London murder rate rises higher than NY City

With cigarettes, it's obvious that inhaling smoke into your breathing organ is going to have a detrimental effect on your health even without being told by an authority figure. A causal relationship is apparent unless you don't want to see it, and most addicts don't want to see it; that's called denial. However, the high level of gun ownership in an area is indicative of a high level of crime in the same area. People living in high crime areas tend to want to have a gun for personal defense. But you choose to misinterpret that fact and see it backwards. One would think that the absence of any study that shows a causal relationship between firearm ownership and murder rates would be a tip off, but . . .

 

No, I'm saying that you don't have a rational or reasonable argument for banning all guns that hold more than six rounds. I thought I pointed that out to you earlier.

 

Australia does it.

 

Well, maybe the 'absence of any study' can be explained by the fact that the NRA has been blocking such research for over 20 years now.

The NRA has blocked gun violence research for 20 years. Let's end its stranglehold on science.

In case anyone has any doubts at this point, they're using the Republican party to do it. They're already responsible for legitimizing climate change denial as oil company bitches, so it's not like being anti-science is inconsistent with their platform or the interests of their voters.

 

I thought Balbus was comparing gun advocates' lack of concern about 3.5 deaths per 100, 000 to the lack of concern the captains of industry had about worker deaths back in the day. Seems apt to me. But as usual too subtle for the pro-gunners.

 

Dead people are just as dead no matter what kills them. But the living may prefer a natural death to being gunned down in a waffle shop.

 

No. Someone who is killed with a knife is just as dead as someone who is killed with a gun.

The rate doesn't make much difference. The victims are still just as dead.

Probably not. But you could probably kill a number of people with bombs.

Mass killings do not make up a significant amount of the homicide rate in any case.

Yes. It's a classic for a good reason. It gets right to the point and wins the argument.

Why does that matter?

 

Probably not. But efficiency doesn't matter. The victim is just as dead even when killed with a less efficient weapon.

Statistics are very clear that gun availability has little correlation with homicide rates.

Australia abolished their freedom. It's really horrible what happened there.

 

Not a fan of cigarettes

But there has always been a lot of bullshit with the weak to no correlation between smoking and certain diseases, especially heart disease and cancer

Most smokers are overweight and dont exercise anyway

If smoking was ever the primary cause, you would have all the heaviest smokers dying first. Smokig comes in 4th or 5th, always has, always will

Random mutation comes in first for cancer, then genes, then diet/ exercise, then lifestyle like smoking

 

Your kind of arguments only seem to come from Americans

 

They seem pretty free to me

 

I went all day today without being murdered. (London is great, but a little bit dangerous.)

 

I've tried to hold back, but your arguments have reached new heights of absurdity. The victim is just as dead, but with guns in mass killings there are far more of them. They may not show causation, but they certainly show correlation.

The statistics are clear that that is not the case. See the Harvard studies previously cited. You talk about correlations after having admitted that you can't cite a single r and don't know how to calculate one. Your B.S. about cherry picked data won't cut much ice with people who understand social science methodology.

Ah, yes. They're a real tyranny. But much safer from gun violence than our flourishing Jeffersonian democracy.

 

It's ironic to me about Australia because as recently as two days ago I clicked through a presentation on the Web about the 27 countries with the most freedom. The U.S. didn't even place! I was a little shocked, but Chile for example did well. Also, Australia was like 6th in 27! Their freedom exceeds that of the United States.

I haven't heard it from an Australian's perspective. But I wish we had similar constraints in our society. It would sure be nice...

 

What the hell are you talking about?


I'm not just saying this because I live here, and I dont live in Norway


But on paper, you tell me those two countries arent the best in the world to live in.

 

Free people have the right to have guns that are suitable for self defense.

Australia, having abolished this ancient right, is no longer free.

 

All I do is point out facts and reality.

Mass killings are not a significant portion of the homicide rate.

That is incorrect. The statistics are very clear that there is little correlation between gun availability and homicide rates.

Fraudulent studies based on cherry picked data.

Facts are hardly BS. And if these people do not care that they use cherry picked data, that just means that their fraudulent studies should be disregarded.

Being killed with a knife instead of with a gun hardly makes the loss of freedom worth it.

 

No. Free people have the right to have guns that are suitable for self defense.

Australia abolished this ancient right.

Having our freedom abolished would not be very nice at all.

 

Free people have the right to have guns that are suitable for self defense.

Australia abolished this ancient right. Now they are no longer free.

 

Just because you keep repeating something doesnt make it true.

Your viewpoint is actually pretty extreme and limited to a certain group of people in one country. The vast majority of people around the world dont really believe guns have anything to do with freedom. And yet, they still have the freedom to practice the religion of their choosing, pursue any professional goals and personal interests they choose, speak amd write about anything of their choosing, protest, speak out against their leaders, vote, travel.

You have a very very limited view of what freedom is