iwishiwascool

Or just enough.

How have abortion rates been 18 years prior to the drop: Linkey Again dudes, I am not advocating from a position of increased gun control, I don't care. I would, however, prefer to live in a land where gun ownership is not an imperative to living free. That doesn't sound very free to me.

whoa on that one

I don't follow 4chan, what did he say?

According to his FB page he went to the courthouse immediately and was cleared. I agree he does not have grounds to sue as the Post included a tiny disclaimer.

So, can we at least agree, all pretenses aside, that if there were fewer guns in the world, as in they've never been invented, these kids would more likely resort to jump-kicks and Karate chops than shooting each-other in the street? This is the problem. The pervasiveness of guns attained by legal, law-abiding citizens has trickled down in such a way that has made conflict deadlier. It is far easier to pull a trigger from 100 or even a few feet away than it is to feel the tactile feedback of a knife penetrating your victim. Yes; poverty, poor parenting, perverse culture, et al is at play- These happen to all be things that the right does not want or care to deal with either- But the addition of readily accessible guns added to the above equation creates a unnecessary culture of death and destruction in the parts of town we pretend don't exist.

They're looking pretty brown and terroristy. Who do we get to invade now!?

A few things: Also, his notion that "nobody is paying attention to the 50% drop in crime" is way off too. Even the movie did an entire segment on this statistic and the reasons behind it. The reasons are surprising. A lot of you are bringing up the causation vs. correlation argument which is valid.

Gotcha. I didn't factor in blind jingoism into my logical argument. Most of Chicago's guns are not bought in Chicago. One could argue that if the net number of guns were fewer and Guns were harder to come by. Surely the kids in the middle of the Harper Highschool war zone would not resort to crowbars and axe murdering if guns weren't readily available. I'm getting convinced that I was giving you far to much credibility in your debate skillz. How flippant can you be? Is this the argument I should have used during our Obamacare debate? Listen to the Harper High School TAL podcast above and then tell me guns are not an issue. Just because gun violence doesn't impact you directly does not mean a problem does not exist. You believe and are ok with the fact that the NRA has deliberately and systematically through lobby defunded the CDCs research into gun violence? You are fine with a lobby impacting a position which you blindly agree but would surely decry outrage if it was the other way around.

I'm not arguing that background checks would fix anything. Apparently we haven't even established that there is a problem. Violent Death's of Top 10 Countries (by Wealth): http://violentdeathproject.com/charts/Homicide%20Rates%20Of%20Richest%20Countries%202009.jpg Gun Related Homicides vs. Other Western Countries http://abcnews.go.com/images/International/homocides_g8_countries_640x360_wmain.jpg It's Even Worse in Cities: http://cdn.theatlanticcities.com/img/upload/2013/01/18/homicide_metro_country%20(2)web.jpg States with the More Gun Laws Have Lower Gun Violence: http://hereandnow.wbur.org/files/2013/03/0313_gun-study-624x321.png Again, I am not advocating for any position to increase gun control. I'm not really for it at all actually. However, I think you'd have to be an NRA lapdog (a sheepdog if you'd prefer) to dismiss that an issue does indeed exist. Speaking of the NRA, it would be a lot easier to get numbers if they didn't block the government from doing any sort of analysis of gun violence.

Like I've said, I don't have a position on this issue, I'm just doing my typical truth trolling. I do think denying that there is a problem... is a problem. I think that taking the nuclear armament approach of "guaranteed mutual annihilation" through everyone owning a gun is wrong. I think we've created an industrial complex of gun ownership that is predicated on the fear mongering by those with the most to gain.

So by this logic, gun ownership would likely be higher than 35% since people like you would not report to a private, non-profit polling agency that they own a gun. So the percentage of gun owners who do support increased background checks is likely higher... So refer to my previous question.

This "sheeple" argument you keep making is below you. Most often I find those who make the argument that others are being manipulated are the least in command of facts. Don't be one of those people. Most of those polls asked specific questions, i.e: "Do you support expanded background checks at gunshows" ~90% of people say "yes". What's your argument against that very specific question.

34% is personal self-reported. Household is around 45% according to Gallup.

Well 34% of Americans own a gun so there should be concern that up to 2/3s of the gun sub-culture doesn't understand itself.

The post also buried a disclaimer that the police have not yet released pics of the suspect. Terrible journalism, especially for the two innocent high-school kids who were falsely implicated: http://www.salon.com/2013/04/18/new_york_post_fingers_two_boston_bag_men/

That's fair. Here are more: 86%: http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2013/04/16/National-Politics/Polling/question_10459.xml?uuid=I7UsPqaCEeKeHLsPsMLt2Q 83-87 (CNN): http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm That last one shows a fox news poll that is 91 at the beginning of the year, 85 more recently. It's hard to argue against every poll from 7 different sources over the course of 4 months.

You mixed your threads up.

The dudes in this pic have been IDd on Facebook. One is a highschool track star, works at Subway. Next.

You kids and your false flag shit have got to give it up. Seriously.

I'm not sure why you guys keep rejecting this poll. It was a poll it does exist and it is fair game to reference it. http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes--centers/polling-institute/pennsylvania/release-detail?ReleaseID=1843

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/apr/16/Arizona-Citizens-Defense-League/gun-rights-group-says-senate-bill-proposes-univers/ Here is the Toomey ammendement that was in the final bill: http://www.toomey.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=968

There was a provision specifically making illegal a national registry to kill the slippery slope argument you just made.

I don't have a dog in this fight, i live in alafuckingbama afterall. Every house has a gun or twelve here. I'm all for background checks at gun shows and increased mental health screening. The expectation for p2p background checks was pretty silly.

For curiosity's sake, what do you guys feel was wrong with the legislation?