But...but...its the Gun dammit

[sirs]

LOL.....brilliant

[Christians4LessGvt]

[Plane]

The more guns there are, the more people will get shot. It is really very simple.
Fewrer guns meansd fewer peope get shot, unless you take the guns away from the police.

   This seems to be the opposite of observed facts.

    Surely if you removed the guns from the police gun wounds would fall by about a third immediately, because the third the police shoot would not get shot anymore.

On the other hand 99% of the guns in circulation have never been used to shoot a person, if you were to remove every single one of those guns, the gun violence would be unchanged entirely , right?

[Xavier_Onassis]

That is absurd.

Drugs are useful, and no one has ever done away with them.

The more addictive drugs there are, the more addicts there will be.
The more guns there are, the more people will get shot.

There is your parallel.

[Plane]

That is absurd.

Drugs are useful, and no one has ever done away with them.

The more addictive drugs there are, the more addicts there will be.
The more guns there are, the more people will get shot.

There is your parallel.

I take your absurdity and raise you one.

All of the people we are speaking of are going to die, the more people there are the more death there will be. This is both absurd and true.

The more guns there are, the more people will get shot.

Is not only absurd , it is untrue and demonstrably so.

The more addictive drugs there are, the more addicts there will be.

I really don't think so , are most people helpless to avoid addiction when an addictive drug becomes available?
     

[Xavier_Onassis]

It is not demonstrably untrue, and I dare you demonstrate otherwise.

In a civilian situation, the more guns there are, the more people will get shot. They will shoot others intentionally, they will shoot others accidentally, they will shoot themselves.

Guns belong to responsible and irresponsible people. Irresponsible people will likely use then irresponsibly.
Responsible people, being mortal, will die, and many guns will then belong to careless and irresponsible people as a result.
And more will be shot.

[sirs]

or, as the current statistics demonstrate in this counry......not.  Except of course in those areas where gun laws & guns are restricted the heaviest

[Xavier_Onassis]

American statistics are essentially worthless, because, except for Hawaii, it is exceedingly easy to move a gun from one state to another.

It is sort of like patching an inner tube: unless all the leaks are patched well, the thing will not hold air.
Unless the gun laws are restrictive everywhere, they are not restrictive anywhere.
At best, they are only a nuisance.

[sirs]

That's right....let's ignore all the facts and statistics that debunk the asinine claim that "more guns means more death/crime".  Let's just cherry pick a few stats in those few places, that do support the claim......yea, let's pick an island, thousands of miles off the coast         Naaa, let's stick with places much closer to home, like Chicago, Detroit, and DC

[Xavier_Onassis]

If you have a leak in a tire, you patch the leak, or you have a flat tire.

Gun laws are leaky and therefore useless as preventatives.

I realize that you have difficulty understanding this, but it's not my fault.

[sirs]

The flaw in your prescious anti-constitutional premice is that we have no leak.  We already have thousands of gun laws and restrictions.  Further laws and restrictions doesn't thwart the bad gun nut, since they're aready disregarding the law.  They only impede THE LAW ABIDING.  It's utterly astounding a supposed learnered professor is unable, or more so, unwilling to grasp that reality

[sirs]

American statistics are essentially worthless, because, except for Hawaii, it is exceedingly easy to move a gun from one state to another.

Wanted to reinforce this point again......notice how effort is used to talk about guns being moved from 1 state to another, except of course Hawaii, which are islands, thousands of miles off the coast.  Point being that the stats that demonstrate how much more gun crime and "people being shot" are occuring in heavily restricted regions, such as Chicago & DC, are to "be ignored", because of the foolishess & ignorance to think that bad gun nuts aren't going to focus on areas where the law abiding are less able to protect themselves

In other words, its not that guns are exceedingly easy to more from state to state, since the bad gun nuts areadly obtained their guns illegally, and will completely ignore any added laws.  So, any added "restrictions everywhere" in that endeavor, once again, only affects the law abiding.  All the while those areas like Chicago & DC become that much more of a shooting gallery for the bad gun nuts, thanks to the efforts of those who would rather we defend ourselves with harsh words

[Xavier_Onassis]

How often have you had to defend yourself with a gun, really?

My guess is ZERO.

[sirs]

Ahhh, was wondering when the literal card was going to be played.  It's not about me personally.  It's about anyone like me, having the freedom to defend themselves with a right that has been guaranteed us, one that can NOT and will NOT TO BE INFRINGED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

One more time, its like wearing a seatbelt...you chose to use one IN CASE there's the possibility of injury or death.  No one expects to be in an accident, nor does any one expet to be attacked.  (Of course, those unfortunate souls, that have to life in places like Chicago & DC, may indeed expect to be attacked, given the level of disarming of the law abiding that's been going on, at the hands of leftist loons and Democrat policies)

[Xavier_Onassis]

Yeah, it is just like a seatbelt.

When I see an accident approaching, I will just strangle it with my seatbelt.