Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News

thanks, ill be on the lookout for a magical genie lamp. why didnt i think of this sooner.

 

Gooch makes a valid point though. Criminals will still be criminals, whether they have guns or not, they'll just find different ways to commit the crimes.

 

This is one of the more ignorant statements I have read on this forum -- and that's saying a lot.

 

*loads weapons * crime rate at my house is zero, guns must work

If we cant compare US to Mexico can we compare US to England, the amount of "hot" breakins or breakins that occur when the homeowner is home in England is way higher than ours, there are several sources that will back this up. Limiting law abiding citizens doesnt limit criminals whatsoever, not saying that it will stop crime but it does make criminals rethink breaking into occupied homes

 

i agree, i guess that i was thinking of murderers and cop killers when i started mouthing off all that anti gun stuff, basic crime is not a huge concern of mine, but civilians outgunning authority, that concerns me

 

and i have stated 2 times that i think that people should be allowed to have a handgun in their home for home protection

 

what makes the authority right tho, its our job to keep the "authority" from doing anything that we dont as a country believe in, and at some point, Revolutionary war, Civil war, we might have to show them that we wont tolerate it anymore and our forefathers thought of this many years ago

 

Not trying to start a flame-war, but you realize that "assault/military grade" comment is retarded, right?

I mean, I have a Mauser and a Mosin-Nagant. Both are bolt-action, carry 5 rounds, weigh around 8-9 lbs each. And, yup, both were heavily involved in several world wars. That makes them military-grade. Same goes for a Springfield 1903, a Sharps flintlock, a Navy Model 1851 cap & ball pistol, etc ...

Now, if you mean rifles with fast rates-of-fire and large-capacity magazines, I might be inclined to agree. Maybe ... after my wife lets me buy an AR.

 

i dont know that much about guns. but i certainly was not referring to civil war and World War era guns when i said assault/military grade.

i was thinking more like you said "fast rates-of-fire and large-capacity magazines"

 

This is the main issue. 6 months is such a small sample size that there is really no way to know what affect this will have. In almost all cases of this sort of legislation being passed, there is an initial dip in violent crime followed by a regression to the statistical norms -- barring any additional influences like increased police activity, lengthening terms of incarceration, increase in median income levels, etc.

What gets me chuckling is why would any media outlet even bother to cover said small sample, when we are running up to an election cycle, suffering financial stagnation, fighting a war, combating famine in Africa, uncovering faulty foreclosure practices, political uprisings in the Middle East and a metric shitton of more IMPORTANT stories and events?

I can just see the production meetings:

News Director: So, what do we have today?

Reporter: Gun crime is down in DC and NOBODY is covering it!

News Director: ...

News Director: BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Newsroom: BHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

News Director: BAHAHAHAHAA!

News Director: But seriously, no.

 

the 6 month sample size is the issue, i agree. a few years ago here in CT, there was a fire in a nursing home, it killed something like 14 old folks living there, as it turned out a resident living there set the fire and was convicted of multiple counts of murder. as a result, that year Hartford had the highest murder rate in the USA (per capita), and that's a 1 year sample, the next year the rate decreased by like 50%, no one talked about it, and that was pre-obama, lol

 

Oh shit!

I just realized that article was written by Lott (author of More Guns, Less Crime) who has repeatedly been exposed as manipulating his statistical evidence in his studies to skew the results toward his agendas.

Well played, Fox News.

 

pudge, I'm not trying to be a wise ass, but it seems that you have zero understanding of the 2nd Amendment. Brushing up on your American history wouldn't be a bad idea.

 

im not that familiar with the 2nd amendment, i dont really care to either, the right to bear arms is what it says and i dont think everyone should have the right and if they do they certainly should be limited in what the have in their arsenal

 

This is absolutely chilling.

 

This^^

Refer yo my last post, guns got us to where we are today and not the militaries guns but private citizens guns... History repeats itself best to know how and why of past evets to stop reoccurences

 

Thats worth a double post

 

Yeah, but that can be said about either side of any polarizing issue.

I would wager that the fact that people fail to learn the details of the issues is what makes them polarizing in the first place. Instead of sitting down and having rational discussion about an issue, they scream "I want it my way!" and anyone who doesn't agree with them completely is a moron.

I'd also wager that the number of people misinformed or underinformed about issues greatly outweigh those are up to speed or actively learning.