- Joined
- Jul 30, 2017
- Messages
- 12,099
- Reaction score
- 3,439
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
Here we have a shooting in the UK which has some of the strictest gun control in the world. So this just goes to show the ineffectiveness of gun control.
https://www.foxnews.com/world/hitma...crime-boss-mr-big-caught-by-gps-running-watch
False. There are roughly fifty to sixty gun deaths a year in the u.k. Conversely in america we have one hundred and sixty times the gun deaths that the u.k. has. Tell Japan, Australia and Norway nothing can be done and see if they agree. Gun control does work, it's the gun owners who disagree.
Number one, the USA has a much larger population than the UK so that also has to be taken into consideration because its only proper to talk about gun deaths in proportion to the number of people. Fifty to sixty sounds like quite a bit when you look at the U.K.'s much smaller size and much smaller population.
Number two, even if the USA does have a much higher gun death rate than Japan, Australia, or Norway, that doesn't mean the premature death rate overall is higher in the USA. Its not fair to look at just gun deaths, if you're going to look at gun deaths its only fair to look at all premature deaths along with it. Having more guns will result in more gun deaths, that's sensible, but that doesn't mean having more guns will lead to more premature deaths overall. The thing to do is to look at how the availability of guns affects the premature death rate.
Number three, most gun deaths in the USA are either suicides or gang related killings where gangsters kill other gangsters.
Fifty something shootings a year in a country with fifty million something folks seems low to me.
Britain only banned handguns
Good, so you can stay there and be happy.
The old "but mommy, all the other kids are doing it" argument - mom never bought, and neither do most thinking people.False. There are roughly fifty to sixty gun deaths a year in the u.k. Conversely in america we have one hundred and sixty times the gun deaths that the u.k. has. Tell Japan, Australia and Norway nothing can be done and see if they agree. Gun control does work, it's the gun owners who disagree.
The UK has a much lower population than fifty million, you don't find that many people living in a country that's only about the size of the state of PA.
The old "but mommy, all the other kids are doing it" argument - mom never bought, and neither do most thinking people.
We are not any of the countries you listed. So arguments that imply "if we just did what <fill in the country of your choice> all our problems would be solved" apply to emotion but not logic.Eye, please show me what is incorrect in my statement before you comment about thinking people. Thanks in advance.
We are not any of the countries you listed. So arguments that imply "if we just did what <fill in the country of your choice> all our problems would be solved" apply to emotion but not logic.
Your entire portrayal of "gun owning America" is wrong, for starters, and throwing in a classic "appeal to emotions" logical fallacy argument doesn't help you case, either.Correct, no amount of logic or emotion will sway the thinking of gun owning america. No amount of mass shootings will change anything. No amount of kids being killed in school matters, at concerts, in church and everywhere else in america. By god, you have your rights and they trump anyone else's rights. I think my right to not be shot trumps your right to carry a concealed weapon in public. Even in the 'wild' west folks had to turn in their weapons while in town. Ok, your turn. Tell me why I'm wrong.
I'm quite relaxed about staying where I'm TWENTYFIVE TIMES less likely to be shot than you are.
You're right that emotion won't sway the gun owning crowd but as for logic, its the gun owning crowd that has logic and that's why they think the way they do. The gun control crowd has the emotion.Correct, no amount of logic or emotion will sway the thinking of gun owning america.
As a matter of fact it does. More mass shootings make it more urgent to have armed security. With armed security, that's how we stop mass shooters and mass shootings. Its too bad that it has to come to this, that we need to have mass shootings to show just how important it is to have armed security, if we had more armed security we would have less mass shootings in the first place.No amount of mass shootings will change anything.
See above.No amount of kids being killed in school matters, at concerts, in church and everywhere else in america.
In no way do my rights trump yours.By god, you have your rights and they trump anyone else's rights.
My right to carry a concealed weapon in public does not infringe on your right to not be shot. Just because you have the right to carry a concealed weapon doesn't mean you have the right to shoot innocent people. I will assume, for now, that you're an innocent person.I think my right to not be shot trumps your right to carry a concealed weapon in public.
The only town I can think of where they had to do that was Dodge City. BTW shootouts in the wild west were very very rare, much more rare than you might think. Its not like in the movies where Hollywood makes it seem like there were gazillion shootouts every day. You watch too many cowboy movies.Even in the 'wild' west folks had to turn in their weapons while in town. Ok, your turn. Tell me why I'm wrong.
You're right that emotion won't sway the gun owning crowd but as for logic, its the gun owning crowd that has logic and that's why they think the way they do. The gun control crowd has the emotion.
As a matter of fact it does. More mass shootings make it more urgent to have armed security. With armed security, that's how we stop mass shooters and mass shootings. Its too bad that it has to come to this, that we need to have mass shootings to show just how important it is to have armed security, if we had more armed security we would have less mass shootings in the first place.
See above.
In no way do my rights trump yours.
My right to carry a concealed weapon in public does not infringe on your right to not be shot. Just because you have the right to carry a concealed weapon doesn't mean you have the right to shoot innocent people. I will assume, for now, that you're an innocent person.
The only town I can think of where they had to do that was Dodge City. BTW shootouts in the wild west were very very rare, much more rare than you might think. Its not like in the movies where Hollywood makes it seem like there were gazillion shootouts every day. You watch too many cowboy movies.
As for why you're wrong, see above.
False. There are roughly fifty to sixty gun deaths a year in the u.k. Conversely in america we have one hundred and sixty times the gun deaths that the u.k. has. Tell Japan, Australia and Norway nothing can be done and see if they agree. Gun control does work, it's the gun owners who disagree.
gun control that is constitutional only works for the purpose that its proponents intend-to harass honest gun owners while pandering to slow witted dullards who think that people who commit mass murder or gang killings will follow a gun law
Does this fall under the heading of guns don't kill people?
I don't watch any cowboy movies but I do watch my fair share of the history channel. So your logic says more armed security will do the trick. By that thinking when we all have to drive around in armored vehicles for our own safety, that will be normal too. You know, to protect ourselves from crazies with guns.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?