XPost: uk.politics.guns, aus.politics.guns, aus.politics   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net   
      
   "Trevor Wilson"  wrote in message   
   news:atlsu0F6niuU1@mid.individual.net...   
   > On 4/23/2013 8:30 AM, Scout wrote:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> "Trevor Wilson"  wrote in message   
   >> news:atkfi3Fr1mrU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>> On 4/22/2013 4:45 PM, Scout wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "Trevor Wilson"  wrote in message   
   >>>> news:atk47kFoj0aU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>>> On 4/22/2013 4:17 PM, Scout wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> "Trevor Wilson"  wrote in message   
   >>>>>> news:atjmslFm001U1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>>>>> 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.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> So if you can't show results that were actually caused by that law,   
   >>>>>> then   
   >>>>>> we can both agree it wasn't a good, sane law?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> **I've already provided the results of the Australian gun control   
   >>>>> laws. All good.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> No, you've asserted them, and you claimed they were the result of the   
   >>>> change in the laws.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>  Bad, tyrannical, even evil laws can also achieve   
   >>>>>>>> results.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> **Indeed. Bad results.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> So simply pointing to results, assuming you can actually prove any,   
   >>>>>> doesn't automatically mean it was a good, sane law. You still have to   
   >>>>>> PROVE that.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> IOW, you've just made the criteria of proof even harder for yourself.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>  Just because you have results doesn't make the law good and sane.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Exactly, and thanks for stepping into the trap.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> **There is no trap to step into. I've cited the changes to gun laws in   
   >>>>> Australia. You cannot show where these changes are bad. In fact, the   
   >>>>> reverse is true.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I don't have to show the changes were bad, you have to show they were   
   >>>> good by the standard you set.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> So let's see the causality you claim exists.   
   >>>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)