|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Two wrongs don't make a right (the (ir)rationality of revenge) - also gun control | |||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
Your only arguments have been variations on the "guns kill people" theme. Which isn't even an argument, more of a superstituous mantra really. Please show me how I have used that argument? I think you are again misrepresenting what I have said. Please stop that. Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
Twisting arguments again, I see.
Your only arguments have been variations on the "guns kill people" theme. is misrepresentation of.
quote: quote: Yet the data(facts) suggest that this isn't necessarily so. You can manipulate the facts anyway you want, but I do not think the facts say wht you think they say. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
yet consistently you continue to argue against any and all reasons to allow them. Can you clear up this discrepancy? Becasue it certainly seems that your veiled aims are to rid civilians the right to bear arms. Where have I made such arguments? How do you read "veiled aims to rid civilians of the right to bear arms" in my posts? I favor strong regulation of handguns and assault weapons. Do you not read what I actually post? My arguments are to show that the arguments used to show that guns should be less regulated are flawed. At no time have I here or anywhere else advocated for the banning of firearms. I am a hunter and I have a number of guns. So I have no clue where you are coming from. read what I actually post, not what you assume I am posting. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
Every other word is about how guns are bad, Please show where I have posted that guns are bad. I have posted that I feel that some guns need to be regulated. Can you make arguments or just wild accusations? The more guns there are the more murders by firearms there are. This is a fact. I have yet to see any successful argument that an increase of guns results in a decrease in crime or an increase in security. Can you make those arguments and provide evidence? Guns are not "bad", they can be used in "bad" ways. Now can you make an argument or are you going to just continue to misrepresent the arguments others are making. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
They already do background checks.
(some states already require registration, if not all) Maybe you should read what Oni has already posted.
Gun Laws in the United States 20 years ago I ran a gun store in North Carolina. The laws are the same now as they were then. There is a requirement for a permit to purchase a handgun. There is no registration. The permits are handled by the county sheriffs. Each Sheriff can make his own rules for issuing a permit.From link above. quote: I had some customers that would buy 2-3 handguns a month. I am quite sure they did not keep them all. As a matter of fact I did not read the laws of all states, but I do not know any states that require registration. I am sure there are some but I am not familiar with them. Minnesota and Wisconsin do not. I know Massachusetts requires firearms owners to be licensed but I do not know if the firearms have to be registered. OK spent sometime looking, CT and NY require handgun registration. Maybe I missed some, but it isn't very many at all. ABE - Sorry did not mean to "pile on". I was researching some and I see ONI posted similar info while I was composing. Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
How do you explain why gun violence decreased when the SCOTUS shot down the unconstitutional ban in Washington D.C. or why Australia's gun rate versus homicide increased when they disarmed their citizens? Source and stats please. Since the SCOTUS decision just happened about a year ago, I think using any figures from that might not be a true picture, but I would like to see the figures.
You still are missing the gigantic elephant sitting in the room. To purchase a handgun, one must first pass a criminal backround check, the serial number is documented to the owner/purchaser of the weapon, etc. The barrels of handguns are so unique with their lands and grooves that the forensic evidence left behind on a bullet is as damning as any biophysical evidence (semen, fingerprints, blood, etc). In most states all you need is to fill out the Federal form. The gun is not registered to the owner and the owner can turn around and sell it to any scumbag they want to. The lands and grooves can only be evidence if you access to both the shot bullet and the firearm. The police cannot take a bullet and just magically match it to the original gun.
In fact, ways to circumvent this is through shotguns (sawed-off shotguns in particular) which you seem to think is fine for sporting reasons. They leave no discernable way to trace the weapon of origin in a homicide quite the same way as with a handgun. OK how often do you hear of a driveby shooting with a shotgun. Most of the crimes are crimes of opportunity. You make it sound like most of these incidents are perpetrated by criminal masterminds. They are not. It is the guy pissed at another for looking at his woman, somy young punks thinking they can make quick cash breaking into a house or business. You know what kind of guns they usually have? Small semi autos. .22's, .25's, .380's and 9MM's. They are not illegal to possess. But a sawed of shotgun? Very illegal, that is breaking of federal laws. You can always say you have a legitimate reason for a handgun, but you can never say you have a legitimate reason for a sawed off shotgun. Your argument does not work.
So what does that mean? That means the people who do purchase weapons used in homicides most often buy off the black market, which is exactly what the laws you promote don't do anything against. Yes they do. Register all handguns. Transfer registrations when sold. Make the original owner responsible for that hand gun until a registrstion transfer is done. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
I can deal with people opposing and debating me with reason and logic, but this guy is beyond the pale, suggesting absolute absurdities.
Some people with an ultra-liberal mentality often see the victimizers as the victims. Anyone who advocates the owning of a gun then becomes a "vigilante." Are you talking about Modulous? I have nor seen him or anyone make any of these claims. "victimizers as victims"? What is that shit. Who said that? People have made statements that they do not believe it is right to kill an intruder if there is no imminent threat(in many states it is not legal), but what you imply is a GROSS distortion of the arguments presented. Absurdities? Please enlighten us on these absurdities? Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024