>From: "Michael S. Lorrey" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Zero Powers wrote:
> > >From: "Michael S. Lorrey" <email@example.com>
> > >
> > > > >Facts are that guns are what keeps as many people in this country
> > > > >circulation as possible. Proven fact, undeniable. Largest
> > > > >database examined to date (and the most unbiased one).
> > > >
> > > > What database? Where can I see it for myself. If as you say, it is
> > >really
> > > > "undeniable" then I won't deny it. I doubt however that there is
> > >such
> > > > "proven" and "undeniable" evidence.
> > >
> > >FBI Database of Crime Statistics, 1979 to 1995.
> > Not even remotely close to "undeniable."
>Better than any other source. Show me anything more credible.
I didn't mean that the FBI Database of Crime Statistics was not credible.
In fact, for the purpose of this discussion, I'll concede that if its in the
FBI Database of Crime Statistics, its true. What I meant was that I don't
believe that there is anything in the FBI Database of Crime Statistics which
supports your claims. If I'm wrong, show me.
> > Sure everyone knows that crime has
> > been steadily decreasing recently. *Nothing* I have ever seen
> > this trend to the large number of guns circulating in society. You
> > want to check out what the National Center for Policy Analysis has to
> > this count.
> > http://www.ncpa.org/studies/s229/s229.html
>The NCPA is an avowed leftist socialist anti-gun lobbying group. They
>woulnd't know the truth if it slapped them with a wet noodle.
If you are the type of person who debates an issue by castigating those who
hold opposing view points, this debate will not get very far. You will be
far more likely to convince me by showing that any facts asserted by the
NCPA are false than you will by simply calling them names.
> > > > >I can also retort
> > > > >that there should be more hateful cartoons about people and groups
> > > > >think that law abiding citizens have no right to defend their lives
> > > > >against criminals.
> > > >
> > > > As to the need for such cartoons, suit yourself. As for the words
> > >seem
> > > > to be trying to put in my mouth, I never said, or suggested, any
> > >thing.
> > >
> > >You quite vehemently supported the same for the opposition. If you
> > >like it
> > >one way, don't support the other..
> > You misinterpreted my comment. What I said was "As to the need for such
> > cartoons, suit yourself."
>NO, you said the following, on Sun, 12 Mar 2000 19:42:40 PST:
> > Can there be enough hateful cartoons about an organization that fights
> > keep more guns than people in circulation?
> > -Zero
>Therefore, you were arguing in support of more cartoons. Stopy lying.
You simply don't get it. Try to re-read the earlier exchange one more time.
Maybe take a deep breath first.
>Do you get bothered when people catch you in a lie?
Very much so. So far you have yet to bother me at all.
> > > > >Do you really want to continue?
> > > >
> > > > Only if you can turn down the posturing and the rhetoric and turn up
> > > > facts and a *reasonable* debate.
> > >
> > >I didn't start it, you did. I'm all for reasonable debate. Just the
> > OK, just the facts, huh? Lets start with your claim that the FBI
> > of Crime Statistics, 1979 to 1995, somehow supports your assertion that
> > "guns are what keeps (sic) as many people in this country in circulation
> > possible." And that this assertion is, in your own words, "Proven fact,
> > undeniable."
> > Where *exactly* can any such "facts" be gleaned from the FBI Database of
> > Crime Statistics, 1979 to 1995? Reference to web page would be
>The only analysis done of ALL statistics in the database done was by
>Professor John Lott of the University of Chicago. He found the
>following, based completely on the statistics:
>a) For every 1% increase in the number of citizens with Concealed Carry
>permits, crime drops by an average of 1%.
>b) The death penalty, as it is currently administered, has no positive
>or negative effect on the crime rate.
>c) Violent crime drops by an average of 8% one year after a state passes
>a 'shall-issue' reform of its concealed carry statues (versus
>discretionary issue statutes).
>d) Spree type killings (more than one murder per incident) drop by an
>average of 80% within 5 years of passage of such concealed carry laws.
>he found a bunch of other things out, but these are the most salient
>points. Read his book, _More Guns, Less Crime_ before you dismiss this.
So when you *said* "FBI Database of Crime Statistics" what you *meant* was
_More Guns, Less Crime_?
And I don't suppose you would agree that John Lott is an avowed right-wing
pro-gun lobbyist who wouldn't know the truth if it slapped him with a wet
"I like dreams of the future better than the history of the past"
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:05:04 MDT