Unfortunately, this is what people who don't want to invest on the future think. Here is a method that gets you closer to the correct solutions then just guessing. It's called the scientific method and it works well for the physical world as well dealing with social issues like gun violence.
In this case, the practical approach works much better, as a retired lawman, I am spared much of your horse poop ideas and laws.
Who was that? The poster that was cherry picking the government data so that it ended when the graph was at a peak and did not include the next couple of years when the graph fell? Or was it the guy who kept insisting on comparing apples with oranges by comparing our sexual assault rates (which includes pinching someone's bum) with rape? And even IF our "violence" rate was higher than yours I would prefer a punch in the face to being shot in the face
Holy crud, it was multiple posters quoting not only government sources but news articles across multiple topics and all you have ever had as a response was to either return a quote from MJ or accuse them of cherry picking. Good lord beyond that, here in the good old USA undeniably crime is falling, gun ownership is up, CCL holders are not statistically committing recordable crimes and you still want to argue based on some emotional projection. You make me laugh at your lack of recognition in your hypocrisy. Yeah I saw the response from you that totally destroyed that comment.........NOT LOL Fine either way being punched in the face enough leads to the exact same result as being shot in the face.....me, I'll be happy to be the one doing the shooting or punching. I believe in having all the tools necessary and since I'm not emotional about it, I believe in allowing all law abiding citizens having all the tools necessary. You can keep your laws...we are doing fine with ours, eh?
Well, why don't you tell me? That one would be interesting to dissect. However given your proclivity to quote MJ and other anti gun nut sites I suspect your numbers would include many weird aberrations. LOL Wait, those figures have already been torn apart....sheesh what was I thinking? However that wasn't what I was posting about....another perrrfect example of injecting emotionalism into a conversation about growing gun ownership, growing CCL and falling crime. Surely you can do better, eh? You just can't help from moving the goal posts.....Try to focus here...just once.....growing gun ownership, crime falling, CCL holders growing, more states allowing constitutional carry, more states becoming shall issue states, states taking back power from the emotionalism of the anti gun nuts...you know in kind responses. Please don't quote me anymore to go off topic on an emotional rant....you look foolish!
Life itself holds no value except to those who can exploit it to further their own means. To them lives are nothing but resources to use as they see fit. Measles was declared eliminated sixteen years ago. Several years ago this was proven absolutely false as the disease reappeared in force, and it was revealed that vaccination by itself does no good unless those who received the vaccination prior were given booster injections to bolster its effectiveness.
And what does the scientific method reveal pertaining to efforts to continue prohibiting firearms from school grounds? How does enacting an invisible, unenforceable boundary keep others safe, when the ones who are intent on violating the boundary will simply kill themselves rather than face prosecution for said violation? Comparatively speaking, it is no different than claiming that water will not flood an open chamber that has been completely submerged.
And this is of what relevance to the discussion? How does it in any way refute the fact that lives hold no intrinsic value to anyone, except those who can exploit them for their own purposes? The claim is that life is precious, but this is incorrect. Individual lives carry no more value or preciousness than a pack of batteries, a bottle of water, or even a tank of gasoline. They are nothing more than mere resources to be used by those who wish to benefit themselves, even if it is at the expense of others.
It is a matter of opinion that life is precious. Just as it is a matter of opinion that lives have actual value. Just as it is a matter of opinion that it is better to continue expending resources on an impossibility, rather than ceasing when it is realized that failure is the only option. - - - Updated - - - To some this is seen as correct. Others do not agree with your assessment. To them the only lives that matter are the lives of those who are loyal to them, or can give them what they want. If they cannot or will not, then their lives hold no value.
In non British English, or plain American English; what crack are you es-smoking, and what are you babbling about ?
Pray tell where was it said that life is an impossibility? No such statement has been made. Rather the statement pertained to expending finite resources in a futile and illogical attempt to achieve an outcome that is physically impossible.
You treat the disease when someone is infected. In a base-case scenario, you cure the patient. You in no way truly defeat a disease, as it remains free to reinfect over and over again. You are focusing your efforts on the end-result, not the actual source. In comparative terms you are there to clean up the mess long after the crime has been committed, and the suspect has long since escaped to where they cannot be found.
Even worse, last person I heard speak like that was very much like the fictional character; Hannibal Lecter M.D. Truly scary.
