No arguments? I've posted more documented verifiable facts than all you guys combined several times over. Literally dozens of them. Only once or twice did anyone on your "team" even try to refute any of them. You guys on the other hand have been busted repeatedly pulling <s>"facts"</s> lies myths and useless rhetoric out of your asses. I've asked for sources of several you guys claims, nothing but the sound of crickets chirping in response. And you have the nerve to accuse us of having "no argument"? Utterly ridiculous statements like this is in no small part why you come across as a self appointed arbiter of what is and isn't rational, required or necessary.
Seriously? Did you see that idiot Piers Morgan literally foaming at the mouth? Did you read the commentary pieces in the mainstream media last week calling the NRA and its leaders and members everything from evil to child killers? I saw a cartoon in the WashPost today with the head of the NRA aiming an assault rifle at a child. What kind of hatred twists someone enough to even draw such an obscenity, much less publish it? What I have read here is reasoned arguments with a lot of supporting data, courtesy mainly of Lucrum, versus hysterical fear-mongering from you and your crowd. There is a growing backlash, but it is on the side opposing any new restrictions. We are sick of being blamed for the actions of crazy people. We are sick of politicians and one issue fanatics trying to exploit every shooting by a white person while they ignore the 500 people shot every year in chicago. We are sick of rich liberals like Feinstein and Bloomberg, who have armies of private security, trying to take away our means to defend ourselves and our families.
Lucrum and his ilk don't present any facts, they present some very selective and very massaged statistics. Let's look at popular delusions: Delusion 1: "Points to purported decrease in gun crime and attaches it to shall issue laws". This delusion conveniently ignores improved policing as a factor at all and assumes if crime went down it must be due to availability of conceal carry. One must point to NYC vs Chicago and see how aggressive policing and tough gun laws make a difference. NYC had 400 homicides Chicago 500 and NYC is 3 times bigger. Delusion 2: "Gun crime in UK and Australia went up/doubled since gun bans, it must be that bans are ineffective". No it must be that police have to be more aggressive dealing with gang infestations. London had riots recently which is indicative of collapse of law and order (even though temporary and in limited areas). Lucrum finds it scandalous that in UK in SOME areas cops started carrying guns. It is not because of the gun ban, it is because this is not 1960s anymore and UK/Australia is being swamped by third worlders and needs to get with the times. UK and other gun control countries don't have mass shootings NEARLY as often as USA and that is precisely because not every kid/nut can easily obtain a gun (columbine style). Even with less aggressive policing gun crime is far less frequent in UK/Australia than here. If London was policed NYPD style, gun crime would essentially not exist. Delusion 3: "States with strict gun control have more crime than states with less". That part is frequently not true but even in places where it is true it underlies a faulty comparison. You can't in your sane mind compare a state like NY to a state like Alabama. If you compare urban areas to urban areas, you will see a lot of interesting things. Delusion 4:"Criminals will always have access to guns" Yes, just like they always have access to C4, semtex, tovex, TNT and Dynamite. This principle is laughable on its face. Delusion 5: "We have over 300 million guns in the country, they are not going anywhere". You can have a mandatory handgun buyback that solves the existing guns in circulation problem. Delusion 6: "Law abiding citizens are not the problem, nuts, criminals, BLACKS are the problem. It takes exactly one second to go from law abiding to felon. "Law abiding citizens" are quite content to be straw purchasers for monetary gain. The problem is that easy access to guns GUARANTEES that all but most lazy/incompetent criminals will have them. It simply changes the baseline. Delusion 7: "Points to Switzerland and how high ownership of guns did not cause any problem of significance there" In Switzerland gun ownership was tied to the very need to defend the country (as was in USA except for crazy interpretation of the 2nd amendment Scalia style). Switzerland never had a bloody civil war(it had a "civil war" where 100 people died), never had slavery, never was hellbent on conquest of its neighbors. Switzerland as a country was able to make 3 distinct language groups (Italian, German, French) and several religions coexist without violence. Switzerland, at its core, is simply a (substantially) less violent society and comparisons to USA are not appropriate. Delusion 8: "Points to 2nd amendment" 2nd amendment and its obvious mention of militias and security of the country were obviously references to the need to protect the country from foreign invasion. Even discounting that, founding fathers lived in an era of muskets not semi and automatic weapons. Delusion 9: "If everyone is armed criminals would be afraid to mess with you" Worked real well in Wild West and 1920s... Even if you are armed, your chances against 5 gang members armed to the teeth are slim. In Summary: The issue of gun control in USA is a very simple one. In gun control and many other issues, there is a fundamental disconnect between people living in cities and people living in rural areas or well off suburbs where nothing ever happens. People living in comfortable suburbs simply don't give a shit that some poor minority kid gets shot on the streets of Chicago, just as they don't care about the quality of the school that kid goes to. It won't affect John Boehner if Chicago and other urban areas drown in crime but it would affect John Boehner if some nut picked up hundreds of pounds of highly sophisticated explosives.
Absolutely correct! Publix is too mentally challenged to post any facts or sources. Just look at his retort. All attacks and conjecture.
I'm willing to take my chances, facing those criminals with a gun as opposed to unarmed,which is what your proposals would mean.
Very good post. I also researched one of the "facts" that Lucrum posted that only 0.7 % of guns purchased at gun shows end up in crimes. It turned out to be far from fact. You had more patience and gave a much more detailed answer. 22,000 laws number is being thrown too often, but instead if saying that may be we need to toss some of them out and improve others, the usual answer is, nothing should be done, the current system works great.