• Obama to ban assault weapons.
    1,785 replies, posted
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38902199]20 bullets could kill 20 people though[/QUOTE] I can tell you've never shot an automatic weapon because 20 bullets are going to hit like 3 people at most [editline]19th December 2012[/editline] if anything you should be absolutely pro-automatic weapons and push for nothing but automatic weapons to be produced because they're inaccurate, unreliable, and fragile
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38902290]you're a fucking retard[/QUOTE] I'm just quoting a study, you fucking retard
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38902291]"the most reliable predictor of gun violence is the presence of guns" i mean what more do you want[/QUOTE] Too bad: [QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38902158]i'll concede that it would be impossible to get rid of all guns entirely[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38902291]"the most reliable predictor of gun violence is the presence of guns" i mean what more do you want[/QUOTE] What's the most reliable predictor of violence in general? Since, you know, there has been violence for a few thousand years before guns. And there will continue to be violence after guns...
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38902291]"the most reliable predictor of gun violence is the presence of guns" i mean what more do you want[/QUOTE] stop with this circular bullshit, you're basically saying x = x "the most reliable predictor of [noun] violence is the presence of [same noun]" let's play mad libs dogs, trucks, roofing materials, hulk action figures, skaters
argument just goes [img]http://www.facepunch.com/image.php?u=178264&dateline=1351402573[/img]
[QUOTE=zydos;38902313]I'm just quoting a study, you fucking retard[/QUOTE] Let's see the study.
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38902291]"the most reliable predictor of gun violence is the presence of guns" i mean what more do you want[/QUOTE] That's redundant though. "The most reliable predictor of car violence is the presence of cars."
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38902273]lol[/QUOTE] holy shit at least zydos makes points and backs them up
[QUOTE=zydos;38902313]I'm just quoting a study, you fucking retard[/QUOTE] you're quoting a study and presenting the information without context which easily twists it's real meaning to something that seems like it might support your cause you can't do that because it's stupid
[QUOTE=Ridge;38902320]What's the most reliable predictor of violence in general? Since, you know, there has been violence for a few thousand years before guns. And there will continue to be violence after guns...[/QUOTE] "Oh man we can't shoot at each other I guess we'll just be friends."
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38902331]you're quoting a study and presenting the information without context which easily twists it's real meaning to something that seems like it might support your cause you can't do that because it's stupid[/QUOTE] ..nnnno I'm presenting the information from the study the way it was conducted, lolololol good one though
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38902331]you're quoting a study and presenting the information without context which easily twists it's real meaning to something that seems like it might support your cause you can't do that because it's stupid[/QUOTE] As far as we're concerned, he talking out of his ass, until he provides the study for us to analyze.
[QUOTE=Hunterdnrc;38902336]"Oh man we can't shoot at each other I guess we'll just be friends."[/QUOTE] if only it were so easy, i'd give up my guns in a heartbeat if that were the case
[QUOTE=teh pirate;38902321]stop with this circular bullshit, you're basically saying x = x "the most reliable predictor of [noun] violence is the presence of [same noun]" let's play mad libs dogs, trucks, roofing materials, hulk action figures, skaters[/QUOTE] we don't have people being killed by dogs, trucks, roofing materials, hulk action figures, or skaters en masse.
[QUOTE=zydos;38902339]..nnnno I'm presenting the information from the study the way it was conducted, lolololol good one though[/QUOTE] you're presenting biased information from a biased study in a biased way because you're a biased person
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;38902287]And yet, if you watch my video, you'll see that gun control has done nothing to stop people from being killed in Canada. Also, here's Chuck Woolery on "assault rifles": [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=evEg1VNfX3o[/url][/QUOTE] Holy shit this guy is great
[QUOTE=zydos;38902313]I'm just quoting a study, you fucking retard[/QUOTE] Then here's another study, done by Harvard, showcasing that gun control in Europe is a failure: [url]http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf[/url] And that the idea that "more guns make more deaths" is entirely false. [quote=Conclusion of the Harvard Study]Nevertheless, the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world.[/quote]
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38902348]we don't have people being killed by dogs, trucks, roofing materials, hulk action figures, or skaters en masse.[/QUOTE] Oh look you missed his point again.
I'm going to keep posting this video until you fucking idiots watch it and hear what Hank has to say [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFfWYYCfCZI&feature=player_detailpage#t=95s[/url]
[QUOTE=Hunterdnrc;38902336]"Oh man we can't shoot at each other I guess we'll just be friends."[/QUOTE] "i can't shoot this person so i'm going to have to run up to him which entails either me getting hurt or him having ample time to escape"
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38902348]we don't have people being killed by dogs, trucks, roofing materials, hulk action figures, or skaters en masse.[/QUOTE] want to compare the ratio of people killed by guns vs people not killed by guns to the ratio of people killed by hulk action figures vs people not killed by hulk action figures? i guarantee they'd be almost the same
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;38902359]Then here's another study, done by Harvard, showcasing that gun control in Europe is a failure: [url]http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf[/url] And that the idea that "more guns make more deaths" is entirely false.[/QUOTE] That's all of Europe. This is JUST America [editline]19th December 2012[/editline] you guys are a different batch of ducklings, just saying
[QUOTE=zydos;38902361]I'm going to keep posting this video until you fucking idiots watch it and hear what Hank has to say [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFfWYYCfCZI&feature=player_detailpage#t=95s[/url][/QUOTE] I watched it, but I want a reliable source. Anyone can make a video. Let's see the study you and he are quoting.
[QUOTE=Apache249;38902360]Oh look you missed his point again.[/QUOTE] his point is based on ignoring mine. and that is that we have a problem with gun violence that can easily be remedied by doing something that i can't quite seem to put my finger on.
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38902248]america does have a general violence problem, and removing guns won't solve it. fine. america does have a huge gun violence problem, huger than any other 1st world country, and removing guns would stop it. you can't argue that removing guns wouldn't end gun violence lol[/QUOTE] There have been about 100 pages of gun discussion, debate, and pissing contests in the past week alone. Not a single person has ever proposed a workable way of not only banning guns, but making the 300 million existing firearms disappear. If you have one, step the fuck up and claim your Nobel Peace Prize, because I can guarantee that's what you would get for it. This isn't even getting to the core of the problem with your line of reasoning. Reducing gun violence is in and of itself an utterly irreverent statistic. If gun violence goes down, and EVERYTHING else goes up to compensate you have accomplished exactly nothing. You cannot simply look at one facet and claim success. If you did, prohibition would be considered successful. No, you must look at the sum total of the effects that outright banning all weapons and magically removing existing ones would have, and until you reduce the desire to do violence in America, you won't change a damned thing in total. In fact, there is more than a good chance that it will actually be detrimental because you would basically create an enormous black market for illegal firearms overnight, and let's not even get into the non metaphorical shitstorm that would happen. In a country where people literally pride themselves on making weapons out of shovels, you think people are going to take that lightly? You're out of your fucking mind.
-snip-
[QUOTE=zydos;38902366]That's all of Europe. This is JUST America [editline]19th December 2012[/editline] you guys are a different batch of ducklings, just saying[/QUOTE] isn't all of europe about the same size as america
[QUOTE=Apache249;38902375]I watched it, but I want a reliable source. Anyone can make a video. Let's see the study you and he are quoting.[/QUOTE] You look it up if you're in such denial of your country's tendency to shoot one another because you all have guns
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38902378]his point is based on ignoring mine. and that is that we have a problem with gun violence that can easily be remedied by doing something that i can't quite seem to put my finger on.[/QUOTE] Reforming the mental health care system definitely is something you haven't touched on. [editline]19th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=zydos;38902384]You look it up if you're in such denial of your country's tendency to shoot one another because you all have guns[/QUOTE] Burden of proof 101. I'm waiting.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.