Re: OT Environmentalists may be in deep Kimchee

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 05:05:40 GMT, Carl Byrns
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 04:02:06 GMT, Gunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>
>>As to side arms being used in drivebys..one would assume you are
>>unaware that the majority of such are done with handguns, with a
>>lesser number being done with :
>
>Read a little slower- I'm talking about using a sidearm to fend off a
>drive-by. Not start one.
>
>>Now the crux of the matter is:
>>
>>>The statement "50% of the states produced 2/3 more homicide than the
>>>other 50% armed states do" is meaningless
>>
>>Is that a true statement or not. Yes or no?
>>
>
>If you mean "25 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and
>walk down the street with no permit of any kind: some say it's crazy.
>However, 4 out of 5 US murders are committed in the other half of the
>country: so who is crazy?" the whole point is that the statement draws
>conclusions it can't support- that open carry lowers the murder rate.

Then compare the figures of Phoenix with Cincinatti, then compare
those from the rest of the two states. States with "an attitude"
as well as the people to back it up, are less encumbered by
violent crime.

>Open carry will not protect you from a drive-by 

It might.

> or being run down by a drunk driver 

Irrelevant.

> or from being stabbed in the back while you sleep or
>having your house torched while you're in it 

So rare as to be insignificant.

> or any of a hundred
>different ways humans kill off other human beings.

And some of those potentials could be prevented.

>That's a true statement.

Too general to have meaning.

>-Carl