XPost: uk.politics.guns, aus.politics.guns, aus.politics   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au   
      
   On 4/22/2013 12:07 PM, Scout wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   > "Trevor Wilson"  wrote in message   
   > news:atjh2kFku7dU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >> On 4/21/2013 7:35 AM, Scout wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> "Trevor Wilson"  wrote in message   
   >>> news:atev54Fkl0sU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>> On 4/20/2013 3:53 PM, Scout wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> "Trevor Wilson"  wrote in message   
   >>>>> news:atec94Fgv0lU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>>>> On 4/20/2013 11:19 AM, Scout wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson"  wrote in message   
   >>>>>>> news:ate4m7Ffj68U1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>>>>>> On 4/20/2013 9:44 AM, Scout wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson"  wrote in   
   >>>>>>>>> message   
   >>>>>>>>> news:ate2shFf89pU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 4/20/2013 9:27 AM, Scout wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson"  wrote in   
   >>>>>>>>>>> message   
   >>>>>>>>>>> news:ate000Fek8tU2@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/20/2013 8:39 AM, Dechucka wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> "RD Sandman"  wrote in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> message   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:XnsA1A782B5E82D8hopewell@216.196.121.131...   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trevor Wilson  wrote in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:atc1j0F11bvU1@mid.individual.net:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't be   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politicians,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constituents.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elected   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creatures   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are interested in re-election.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> sad, so election is more important than dead Americans   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> **It would seem so. Except to a tiny handful of Republican   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> senators   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> and the majority of Democrat senators. Americans should keep   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> those   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> names in mind. Both the brave ones and the gutless ones.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Yep, the ones that voted for it need to go,   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> **Why do you support a criminal's right to obtain firearms?   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Who said I do?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> **You object to good, sane controls on guns.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I do? Where did I do so?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> **In every single discussion you and I have had regarding gun control   
   >>>>>> laws.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> In every single discussion there was no good, sane gun control being   
   >>>>> proposed.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> **That would your opinion. As shown by events, a wrong opinion.   
   >>>   
   >>> If it's a matter of opinion then that means you can't really define   
   >>> exactly what a good sane gun control law is other than it's something   
   >>> YOU approve of.   
   >>   
   >> **Wrong. Good, sane gun control laws acheive results.   
   >   
   > Not necessarily.   
      
   **Yes, necessarily.   
      
      
     Bad, tyrannical, even evil laws can also achieve   
   > results.   
      
   **Indeed. Bad results.   
      
      
     Just because you have results doesn't make the law good and sane.   
      
   **We have good results. Gun related crimes are down. Gun thefts are   
   dramatically down. Mass murders, via the use of firearms have completely   
   ceased. Therefore, a reasonable person will accept that the 1996 gun   
   control laws were a good change.   
      
      
   >   
   >> Like the laws we have here in Australia. All have been shown to   
   >> acheive results.   
   >   
   > Really?   
      
   **Yes, really.   
      
   >   
   > Please produce your scientific proof of causality.   
      
   **Impossible, without a proper double blind study.   
      
   >   
   > ----> Insert here.   
   >   
   > Please note, I said causality, not correlation.   
   >   
   > Remember "Correlation doe not imply causality".   
      
   **Never suggested otherwise. That said, YOU may care to explain the   
   results that we have experienced in Australia.   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>> Kind of like those people who can't tell you want an assault weapon is,   
   >>> but they will know it when they see it.   
   >>   
   >> **Strawman duly noted.   
   >   
   > Really? You think there aren't people like that?   
      
   **People who conconct a strawman argument? Sure. You are one of them.   
   See above strawman for an example. Move on. Stop introducing strawman   
   arguments.   
      
   >   
   >>>>>>>> Therefore, you support a criminal's right to easily obtain   
   >>>>>>>> firearms.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Sorry, one doesn't follow from the other, particularly when I   
   >>>>>>> haven't   
   >>>>>>> objected to good, sane controls on guns.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> **You have objected to good sane gun control laws. In every single   
   >>>>>> discussion you and I have had.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Point out a single good sane gun control law that I objected to.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> **I'll point out several:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> * ALL gun sales must be registered with government authorities. EVERY   
   >>>> SINGLE gun sale.   
   >>>   
   >>> It's insanity to assume criminals are going to register their illegal   
   >>> sales on the black market.   
   >>   
   >> **Since ALL gun sales must be reported, fewer guns will be sold to   
   >> criminals by legal gun owners. That can only be regarded as a positive   
   >> step.   
   >   
   > Really? Even the illegal sales will be reported?   
      
   **Another strawman. Read what I wrote.   
      
   >   
   > Hello.... think Trevor....if the transaction is illegal, then it's not   
   > going to be reported and your attempt fails.   
      
   **Since cross-checks are in place (in Australia), then any sale of a   
   firearm from a legal gun owner will be detected. The perpetrator will   
   then be punished.   
      
   >   
   > Further your assumption above assumes facts not in evidence, nor does it   
   > consider criminals simply turning to other sources.   
      
   **What other sources? What are all the sources that criminals obtain   
   firearms?   
      
   >   
   > Further as  a 'step' that means it doesn't produce tangible results.   
      
   **Wrong. ONE life saved is a tangible result.   
      
      
   > Thus by your own standard it is not a good, sane law since it doesn't   
   > produce such results.   
      
   **Wrong. Fewer guns are available to criminals. Therefore, the result is   
   a good one.   
      
   >   
   >>> Next?   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>> * EVERY SINGLE gun purchase must be subject to government approval.   
   >>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)