely to experience some "fervor" about this subject one way or another. Others have hardly any emotion about it at all, because they are busy with focus on other things, like NASCAR racing or the World Series. All depends on who your dealing with and being specific along those lines is far more productive than these broad-brush profiles of what the "other side" thinks.
5) Can't speak for any or all gun control advocates and either can you, but I think you do a very good job of incorrectly making their arguments for them or suggesting they are "silent" on other significant causes of death. Cancer from smoking cigarettes comes to mind, another example of countless others that people have hardly been "silent" about.
6) The issue regarding any tragedy has little to do with the number or nature of other tragedies. This is a point that gun enthusiasts seem to struggle with mightily. Also that just about any source of tragedy is constantly being considered and addressed by those in the industries having to do with those tragedies, be they the auto industry, food industry, energy industry, etc.
7) I have engaged in pointing out what arguments are fairly sound, agreeable, and which are not so much, even ridiculous ALL CONSIDERED.
That last statement I put in bold above is utterly ridiculous, to the point I have to believe you know it. I have two kids, lots of good friends and family. Anyone who knows me can tell you how ridiculous your claim truly is. Surely you're just trying to get me into a fervor, but I don't usually let emotions get the better of me.
Do you really believe that pointing out the high rate of black crime is the same as saying that is because they are black? Seriously?
Pointing out a correlation is not the same as that saying that the correlation is in fact the causation.
You are not paying attention...
Not close enough anyway. Even I have pointed out those rates, many times, but that is different than making the statement that the problem is that "Exactly. Blacks."
Not how I would describe the problem in any case, but how racists are more inclined to do so. If you don't see the difference, then I can't really help you.
Often this gun use is due to personal conflicts, crime, and the unfortunate consequence of living in crime ridden neighbourhood.
Mass murders on the other hand are random, inspired by hate, and rage and ease of getting hold of guns.
For the most part true.
I might also add the "inspiration" to mass murder born from madness, pure and simple. Again what I think just about everyone knows/understands to a large degree.
Not close enough anyway. Even I have pointed out those rates, many times, but that is different than making the statement that the problem is that "Exactly. Blacks."
Not how I would describe the problem in any case, but how racists are more inclined to do so. If you don't see the difference, then I can't really help you.
I didn't say it was BECAUSE they're Black. BIG difference.
Hard to believe you don't understand the difference.
Im wondering why even the FBI itself tracks the gun crime stats by race. And we all know it usually isn't white boys shooting at and killing each other every weekend in Chicago.
The FACT is that the same group most likely to vote Dem is ALSO the same group most likely to commit gun homicides and non fatal violent gun crimes. It's a certain mindset. One not held by right-wingers.
If that rankles... time to do some soul searching.
Hopefully you too might pay closer attention and/or understand better after my comments since you posted this one.
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.
