Subject:
|
Re: An armed society...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 21 Jan 2002 21:12:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
905 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli writes:
>
> > All things being equal otherwise, in areas where it is eaiser to legally
> > obtian a gun the crime rate is lower. This hold true in all econmic and • social
> > classes.
>
> Cite, please. I'd like to read evidence of the "all economic and social
> classes" bit.
In the SIRS from the local Library. Skip the NRA surveys and the Hangun
Control Inc. surveys. Propaganda from either side is irrelivent. The Gallup
Poll surveys and studies are the ones Congress uses (or at least is supposed
to use) as they are indepent and objective studies.
>
> > > I shall ask again : "I would suggest bringing a gun into his own home is no
> > > solution. Statistically, who is he most likely to shoot with the gun?"
> >
> > No one. 99% of gun owners never have to fire their gun. The threat of force
> > is usually sufficent.
>
> Cite, please. I would say that of all family members shot by other family
> members, 100% are shot by guns (well, the people who wield them). Before
> someone trots out the "more kids die by bleach" angle, I would hasten to add
> that bleach-related murders are rare in the extreme, but gun related killings
> are less uncommon.
>
> > The media is controlled by a small group of liberals.
> > You only ever see the news that will benifit that position.
>
> Ah, that old mantra. Perhaps you remember a recent President whose every
> action caused a feeding frenzy among the liberal press--a press which couldn't
> stop reporting about The Blue Dress for months and months.
> Rather than serving the "liberal" agenda, the press is guilty of playing to
> public interest. That is, stories that garner a bigger popular audience are
> likely to receive more coverage than those which are not.
Odd, most of the people I know avoided the media durring most of that crap.
>
> > The fact that
> > dozens of successful home defence senerios play out for every unsuccessful
> > senerio is often overlooked or ignored as a result.
>
> Cite, please! Without documentation, you are using anecdote and hearsay as
> if they are evidence. There is no way to assess these "successful" scenarios
> without further clarification. In Pittsburgh, for instance, where legal gun
> acquisition is not difficult, there are break-ins every night of the week; the
> number of these that are "successfully" thwarted is minimal in the extreme.
> Further, there is no validity in asserting that "we just don't hear about the
> successful ones," since you could therefore posit that 10billion breakins are
> thwarted each night. Your claim lacks falisifiability and is inconsistent • with
> my geographical region, at least.
Well maybe that is crux of our differing opinions. I my area attempting to
break into a house is equivilent to trying to rob a police station. (i.e.
incredibly stupid and highly dangerous to the perpetrators) Tell me; why is it
that when a drive-by shooting occurs everyone does not open fire on the car?
>
> > This is not limited to just Gun Control issues either. For example about 2
> > years ago a Homosexual was beaten to death by two "religous extremists." • This
> > was all over the media on the front pages of newspapers and the big story on
> > the TV news. At almost the same time 2 Homosexuals lured a 12 year old boy
> > into their house, raped, and murdered him. This was down played to the point
> > where it was a small story at the back of the paper and had barely any • mention
> > at all on the TV news. It was as if they were trying to pretend it never
> > happened.
>
> So? At about the same time a mentally-retarded girl (between 12 and 16 • years
> old, though I can't remember) was hunted down like an animal by two sociopaths
> with legally obtained firearms. Was this also front-page news? No. Was it
> because the media are "controlled" by liberals? No.
> Unlike the tragic murder of the 12 year old boy, the Matthew Sheppard case
> was specifically motivated by anti-homosexual bigotry. *THAT* is why it
> received national attention. The 12 year old's murder, while also undeniabley
> tragic, was not driven by anti-heterosexual bigotry. To equate the two cases
> is to omit deliberately key facts that fundamentally distinguish the two.
Murder is murder regardless of motivation. I see no difference in degree of
crime based on motivation. If one should be "front page" then all of them
should.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: An armed society...
|
| (...) This avoids Dave!'s point: the "liberal media" mantra is just that. It's a cheap label that intends to dismiss criticism of anything conservatives support as biased. Some, of course, is biased in the liberal direction. But some is biased in (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: An armed society...
|
| (...) Cite, please. I'd like to read evidence of the "all economic and social classes" bit. (...) Cite, please. I would say that of all family members shot by other family members, 100% are shot by guns (well, the people who wield them). Before (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
179 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
