Noteworthy News

[tackattack]

You can’t connect a shooting to every other shooting? You just did, which I believe is Brian point. They are all shootings and involve guns, bad guys, and victims.

Funny thing is olb is trying to arm victims to make less of them (and hopefully kill the bad guy category) and Brian is trying to lessen the gun category to lessen them. They’re both striving for the same goal in different categories.

[The Architect Of Fate]

You can’t connect a shooting to every other shooting? You just did,  which I believe is Brian point. They are all shootings and involve guns, bad guys, and victims.

Funny thing is olb is trying to arm victims to make less of them (and hopefully kill the bad guy category) and Brian is trying to lessen the gun category to lessen them. They’re both striving for the same goal in different categories.

The only difference is one isn't pretending there are nice neat categories of bad guys and good guys

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

You can’t connect a shooting to every other shooting? You just did,  which I believe is Brian point. They are all shootings and involve guns, bad guys, and victims.

Funny thing is olb is trying to arm victims to make less of them (and hopefully kill the bad guy category) and Brian is trying to lessen the gun category to lessen them. They’re both striving for the same goal in different categories.

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’.

[Brian37]

You can’t connect a shooting to every other shooting? You just did,  which I believe is Brian point. They are all shootings and involve guns, bad guys, and victims.

Funny thing is olb is trying to arm victims to make less of them (and hopefully kill the bad guy category) and Brian is trying to lessen the gun category to lessen them. They’re both striving for the same goal in different categories.

The only difference is one isn't pretending there are nice neat categories of bad guys and good guys

But there is a neat flooded market in which one industry profits no matter if good guys, or bad guys, cops or civilians have their hands on them and profit no mater how many the industry sells.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The only difference is one isn't pretending there are nice neat categories of bad guys and good guys

But there is a neat flooded market in which one industry profits no matter if good guys, or bad guys, cops or civilians have their hands on them and profit no mater how many the industry sells.

Blah, blah, blah. You keep droning on about the flooded market even though it’s been explained that that isn’t the issue.

Boru

[onlinebiker]

Brian' s the kinda guy who's smut collection is one magazine..


But he' s jerked off to it 15,000 times.



...

[Brian37]

You can’t connect a shooting to every other shooting? You just did,  which I believe is Brian point. They are all shootings and involve guns, bad guys, and victims.

Funny thing is olb is trying to arm victims to make less of them (and hopefully kill the bad guy category) and Brian is trying to lessen the gun category to lessen them. They’re both striving for the same goal in different categories.

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 available to anyone who wants them, there 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.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

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

[Brian37]

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.

Boru

I love crap like this. If you want to talk about gun homicide deaths dropping by 49% that still would not change that we are averaging 100 deaths per day. Way to aim low.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

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.

Boru

I love crap like this. If you want to talk about gun homicide deaths dropping by 49% that still would not change that we are averaging 100 deaths per day. Way to aim low.

You miss the point. If a flooded market was the chief cause of gun death, you’d be looking at more that 100 deaths per day. A lot more.

Boru