A Warning from Canada

[hrdguera]

Today, the esteemed (?) television show TODAY on NBC finally reported that the Newton School shooter did not, DID NOT, use the AR-15 assault weapon that has so many of the Democrat's panties in a bunch.

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/01/3020...town-shooting/


Yes, there were many of us that already knew that .... but that didn't stop that "poser" of a President from posing with school children and trying once again to usurp the United States Constitution by trying to deny Americans their 2nd Amendment rights.

So, I guess that he does believe the saying that if he repeats a lie often enough that people will believe it. All he has really done is drive up the cost of one of the rifles to about $2,400.00 each. Maybe by next year we will be able to trade a gallon of gas for one of these weapons.

[NOLA]

Originally Posted by hrdguera

Today, the esteemed (?) television show TODAY on NBC finally reported that the Newton School shooter did not, DID NOT, use the AR-15 assault weapon that has so many of the Democrat's panties in a bunch.

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/01/3020...town-shooting/


Yes, there were many of us that already new that .... but that didn't stop that "poser" of a President from posing with school children and trying once again to usurp the United States Constitution by trying to deny Americans their 2nd Amendment rights.

So, I guess that he does believe the saying that if he repeats a lie often enough that people will believe it. All he has really done is drive up the cost of one of the rifles to about $2,400.00 each. Maybe by next year we will be able to trade a gallon of gas for one of these weapons.

I would rather get my information from the police.......http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?Q=517284

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by NOLA

I would rather get my information from the police.......http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?Q=517284

LMFAO! hrdguera is not the sort to let FACTS interfere with a conspiracy story!

[Wouldhe]

Originally Posted by NOLA

I would rather get my information from the police.......http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?Q=517284

It didn't say if it was used or not, just that it was found with others.

[NOLA]

Originally Posted by Wouldhe

It didn't say if it was used or not, just that it was found with others.

Well... HG's post link said the rifle was in the car was just showing him that wasn't what the police said. They said a shotgun was in the car.

[Stevomeo]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

You posted it, you own it. You've been busted and you are not even man enough to take responsibility for what you posted. HA!

You can find it all over the internet as an example of how the gun lobby massage facts to suit their agenda.

I only have to read the first line to see that it is a biased report in favour of gun ownership. Look right where it says...

"It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer...."
and then..

"...it does prove that gun control is a flawed policy."

That says it all! There is no academic, peer reviewed article on the planet that would have things like that in it. I notice also that once again you do not supply the link for the article. I wonder why? If you are copy/pasting articles SUPPLY A LINK SO THAT YOUR SOURCE CAN BE CHECKED.

Like you didn't dispute the evidence from Japan where gun ownership is virtually unknown and they have two deaths a year?? I did not dispute it because it was a pointless strawman argument from you (again). The fact that you can get a gun on the black market in Australia is no more to the point than that you can get heroin. What ridiculous point are you trying to make with that statement.

Probably, knowing you.
1. Explain what "violent crime" has to do with guns being banned.
2. Supply the link to the actual academic peer reviewed report that was commissioned by the Australian Institute of Criminology and I'll take a look.
3. Provide verifiable evidence, facts and figures that prove conclusively that the gun ban is solely and irrevocably connected to the rise in violent crime and that there are no other factors involved.

Even if it was true, it still isn't evidence that any rise in crime is down to the fact that they had their toys taken off them. There can be many factors that affect crime figures, an economic recession being just one. When some people have no money they go out and steal which increases the crime figures...without a gun in sight! If you were intellectually honest with yourself you would also see that 'crime rate' is irrelevant to what we are discussing here, it's just another one of your strawman arguments that you are so fond of. We are supposed to be discussing the correlation between high gun ownership and high death rate from guns and not that a few moronic Australian teenagers have nicked a few more cars this year sending the crime rate soaring.

If you want to claim that rising crime rates are connected to a gun ban then you have to provide verifiable evidence for that. For example; it would be a good start if you could verify that:

1. cases of robbery increased significantly immediately after the ban.

2. cases of robbery increased immediately after the ban specifically because people did not have guns to protect their property.

3. that there were not and could not have been any other factors that might have contributed to the rise - like rising unemployment.

You can throw tripe about increased crime rates and try to blame that on the fact that they have no guns all you like but there is one over-riding, indisputable and clearly verifiable thing that you refuse to accept and that is......

COUNTRIES THAT DO NOT PERMIT GUNS HAVE A LOWER RATE OF GUN DEATH THAN COUNTRIES THAT DO ALLOW GUNS. Q.E.D.

Now if you are claiming that this is untrue, I would like you to explain why America has so many deaths from guns whilst Japan has almost NIL. PLEASE ADDRESS THIS.

Not pertinent to the subject. If you want to discuss the rights and wrongs of abortion start another thread.

No, as usual you are not getting it right. It is the people that put their hobbies before the safety of their children that are the slope headed knuckle dragging inbreds. The one's that, despite the verifiable evidence that high gun ownership means high death rate from guns, still scream to keep their guns; the ones that see their children massacred time and time again but still won't learn the obvious lesson and perhaps above all, the ones that decry abortion as an "atrocity" whilst screaming for his right to keep his gun after so many children in his country have been massacred.

Oh look! youtube video.... so it must be true then!! Madre mia

See here...I can do the same.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlR4t0Y6pQ8

PS. You only need to watch it from point 29 to 44.

You continue to fail to counter what I have posted with anything that is any more legitimate. Because you don't like what I have posted doesn't make it any less legit. Hobby? Owning a gun is not a hobby.....why do you find a need to describe it as that. Your video only addressed mass shootings and not the crime statistics that I provided via the video or Australian government site. Because you toss many words in response doesn't make you the winner of an argument, just makes you look like an OCD busy body who doesn't want anyone to have guns because you are fearful of them. Or perhaps you just hate everything American. Americans will continue to be armed as they always have been and occasionally some evil person will commit an evil act with a firearm here, but many less will die as a result of these incidents than do at the hands of medical professionals, auto accidents, etc....

[Wouldhe]

Originally Posted by NOLA

Well... HG's post link said the rifle was in the car was just showing him that wasn't what the police said. They said a shotgun was in the car.

I'm pretty sure the rifle that was in the video the police were emptying from the trunk was a shotgun. Sure looked like one to me. It also looked like it had a short barrel which would not be an AR15.

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by Stevomeo

Your video only addressed mass shootings and not the crime statistics that I provided via the video or Australian government site.

WTF?!?!?! Do you have a problem with reading comprehension? Go back to my post again and this time READ IT. Note where I make comment on guns and crime rate figures. You are trying to connect overall crime rate figures to gun ownership and it doesn't work! If you remove every single gun in the country it will not necessary impact overall crime figures because crime figures are affected by many other things, not just guns. If every gun in the country disappeared tomorrow, how the hell would that affect the crime figures for say...vandalism?

If every gun in the country disappeared tomorrow, the overall crime statistics would probably be unaffected. What would be affected would be statistics for the number of people killed or injured by guns. The number of bicycles stolen from your local mall is unlikely to be affected by a gun ban.

I repeat yet again - WE ARE DISCUSSING HOW A BAN ON GUNS WOULD AFFECT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE KILLED OR INJURED BY GUNS AND NOT HOW A GUN BAN WOULD AFFECT CRIME FIGURES FOR PICK-POCKETING, SHOP LIFTING OR ANY OTHER CRIME THAT DOES NOT INVOLVE THE USE OF FIREARMS.

DO YOU GET IT NOW?

Because you toss many words in response doesn't make you the winner of an argument, just makes you look like an OCD busy body who doesn't want anyone to have guns because you are fearful of them.

I don't so much fear guns than I fear the people that are obsessed with owning them ...to the detriment of their country, it's citizen and even their own children. When the massacre happened in Australia, the public were voluntarily clambering to hand in their weapons. They saw it as the only way to try to stop it happening again; but what do we get from America... 'BO-HO! MY RIGHTS! MY RIGHTS! WAH! I WANT MY TOYS!' What a difference between two nations. So you see, THAT is what I fear; not the guns but the people who would rather see thir children shot like dogs than give up their dummies.

Or perhaps you just hate everything American.

Nope! I've stated many times that America has been very good to me in my career.

Americans will continue to be armed as they always have been....

Strangely, that's just what Australians said and the Brits and the French, the Germans and many other countries before they got disarmed. Get used to it lad. It will be coming to a town near you soon. All it's going to take is a few more child massacres. Your government will have to force you to do it rather than you as a people doing it yourselves because you feel it's the right thing to do and that's rather telling of you as a people, that you have to be MADE to do it, but it will be done never the less.

.... but many less will die as a result of these incidents than do at the hands of medical professionals, auto accidents, etc....

You could be right but in the modern world that we demand, medical professionals and transport are indispensable; guns are not.

BTW, I note that you still haven't given a source for what you pasted in post 57.

[pladecalvo]

Verifiable evidence from academic studies and peer reviewed journals that less guns mean less death from guns.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/fi...uns-and-death/

..and this:

"Figure 1G and table 3 indicate that although the rate per 100 000 of total firearm deaths was reducing by an average of 3% per year, this rate doubled to 6% after the introduction of gun laws. "
http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/12/6/365.full

...and then there is this from the University of Sydney:

"The risk of dying by gunshot has halved since Australia destroyed 700,000 privately owned firearms, according to a new study published today in the international research journal, Injury Prevention."

"Not only were Australia's post-Port Arthur gun laws followed by a decade in which the crime they were designed to reduce hasn't happened again, but we also saw a life-saving bonus: the decline in overall gun deaths accelerated to twice the rate seen before the new gun laws," says study lead author, Professor Simon Chapman."

"The authors conclude that "The Australian example provides evidence that removing large numbers of firearms from a community can be associated with a sudden and on-going decline in mass shootings, and accelerating declines in total firearm-related deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."
http://sydney.edu.au/news/84.html?newsstoryid=1502

...and this from the American Law and Economics Review:

"We find that the buyback led to a drop in the firearm suicide rates of almost 80%, with no significant effect on non-firearm death rates. The effect on firearm homicides is of similar magnitude but is less precise."

"This paper therefore provides evidence that reduced access to firearms lowers firearm death rates and may also lower overall death by suicide and homicide"

3. Australian Firearm Regulation and Firearm Deaths
3.1. Trends in Australian Suicides and Homicides
In the decade following the NFA, there has been a substantial drop in firearm deaths in Australia (Figures 1a and 1b). Firearm suicides have dropped from 2.2 per 100,000 people in 1995 to 0.8 per 100,000 in 2006. Firearm homicides have dropped from 0.37 per 100,000 people in 1995 to 0.15 per 100,000 people in 2006. These are drops of 65% and 59%, respectively, and among a population of 20 million individuals, represent a decline in the number of deaths by firearm suicide of about 300 and in the number of deaths by firearm homicide of about 40 per year.

"The results in this paper using a different and more reliable source of identification support the general findings of those time series studies. We show that the largest falls in firearm deaths occurred in states where more firearms were bought back. Compared to time series studies, this approach has some key benefits. First, it allows us to control for national-level trends in death rates through the use of national-level fixed effects and at the state level through state-specific time trends - the results show that, even after controlling for such trends, there was a statistically significant decline in firearm deaths in states with higher firearm buyback rates. Second, we are able to examine in more depth the time pattern of any response of deaths to the NFA—the results show that firearm deaths in states with higher buyback rates fell relative to those with lower buyback rates and that this relative reduction in the firearm death rate was maintained subsequently.
http://andrewleigh.org/pdf/GunBuyback_Panel.pdf

...and finally, we could listen to someone that actually lives there:

"We in Australia Have Been Through this Debate

Some years ago we had a particularly tragic massacre in Tasmania, and the Prime Minister at the time, John Howard, (called the man of steel by GW Bush) decided to actually stop talking about the problem, and actually do something. Previous to that dreadful event, Howard believed it was everybody's right to bear arms, and told his government colleagues about his change of mind. He convinced them that all assault and semi automatic and automatic guns would be banned in Australia, and to accommodate the change, the government would fund a buyback scheme. There were many critics, but he held his nerve, and now that decision is hailed as one of his greatest decisions, and we now live in a safer country. Sure, criminals can now get guns, but it is not easy for children, young people, mentally unfit, sick etc., the cause of so much grief, and I am happy we have done this. It has not been a failure."

[hrdguera]

Well, you can believe what you want. But the AR-15 was in the car but was not used.

It seems like there are a lot of you that don't let facts get in the way of the truth.

No wonder that poser was elected, twice. All I can say it you people deserve him.
I only hope that our country resembles the once great nation it was when our would-be Emperor returns to relative obscurity organizing ghettos into communist cells.