
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
"Some Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > "Scout" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > "Some Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > "Scout" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > "David Lentz" <dlentz10@/*NOSPAM*/rochester.rr.com> wrote in message > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some Guy wrote: > > > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > > > > Yea, that certainly has worked in DC. After all the registration > > > > system > > > > > > > there is no workable that NO ONE can legally register a handgun > in > > > the > > > > > > > district, and since it's mandatory for all handguns to be > > > > registered..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, the criminals have and use more handguns for crime than > ever > > > > before. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Seems like your "workable system" doesn't apply to criminals, > and > > > > never > > > > > > > could. > > > > > > > > > > > > It just proves patchwork controls don't work. An effective > solution > > > > would > > > > > > have to be country-wide to avoid state-state transfers. > > > > > > > > > > The above author makes an interesting assertion, that while state > > > > > gun control does not work, national gun control would It is an > > > > > interesting, albeit amusing opinion. Yet no evidence was > > > > > provided which to support it and no evidence can be provided. > > > > > > > > Well, we do have some contradictory evidence. Prohibition and the WoD. > > > Both > > > > of which work on a national level and isn't a "patchwork" of controls. > > > Seems > > > > that the first didn't work, and the second isn't working. One can only > > > > wonder why he feels a 3rd attempt will be any more successful that the > > > > miserable failures that went before it. > > > > > > Name one industriallized country that has effective gun controls and > also > > > has a higher gun homicide rate than the US. Or a higher gun suicide > rate. > > > > Hmmm....so you're telling me that industrialization is a major factor in > > violent crime? > > > > Second, why are you concerned with just gun rates? Are you telling me it's > > acceptable to murder people as long as they aren't shot? Seems like your > > conditions are rather selective and will result in a biased result because > > of that. > > > > Oh, and I will note that your use of the term "effective" means you can > > disavow any rates that show they have a higher rate simply by asserting > that > > their gun control is clearly ineffective no matter how restrictive it > might > > be. > > > > Rather a self serving set of criteria you set up there. > > Oh, I see what the problem is. You believe guns should be ubiquitous until I > can prove they shouldn't be. I believe they should be restricted until you > can prove they shouldn't be. In other words, I believe in erring on the side > of caution. Sorry, but since we don't live in a tyranny, and our rights are protected.....you're going to have to do a bit more if you want to see any of your agenda implemented.
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |