If folks are wondering what Lynn is talking about, **butwhat ** posted several entire articles (or huge excerpts). While she was warning him, I removed those posts from the thread and . . . did some other stuff. 
Gfactor
Moderator
butwhat has been banned. Pick a reason: violating board rules re: hate speech, posting copyright protected material despite mod instructions, trolling and then some. Call it the Applebee’s sampler of batshit craziness.
I could throw a stone from my house, and it would land in Washington DC.
… But… but… but… there are laws against that sort of thing! :rolleyes:
You’re seeing my point, yet?
- “The laws of [false utility] are those which forbid to wear arms, disarming those only who are not disposed to commit the crime which the laws mean to prevent. Can it be supposed, that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, and the most important of the code, will respect the less considerable and arbitrary injunctions, the violation of which is so easy, and of so little comparative importance? Does not the execution of this law deprive the subject of that personal liberty, so dear to mankind and to the wise legislator?”*
Cesare Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishments, 1764, Chapter 40
… that’s kind of the point I was trying to make.
I reside in Maryland.
I see it. It doesn’t make any more sense, though.
The point is that the guns are available in Virginia whether or not they’re available in DC. I’m talking about availability, not legality. What you can and can’t do with the guns after you buy them legally in Virginia is beside the point–technically, you’re not supposed to murder people with them either, but that doesn’t seem to stop everyone, right?
Oh, where? I grew up in Mitchellville.
Hostile Dialect,
Hostile Dialect, Narcissist
These restrictive laws sure didn’t cut back on the guns in Detroit. The murder capital of America has plenty of firearms. We are ass deep in them.
Hate speech: check.
Copyright violation: check
Trolling: check
Sock: dayum. He coulduh been a contenduh…
My point is that these laws aren’t keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, they’re keeping them out of the hands of law abiding citizens.
this does nothing but put law abiding citizens at risk.
In Bowie, at the moment.
Many so called law abiding citizens have guns, legal or not. The assumption that if they pass a rule against guns, the good citizens will give them up is specious. They just keep them. We have had amnesty programs asking for illegal guns to be turned in. The beat up junky guns that do not fire get turned in.
You’re pro-gun. I get it. Really. You’ve convinced me.
Cool, I lived in Bowie too, briefly. Don’t remember anything about it, as I was a baby, but still…
Hostile Dialect,
Hostile Dialect, Narcissist
You know what I see on that list? Oregon, Idaho, Utah, N. Dakota, S. Dakota, and Wyoming in the bottom 12, all with some of the highest rates of gun ownership in the country.
Here’s an article on the the rates of gun ownership vs. rates of violent crime internationally. Key quotes:
>> “After decades of ever-stricter gun controls, England banned handguns and confiscated them from all permit holders in 1997. Yet by 2000, England had the industrialized world’s highest violent crime rate – twice that of the U.S.”
>> “Eight decades of police-state enforcement of handgun prohibition have kept Russian gun ownership low, resulting in few gun murders. Yet Russia’s murder rates have long been four times higher than those in the U.S. and 20 times higher than rates in countries such as Norway. Former Soviet nations like Lithuania also ban handguns and severely restrict other guns, yet have 10-15 times higher murder rates than European nations with much higher gun ownership.”
Now, can we please stop acting as if guns were a cause of social problems, instead of a symptom?
Man, you all like to do some real selective cherry picking. 1) Please provide me with the data you have on high rates of gun ownership by which you are making claims about rates by state. I know that Oregon ranked pretty high on the Brady Campaigns list of states with good gun control laws (14th), for instance.
- If you want to pick cherries so badly, the bottom 12 also includes Connecticut, Maine, Delaware, Hawaii, Vermont and New Hampshire. Going up a few more spots you also get Massachusetts and Rhode Island, so somehow New England as a region is pretty solid in terms of low per capita firearms homicides. I don’t have the data in front of me, but I recall from an American Society of Criminology meeting I attended a couple years back that the Southeast, or South, as a region is the worst IIRC for gun violence and for firearms murders of law enforcement officers. I look forward to seeing your data on firearms ownership by state to see where these states stand.
How are guns a symptom of a social problem?
Man, you sure do like to use the accusation of “cherry picking” to ignore inconvenient facts. [=51&commit=%3E"]Here’s what you asked for, genius](Swivel.com is for sale[limit).
Note:
#1 in gun ownership = WYOMING
#4 = SOUTH DAKOTA
#6 = IDAHO
#10 = NORTH DAKOTA
#14 = UTAH
So, in other words, all these states are in the bottom 25% of per-capita gun homicides by your OWN data, and they are ALSO in the top 25% of gun ownership. Hmm.
As for New England being “pretty solid for low per-capita firearm homicides,” the graph I linked to shows, for the lowest gun ownership rates:
#4 = Massachusetts
#5 = Rhode island
#6 = Connecticut
#10 = Maryland
#13 = New Hampshire
So, obviously, if there aren’t a lot of guns around, the ability to murder people with them will be correspondingly lower, so banning them is a great idea, right? Not so fast. We’re merely comparing FIREARM homicides, not violent crime in general. If we look at violent crime rates (right column), guess who’s in the bottom 10, with the lowest violent crime rates in the entire country?
#49 = N. Dakota
#46 = S. Dakota
#45 = Utah
#43 = Wyoming
#42 = Idaho
Avg. rank = 45
Gee, what an interesting correspondence with the rates of firearms ownership! I suppose if I were as eager to ignore contrary evidence as you, I would proclaim that this PROVES firearms ownership deters violent crime. even more damning:
#47 = New Hampshire
#44 = Rhode Island
#37 = Connecticut
#20 = Massachusetts
#8 = Maryland
Avg. rank = 31
- Maine and Vermont are New England states with low violent crime rates, however, they were NOT low on the firearms ownership list.
Wow, isn’t that somthin’? The specific states you mentioned with lower firearms ownership rates have, on average HIGHER rates of violent crime overall. As for the South, I dunno, and I don’t care. If you want to introduce a new facet to the debate, YOU must produce the evidence, as I have. Frankly, I’ve had this same debate many, many times on this board. I’ve heard almost all the evidence for and against gun control. It is inconclusive.
Personally, I have no intention of giving up ANY of my Constitutional my rights, be they for free speech or the right to keep and bear arms.
Man, you sure do like to use the accusation of “cherry picking” to ignore inconvenient facts. [=51&commit=%3E"]Here’s what you asked for, genius](Swivel.com is for sale[limit).
Note:
#1 in gun ownership = WYOMING
#4 = SOUTH DAKOTA
#6 = IDAHO
#10 = NORTH DAKOTA
#14 = UTAH
So, in other words, all these states are in the bottom 25% of per-capita gun homicides by your OWN data, and they are ALSO in the top 25% of gun ownership. Hmm.
As for New England being “pretty solid for low per-capita firearm homicides,” the graph I linked to shows, for the lowest gun ownership rates:
#4 = Massachusetts
#5 = Rhode island
#6 = Connecticut
#10 = Maryland
#13 = New Hampshire
So, obviously, if there aren’t a lot of guns around, the ability to murder people with them will be correspondingly lower, so banning them is a great idea, right? Not so fast. We’re merely comparing FIREARM homicides, not violent crime in general. If we look at violent crime rates (right column), guess who’s in the bottom 10, with the lowest violent crime rates in the entire country?
#49 = N. Dakota
#46 = S. Dakota
#45 = Utah
#43 = Wyoming
#42 = Idaho
Avg. rank = 45
Gee, what an interesting correspondence with the rates of firearms ownership! I suppose if I were as eager to ignore contrary evidence as you, I would proclaim that this PROVES firearms ownership deters violent crime. even more damning:
#47 = New Hampshire
#44 = Rhode Island
#37 = Connecticut
#20 = Massachusetts
#8 = Maryland
Avg. rank = 31
- Maine and Vermont are New England states with low violent crime rates, however, they were NOT low on the firearms ownership list.
Wow, isn’t that somthin’? The specific states you mentioned with lower firearms ownership rates have, on average HIGHER rates of violent crime overall. As for the South, I dunno, and I don’t care. If you want to introduce a new facet to the debate, YOU must produce the evidence, as I have. Frankly, I’ve had this same debate many, many times on this board. I’ve heard almost all the evidence for and against gun control. It is inconclusive.
Personally, I have no intention of giving up ANY of my Constitutional my rights, be they for free speech or the right to keep and bear arms.
Wasn’t it well established that Gov. Ronald Reagan signed gun control legislation in CA as an anti-Black Panther move?