New Yorkers now being given $500 rewards if they report gun owners to law enforcement

in the UK taking all the handguns out of circulation after the massacre you would expect crimes with handguns to fall to zero ,but thats not the case as gun crime has still persisted in spite of responsible gun owners losing their weapons.
the bad guys still get handguns and use them ,whilst the hobbyists have no handguns and cant kill anybody .
 

Criminals not following the law...shocking! :laughing7:
 

in the UK taking all the handguns out of circulation after the massacre you would expect crimes with handguns to fall to zero ,but thats not the case as gun crime has still persisted in spite of responsible gun owners losing their weapons.
the bad guys still get handguns and use them ,whilst the hobbyists have no handguns and cant kill anybody .

Ah huh!...And UK streets are just flowing in rivers of blood because of it arn't they? Bodies everywhere?

Tell me something BB?....If you heard a bump downstairs in the night, would you be stood at the top of the stairs wondering if they had a gun? Be honest.
 

Ah huh!...And UK streets are just flowing in rivers of blood because of it arn't they? Bodies everywhere?

Tell me something BB?....If you heard a bump downstairs in the night, would you be stood at the top of the stairs wondering if they had a gun? Be honest.

Your own countrymen contradict your assertions . . . and agree with the numbers . . . and still you deny.

Takes a lot of guts, I'll give you that.
 

Your own countrymen contradict your assertions . . . and agree with the numbers . . . and still you deny.

Takes a lot of guts, I'll give you that.

Dano disagrees for the sake of disagreeing.It doesnt matter whats posted he'll disagree with it.Maybe a lot of guts (and thats giving him a lot of credit)but a hell of a lot less of something else:laughing7:
 

Look at National Defense Authorization Act (aka NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012; MORE recent than PATRIOT ACT! INTERESTING, now that DOD has the DRONES...
 

Last edited:
in the UK taking all the handguns out of circulation after the massacre you would expect crimes with handguns to fall to zero ,but thats not the case as gun crime has still persisted in spite of responsible gun owners losing their weapons.
the bad guys still get handguns and use them ,whilst the hobbyists have no handguns and cant kill anybody .

Expect it to fall to zero?? I don't think any rational person would expect it to fall to zero. If it decreased deaths by one single god given life wouldn't you consider that to be a good thing? Or do you want to give what you believe would be an acceptable level of deaths each year - 10, 50, 100, 1000?? How many would be ok with you?
 

Your own countrymen contradict your assertions . . . and agree with the numbers . . . and still you deny.

Takes a lot of guts, I'll give you that.

What are the numbers? What country has the higher rate of gun deaths? Does anyone have these stats?
 

Expect it to fall to zero?? I don't think any rational person would expect it to fall to zero. If it decreased deaths by one single god given life wouldn't you consider that to be a good thing? Or do you want to give what you believe would be an acceptable level of deaths each year - 10, 50, 100, 1000?? How many would be ok with you?
Wouldn't this fall into anecdotal evidence? :icon_scratch:
 

Not at all. Do you know what anecdotal evidence is?

LOOLOLL Do you have anything else Stocky? Are the cherries burying you yet? Learn a new defense please, That one is getting SOOOo boring!
 

Not at all. Do you know what anecdotal evidence is?
Yes, I do. I am suggesting that putting a number on crimes the did or didn't happen is NOT scientific. How would you know if it decreased by even one person. Could be just one person less that particular year had the desire to kill another...
 

Yes, I do. I am suggesting that putting a number on crimes the did or didn't happen is NOT scientific. How would you know if it decreased by even one person. Could be just one person less that particular year had the desire to kill another...

That's exactly right and exactly my point on why you can't say that it failed - correct?
 

That's exactly right and exactly my point on why you can't say that it failed - correct?
But it did fail. The guns are still on the streets, only there exclusively in the hands of criminals now...
 

But it did fail. The guns are still on the streets, only there exclusively in the hands of criminals now...

But you can't say that because you can not state if more or fewer guns would be on the streets if the ban did not occur - correct?
 

You can say that because if you look at places that have banned the guns, the criminals are still committing crimes with them. Correct?
 

You can say that because if you look at places that have banned the guns, the criminals are still committing crimes with them. Correct?

But you would need to know if they are committing more or fewer crimes than if there was no ban.
 

The purpose of the "ban" is to eliminate the weapons. If they are still out there the ban is a failure...
 

The purpose of the "ban" is to eliminate the weapons. If they are still out there the ban is a failure...

That's not true at all. Look at the FAWB (b equals ban). They allowed the grandfathering of weapons. The purpose of any type of law would be the reduction of death and violence. Funny, aren't you always one of those accusing others of "lawyer speak". I think the purpose of these bills are simple to reduce death and violence. Whether they work or not has been debated for many many decades and will continue to be debated. We do know that the UK does have a much lower rate of gun related murders.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top