Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting (24 Viewers)

[Enron]

Your a clown who talks down to people whom he doesn't agree with all while hiding behind your screen. What I showed is that higher gun ownership equals lower crime. If you want to be ignorant to those stats then it's not my Job to prove it to you

The mashup is a pretty terrible source to use as your platform. First of all, who made it? Where did the stats come from? Are the stats reflective of gun crime or all crime?

The better source to reflect your position would be a comparison of gun crime in open carry states v. gun crime in states with strict gun laws.

EDIT:

It's actually FBI Violent Crime numbers from 2007 v. The CDCs Percentage of households with loaded fire arms from 2002.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[acmilan]

http://www.datamasher.org/mash-ups/crime-vs-gun-ownership

This is for those calling me ignorant

AC, I would suggest not showing this source on another forum, or anywhere else for that matter, if the point you wanna prove is that you are not ignorant ... no offense mate, but you are making a bulletproof case for exactly the opposite

hint: did you even look at what data is shown on that map? It's violent crimes/100K DIVIDED by % of gun owning households. the key word there is DIVIDED hence, in states where guns are more freely allowed (eg Texas), you'd be dividing by a higher number than say Massachusetts, which would naturally lead to a lower number (which is what the map illustrates).
Take for example Mass - it's ranked highest on that map - but it has fewer violent crimes/100K than gun-loving Texas.

So, I hope you see my point now

 

[AndreaCristiano]

The mashup is a pretty terrible source to use as your platform. First of all, who made it? Where did the stats come from? Are the stats reflective of gun crime or all crime?

The better source to reflect your position would be a comparison of gun crime in open carry states v. gun crime in states with strict gun laws.

I posted more than just one link. What I find ironic is how all of the opposing persuasion haven't posted anything but their opinion

 

[Maddy]

Again find it yourself I posted what I posted which I'm sure you didn't even look at. I love how you think you're an elitist and smarter than everyone

im not smarter than everyone but im clearly smarter than you.

you have no idea of what a proven study is nor empirical evidence, yet you claim it.

you are yet to show me a study that excludes other factors than gun ownership and for your claim to be right you have to.

- - - Updated - - -

It's proven over and over again the more guns readily available the less crime

u are yet to prove this statement or at least to prove it had anything to do with guns.

 

[Enron]

I posted more than just one link. What I find ironic is how all of the opposing persuasion haven't posted anything but their opinion

At least two of your links are crap and the third is from the Cato Institute, while they do make a point they are extremely one-sided. The only study you showed is actually a write up of a study from the perspective of a pro-gun voice. However there is a link to the study on that page, but for some reason you didn't use that to back up your position.

I love ya bud, but you've got to come up with better sources.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

maddy must be really bored today

 

[Maddy]

maddy must be really bored today

why?

and yep i am

the holidays man. no work, no university.

 

[acmilan]

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gun-control-myths-realities

no offense buddy but the Cato institute is a libertarian think tank aka teabagger's poor ass attempt at "thinking"
Honestly, what do you think the Cato inst would say when most of their funding comes from teabgger superpacks, gun manufacturers and what not?

I gave you some guidelines of what a "proper" i.e. independent source would be earlier but I suppose you missed it :

and preferably a study/inquiry that wasn't approved and paid for by the NRA or one of them teab-bag superpacks like Crossroads for America and the likes or a weapon manufacturer for that matter too.

actually, why not make it a study coming from outside the US - if the proof is so "bulletproof" that should hold true everywhere around the world.

Now go back to that google search engine and bust a cap in its ass 'cause that's what's gonna take to make it find you a reliable, independent study showing decreasing crime correlated with increase in gun ownership

 

[GordoDeCentral]

AC, there is a HUGE, i mean universe huge, difference between linking and proving. I mean thats one of the cardinal principles of logic/science "correlation does NOT imply causation"

 

[Enron]

AC, I would suggest not showing this source on another forum, or anywhere else for that matter, if the point you wanna prove is that you are not ignorant ... no offense mate, but you are making a bulletproof case for exactly the opposite

hint: did you even look at what data is shown on that map? It's violent crimes/100K DIVIDED by % of gun owning households. the key word there is DIVIDED hence, in states where guns are more freely allowed (eg Texas), you'd be dividing by a higher number than say Massachusetts, which would naturally lead to a lower number (which is what the map illustrates).
Take for example Mass - it's ranked highest on that map - but it has fewer violent crimes/100K than gun-loving Texas.

So, I hope you see my point now

Texas v. New York is a good comparison and even in this graphic, it's not helping. Even with the whacked out data.

 

[Trequartista]

Mike Huckabee

 

[swag]

When the hell did state-to-state government regulations become a leading indicator on human behavior anyway?

Are we now suggesting that you can legislate morality? Isn't that folly to begin with?

 

[GordoDeCentral]

why?

and yep i am

the holidays man. no work, no university.

no travel?

- - - Updated - - -

When the hell did state-to-state government regulations become a leading indicator on human behavior anyway?

Are we now suggesting that you can legislate morality? Isn't that folly to begin with?

not according to iran

 

[Maddy]

no travel?

not until spring. its yuletide. gotta spend time with my family and friends.

besides still got a lot of mess to clean up after my ex.

 

[Enron]

I'm gonna go ahead and post this for AC because I think it may support his position better than some of the other stuff.

It's titled...

WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE MURDER AND SUICIDE?
A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AND SOME DOMESTIC EVIDENCE

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

 

[swag]

AC, there is a HUGE, i mean universe huge, difference between linking and proving. I mean thats one of the cardinal principles of logic/science "correlation does NOT imply causation"

But I thought we proved that whenever Hustini watched a match, Juventus lost points.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

not until spring. its yuletide. gotta spend time with my family and friends.

besides still got a lot of mess to clean up after my ex.

excuses!

I'm gonna go ahead and post this for AC because I think it may support his position better than some of the other stuff.

It's entitled...

WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE MURDER AND SUICIDE?
A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AND SOME DOMESTIC EVIDENCE

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

nice, more theories, where does say "proven"?

 

[acmilan]

AC, there is a HUGE, i mean universe huge, difference between linking and proving. I mean thats one of the cardinal principles of logic/science "correlation does NOT imply causation"

what makes it even worse is that there is even lack of correlation here, forget about proving causation.

On related note, how huge is the Universe?

 

[Enron]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/18/high-capacity-magazines_n_2323928.html

Looks like Dems are going after extended cartridges. Perhaps they should become familiar with a concept called "reloading".

 

[GordoDeCentral]

But I thought we proved that whenever Hustini watched a match, Juventus lost points.

nah thats alcohol proofed