RE: Noteworthy News
July 18, 2021 at 6:45 pm
(This post was last modified: July 18, 2021 at 6:47 pm by BrianSoddingBoru4.)
(July 18, 2021 at 6:42 pm)Brian37 Wrote:(July 18, 2021 at 6:33 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I think you’re being deliberately obtuse. Of course all shootings involve guns, but to claim that qualifies as a connection, when the topic is the phrase ‘isolated incident’ is tautological to the point of uselessness. Cancer is a disease - does that fact mean that all cancers are somehow connected?
Suppose that Joe in Seattle shoots himself in the foot while cleaning his gun. Further suppose that Jim in Miami shoots a clerk and two cops during a robbery. Other than the fact that both involve guns, what is the connection between the incidents?
Boru
Edit: Please note that Joe’s shooting didn’t invoke a ‘bad guy’.
Ease of access is the connection. If Jim in California smokes and Jim in Miami smokes, and cigarettes are widely availably to anyone who wants them, therw is going to be a higher rate of cancer. So if guns are as easy as purchasing candy, and unfortunately they are, it does not matter if we are talking about Chicago or Norman Oklahoma, the more guns available, the more guns used, the more opportunity for injury and death.
Then you’re going to have a tough time explaining why gun homicide has dropped 49% in the last 30 years. If ease of access and a flooded market were proximate causes, you’d expect gun crime to increase at or about the same rate as gun ownership. It doesn’t, so they aren’t.
Also, if you could explain to me the connection between bone cancer in children and lung cancer in cigarette smoking adults, that would be great.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax