Cobblestones, cobblestones, cobblestones!

TFLYTSNBN wrote:http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/un-commissariat-de-l-eure-attaque-par-des-jeunes-aux-cris-d-allah-akbar-20190628

Exactly how long is it going to take you to realize how stupid and pointless these anecdotal threads are?

These threads are far from pointless and stupid.

I cite examples to dramitize the fact that when guns are unavailable (banned or draconian regulation) other weapons can and will be substituted. The fact that until recently the US had a much lower suicide rate than all of the "civilized" nations that ban guns prooves the point. The recent increase in suicides in the US has not been accompanied by an increase in the percentage of suicides committed with guns, so guns are not the cause.


Just to avoid triple posting, I thought that I would consolidate this:

https://youtu.be/Py4AMYebHGI

I will concede that the weapon used is a brick rather than a cobblestone, but it is essentially the same.

Of course if I had been driving that truck, the LA riots would have been reduced to a red stain at the intersection of Florence and Normandy.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:These threads are far from pointless and stupid.

I cite examples to dramitize the fact that when guns are unavailable (banned or draconian regulation) other weapons can and will be substituted.

Nobody here is being subjected to a revelation that it is physically possible to kill people with weaponry that is ot a firearm. You are not introducing any new information or making any meaningful argument.

You're just pretending that citing anecdotal evidence of a death here or a death there that *wasn't* the result of a gun means guns aren't far more lethal weapons than knives or fucking cobblestones requiring more stringent controls on access to them. (Except when you switch to making the self defense argument and then suddenly *of course* you need a gun because holy crap you can't expect people to defend themselves with a cobblestone! Guns are WAY more effective weapons!)

And *nobody* here (with a few exceptions who are already on your side of this debate) is stupid enough to fall for that dumbass bait and switch routine.

You are accomplishing nothing except being an annoyance.

gcomeau wrote:

TFLYTSNBN wrote:These threads are far from pointless and stupid.

I cite examples to dramitize the fact that when guns are unavailable (banned or draconian regulation) other weapons can and will be substituted.

Nobody here is being subjected to a revelation that it is physically possible to kill people with weaponry that is ot a firearm. You are not introducing any new information or making any meaningful argument.

You're just pretending that citing anecdotal evidence of a death here or a death there that *wasn't* the result of a gun means guns aren't far more lethal weapons than knives or fucking cobblestones requiring more stringent controls on access to them. (Except when you switch to making the self defense argument and then suddenly *of course* you need a gun because holy crap you can't expect people to defend themselves with a cobblestone! Guns are WAY more effective weapons!)

And *nobody* here (with a few exceptions who are already on your side of this debate) is stupid enough to fall for that dumbass bait and switch routine.

You are accomplishing nothing except being an annoyance.

I goad you with the anecdotal data because you refuse to acknowledge criminological data that refutes your presumptions.

You could consider this informwtion:

https://www.gunpolicy.org/

or this information:

https://mises.org/wire/fbi-us-homicide-rate-51-year-low

but you refuse.

And you are accomplishing nothing except being an ignorant, hate mongering bigot.

I could respect the gun regulation argument if the propnents were willing to acknowledge and address the many other causitive factors. Among the most important are the competence anddiligence of police and the sanity of the courts. Guns are merely the scapegoat that enables you to distract from those factors.

So, what's the next thread going to be? Fists, fists, fists?

Michael Everett wrote:So, what's the next thread going to be? Fists, fists, fists?

How about shoelaces?

Here is one offender, a Deputy District Attorney, who used her bare hands to strangle a teenaged boy.

https://images.app.goo.gl/DZEM9dxPR6byjDmm8

I wonder what he did to piss her off?

I always carry an extra pair of shoelaces whenever I fly.

Seriously, strangulation is an extremely serious assault that can easily be lethal or cause extremely serious injury.

https://www.strangulationtraininginstit ... ngulation/

TFLYTSNBN wrote:

gcomeau wrote:Nobody here is being subjected to a revelation that it is physically possible to kill people with weaponry that is not a firearm. You are not introducing any new information or making any meaningful argument.

You're just pretending that citing anecdotal evidence of a death here or a death there that *wasn't* the result of a gun means guns aren't far more lethal weapons than knives or fucking cobblestones requiring more stringent controls on access to them. (Except when you switch to making the self defense argument and then suddenly *of course* you need a gun because holy crap you can't expect people to defend themselves with a cobblestone! Guns are WAY more effective weapons!)

And *nobody* here (with a few exceptions who are already on your side of this debate) is stupid enough to fall for that dumbass bait and switch routine.

You are accomplishing nothing except being an annoyance.

I goad you with the anecdotal data because you refuse to acknowledge criminological data that refutes your presumptions.

You could consider this informwtion:

https://www.gunpolicy.org/

We have been over the statistical data again and again and again and again and every time it is pointed out to you what it actually means you run back to anecdotes or blaming it on racial minorities as if other western countries don't have those too.

or this information:

https://mises.org/wire/fbi-us-homicide-rate-51-year-low

but you refuse.

Again, we have dealt with that ad nauseum. Homicide rates have gone down ALL OVER the damn civilized world, the US remains comparatively ridiculously high, and we all know why. You have had this pointed out to you *repeatedly*. You ignoring the responses is not the same thing as there being no responses.

We deal with it. Over and over and over. You ignore the responses then repeat the initial claim and make these whining assertions we're ignoring the data just because you clamped your hands over your ears and squeezed your eyes shut the last time you got an answer to it.

gcomeau wrote:

We have been over the statistical data again and again and again and again and every time it is pointed out to you what it actually means you run back to anecdotes or blaming it on racial minorities as if other western countries don't have those too.


Again, we have dealt with that ad nauseum. Homicide rates have gone down ALL OVER the damn civilized world, the US remains comparatively ridiculously high, and we all know why. You have had this pointed out to you *repeatedly*. You ignoring the responses is not the same thing as there being no responses.

We deal with it. Over and over and over. You ignore the responses then repeat the initial claim and make these whining assertions we're ignoring the data just because you clamped your hands over your ears and squeezed your eyes shut the last time you got an answer to it.

It is not I who ignores the statistical data. I once again cite this reference that includes the statistical data on homicide rates verses gun ownership rates:


http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-my ... countries/


Please extract your cranium from your rectum and remove the feces from your eyes so that you can actually read!

You of course refuse to acknowledge the statistical data that refutes the alleged correllation beteen gun ownership and homicide by insisting that the US should be judged only in comparison to "civilized countries". This of course is politically correct code speech for "predominantly white people either Europeans or descended from Europeans." Guess what? The US has a very significant population of people that are not white and did not descend from Europeans and these people commit the vast majority of US homicides.

The statistical data that documents the profound difference in homicide rates beteen African-Americans or Hispanic-Americans or Native-Americans verses White-Americans is irrefutable. You of course resort to accusing me of racism by pointing out these irrefutable facts. Your eagerness to make such accusations blinds you to the data on child homocides, arrest rates and conviction rates that confirm the enormous cultural differences.

I once again suggest that you peruse the HeyJackass website on Chicago homicides that documents the extremely low arrest rates for murder. The data should also disabuse you of the notion that blacks suffer from such a high homicide rate because they are being lynched by the KKK.

Setting aside the racial aspects of homicide, consider the age distribution of homicides in various countries. In most countries including the US, infants and young children suffer the highest risk of murder. News flash! Baby killers in the US don't use guns!


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... XmYfEnqRMJ

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Juv ... _246383521

If you want to actually learn more about homicides in America, you might want to explore this online tool that provides rudimentary access the the FBI-SHRs:

https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezashr/a ... ection.asp


So once again I suggest that you recognize the realities in America that are far more relevant than gun ownership rather than condemn me for refusing to acknowledge your alleged facts.