How To Argue For Gun Control.

Mac

LOL - So still unable to think for yourself? Come on man you can do better than that, this is all about getting you to think a bit more about the issues involved.

Ok, so far the main reason’s you have put forward as the reasons for violence are

• Single parenthood (fatherless families)

• Not being a follower of your religion

• Population density

• Black people are more violent/murderous than other people

Well on a national level at least the single parenthood thing doesn't seem to fly. The religion thing seems a non starter. Population density does not seem to stand up - so we are left with - Black people are more violent/murderous than other people

Now as a supposed black person yourself why do you seem to think black people are inherently, that is genetically predisposed to being more violent than others?

I have heard this kind of thing before, but only from racists, can you please explain your think?

 

I thought you were asking were did I got the 67% of gang violence coming from cities. Nevertheless from wikepedia it states that gun related homicides are frequently gang related.

"Gun violence is most common in poor urban areas and frequently associated with gang violence, often involving male juveniles or young adult males.[14][15]"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

 

No but I support any gun rights group and in fact in my opinion the NRA isn't hardcore enough.

Actually the CDC themselves said there's no evidence that gun control actually works ironically.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

I was speaking in the sense that guns causing violence outweigh guns being used for self defense.

This site explains what I was trying to say.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/12/15/why-congress-cut-the-cdcs-gun-research-budget/

 

Your proposals are government forced.

 

Mac

Again you really need to clarify and explain your thinking?

Are you saying you’re some kind of right wing anarchist who wants to get rid of all regulations and laws because they are ‘forced’?

I mean you want to vastly increase the number of people being executed how is that not ‘forced’ but having a good well funded social services system designed to help people from amongst other things turning to crime somehow the worst type of coercion

 

Mac

https://www.cdc.gov/...ml/rr5214a2.htm

Having read the paper the main thrust seems to be that more study is needed and that without it it’s hard to come to a firm conclusion.

Further high-quality research is required to establish the relationship between firearms laws and violent outcomes.

LOL - To me this was saying this issue needs a CDC study but the NRA are blocking that and they are blocking it because the NR leadership knows the outcome would be that prudent gun control is needed.

 

Mac

Hell man we have been through this many, many, many, many times why do you keep doing this the only conclusion is that you have no reply to the criticism of your views and just repeat the same thing over and over hoping no one notice – problem is we have noticed.

guns causing violence outweigh (happen far more frequently) than guns being used for self defense.

This would indicate that ease of access to guns increase the likelihood of guns being used in criminal or irresponsible ways.

In which case wouldn’t it be prudent to try and limit the possibility of guns getting into the hands of the criminal and irresponsible through prudent gun control.

Now other have argued is general crime that ease of access to guns deters general crime (car theft, burglary etc) and so it is worth the price for all the gun related deaths and injuries.

But US general crime is about at the same level as comparable countries without ease of access to guns meaning the deterrent isn’t working and doesn’t reduce crime and leads to many peoples deaths.

 

Mac

Ok so far the main reason’s you have put forwards as the reasons for violence are

• Single parenthood (fatherless families)

• Not being a follower of your religion

• Population density

• Black people are more murderous than other people

Well on a national level at least the single parenthood thing does seem to fly. The religion think seems a non starter. Population density does seem to stand up so we are left with - Black people are more murderous than other people

Now as a supposed black person yourself why do you seem to think black people are inherently, that is genetically predisposed to being more violent than other groups?

I have heard this kind of thing before, but only from racist, can you please explain your think?

 

I'm talking abou welfare and public child care.

Uh no.

Yes because you're forcing people to pay for your poor life. For example with healthcare 70% of the claims are self induced. Whether it be smoking, drinking, running aroun with wild women, or taking that extra slice of cake. It's one thing to have a private insurance company that's providing for you, it's another for the government to provide for you. Whenever there's competition businesses becomes efficient and affordable.

 

It's called job security. Can you name any study that said "without a showdown of a doubt this is true and we don't need to study it anymore"? Of course not. Because that means if you don't need to study anymore then you don't need the grant anymore. And so now that you don't have the CDC backing up your claim you now use the fallacy of proof by lack of evidence. Because they didn't found anything that proves that the evidence for "prudent" gun control is needed is somewhere deeper than the CDC dug up.

Prove the NRA are blocking anything. As the other link I gave said the CDC was in no way blocked by the NRA. In fact the CDC did even more studies during the so called ban.

 

It isn't true. Even at the low end guns are used in self defense more than a thousand times a week. While guns used for violence are only used less than 600 times a week.

Somehow you thought I was saying guns are used for crimes more than self defense. It's the opposite actually.

It also leads to many more people defending themselves and property.

 

I don't know for sure. Blacks tend to populate the urban cities and they also have the highest rate of fatherless homes. So my guess is the combination of those mixed with the race baiting of the left.

 

Bogus alternative facts! Are you angling for a job in the Trump Administration?

 

Ok, prove me wrong.

 

Mac

Oh how very Christian of you LOL

So really this is all about money you worship Mammon about Christ.

Basically you would prefer others to suffer or die unnecessarily because you want lower taxes.

I suppose it fits in with your stance over gun control which seems to be that you would prefer others to suffer or die unnecessarily because you want easy access to guns.

To me both stances seem selfish and self-serving and as an atheist they seem rather unchristian.

 

Mac

My poor life?

So people deserve to be disadvantaged?

People who are disadvantaged are only disadvantaged because they want to be disadvantaged?

Can a child choose to not to be born into disadvantage and therefore not be burdened with the problems being disadvantaged can bring?

Let us imagine a plague, a disease that could affect anyone but will actually end up only affecting half of the population but nobody knows which half. (*)

That is a societal problem.

In such a situation I think most sensible people would want the community’s government to try and do something about it and be willing to pay the taxes to tackle the situation.

Now let’s say that half a population are born into disadvantage and half not. But since no one can choose beforehand to which half they are to be born, it basically means disadvantage could affect anyone.

So again it is a societal problem.

The difference is that there is the problem of hindsight, when those born into advantage are taxed to help the disadvantaged, they may not be inclined to go ‘oh I could have been born disadvantaged myself’ they might go ‘why should I help’.

It is like knowing who would be affected by the disease and who not. Some might help out of compassion and for the good of society but others might think ‘I’m all right jack’ and decide it’s none of their business if others suffer - something I’m sure they wouldn’t think if they didn’t know they wouldn’t be effected.

(*And I’m not saying disadvantage is a disease, I’m just using the plague idea as an example)

 

Mac

I can find no information to back up that claim.

The UK NHS and government are very much involved in preventative measures, educating people about health and helping people to stop smoking having a healthy diet, sexual heath etc. Coupled with other types of regulation such as the laws on against smoking in public places and against tobacco advertising.

In the belief that it is better help people have healthier lives and then have to deal with the problems and the burden on society these things can cause later on.

I mean are you saying that nothing should be done to try and help these people preferring for them to suffer and die early instead?

Actually the NHS is considered one of the most efficient and rather ‘affordable’ healthcare systems in the world.

[SIZE=11pt]The NHS has been declared the best healthcare system by an international panel of experts who rated its care superior to countries which spend far more on health.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]The same study also castigated healthcare provision in the US as the worst of the 11 countries it looked at. Despite putting the most money into health, America denies care to many patients in need because they do not have health insurance and is also the poorest at saving the lives of people who fall ill, it found.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]The report has been produced by the Commonwealth Fund, a Washington-based foundation which is respected around the world for its analysis of the performance of different countries' health systems. It examined an array of evidence about performance in 11 countries, including detailed data from patients, doctors and the World Health Organisation.[/SIZE]

"The United Kingdom ranks first overall, scoring highest on quality, access and efficiency," the fund's researchers conclude in their 30-page report. Their findings amount to a huge endorsement of the health service, especially as it spends the second-lowest amount on healthcare among the 11 – just £2,008 per head, less than half the £5,017 in the US. Only New Zealand, with £1,876, spent less.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jun/17/nhs-health

 

Mac

So it’s about ‘feelings’ rather than having any rational or real societal value.

I mean you seem to be saying that widespread gun ownership has had no real impact on general crime in the US other than leading to a much higher gun related death rate than other developed countries.

I mean as explained to you before these other countries have roughly the same levels of general crime but do not have the ease of access to guns. So the ease of access to guns method isn’t working very well at tackling general crime as it increase gun related crime that those other countries do not have.

 

Mac

Bingo! Thank you

That is exactly my point, you haven’t (and don’t) give these things that much thought.

You guess rather than think it through

And when people don’t give complex issues that much thought they are likely to come up with simplistic and so ineffectual solutions.

Like hoping a god will intervene and make things better.

 

Mac

And so what?

We have gone through the population density argument and it doesn’t seem to stand up.

And why is that do you think?

I mean are you implying that not just are black people inherently moe violent they are also more feckless as well?

What race baiting, I mean you seem to be the one who seems to be claiming black people are genetically disposed to violent behavior and you are definitely not of the left LOL