Originally posted by Q99
A chart on mass-shootings per capita (from an article on the rate in Chicago vs the norm)
Chicago is a One Party City (aka Democrat/Liberal controlled) That city and state have some of the MOST if not HARSEST Gun Control Laws in the entire country.
Look how well its is working when compared to its neighboring states.
I said it before. Will say it again.
LAWS do NOT STOP CRIME!
But hey. If Ush or 99 want to walk into some of those Gang Controlled part of the city and tell them they need to hand in their ILLEGALLY obtained weapons.
Feel free.
😱
Originally posted by Flyattractor
LAWS do NOT STOP CRIME!
Except they do change the type of crime.
View the entire country of Australia, where after a shooting spree they enacted stronger gun laws and had their rate of gun incidents plummet, with not a single shooting spree since, while it's been completely normal for us.
Also the UK. Also Germany, France, Japan, South Korea... Switzerland, where everyone has guns but ammo is tightly controlled.
You're several times more likely to die of gun violence than you would be in any of those.
"No Way to Prevent This," says only nation where this regularly happens really sums it it.
Restrictions on the scale of a city aren't going to be as effective, of course... especially when Chicago does not have that strict gun control laws. Different source
"But Chicago's gun laws aren't as tough as their reputation suggests. They once were, but courts have overturned or gutted many of them in recent years, forcing a city that once banned handguns and gun shops to allow both. "
"Several Chicago residents filed a lawsuit this summer against three suburbs, accusing them of lax oversight of local gun shops that they say have been an easy source of weapons for criminals who bring guns into the city."
Their controls are so strict one must go all the way to the *suburbs* to buy a gun.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Your contention that ANY form of gun restriction violates the Second Amendment doesn't stand up to any sort of scrutiny at all. Even the US has a whole host of restrictions of that sort as it stands already- like having a criminal record etc.But you come in and make a totally baseless and brainless comment anyway, simply interpreting the second amendment to mean 'anything we want it to' and thereby emotively and dishonestly saying that gun control legislation is 'tyranny' and undemocratic. Your idea that any government legislation is tyranny waiting to happen is pure paranoia that does not belong in any serious discussion. It's a feeble joke of a position, rather like your ignorant and childlike attempt to draw parallels with Germany.
Well, for starters, it's NOT my contention that any form of gun restriction violates the Second Amendment, only that some people see it that way and that I can largely understand why they do. I'm also left wondering where you're coming from with the "emotively and dishonestly" bit. Take five and ask one of your friends which post has more emotion in it, yours or mine. I think you would quite properly reprimand any member who sent a message as rude as this last post of yours to me.
No, that is a lie; I would have no trouble with a post like that at all. The entire argument you are associating with is precisely what I said- emotive and dishonest rather than rational, made to fit selfish ends to no benefit and much harm. Those are strong words (though in no way abusive posting), but such a poorly considered and harmful position deserves such language.
If you want to disassociate from it entirely, then fine, and I'll happily disassociate you personally from the intellectual content of the argument you outlined. But you brought up an irrational position in an answer to a question about logic, and that has its perils, and if you are claiming a neutral position, starting with 'it's not hard to understand' is a mistake. It's much better to start with, say, 'This is not what I think, but...'
Originally posted by Surtur
I agree that it is different in America when it comes to guns, that much is true. But you act like it is because people just realize that something awful would happen if the 2nd amendment was ratified.Don't be fooled: It's not really about protecting America, they just don't want to lose their guns.
Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Oh well if some 2nd rate Comedian says so then it must be TRUE!!!!!!!!! [/B]
Yea and when I posted this, people just claimed Maher didn't like Muslims.
The double standard is always in effect.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yea and when I posted this, people just claimed Maher didn't like Muslims.The double standard is always in effect.
He really has an unhealthy obsession over a 14 year old boy.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
He's not A-List, but he's not 2nd rate by any measure. That entire special is incredible--especially when he returns to the gun safe joke with the Pistorius set.
Yeah; I don't think I've seen him do a bad special. Each one has at least one brilliant joke.
And Legit never should have been cancelled.
