XPost: uk.politics.guns, aus.politics.guns, aus.politics
XPost: talk.politics.guns
From: SaPeIsMa@gmail.com
"RD Sandman" wrote in message
news:XnsA1AE7951F463Bhopewell@216.196.121.131...
> Trevor Wilson wrote in
> news:atts09Fu2eeU1@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 4/26/2013 7:49 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson wrote in
>>> news:attl3lFsi9eU2@mid.individual.net:
>>>
>>>> On 4/25/2013 2:59 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/24/2013 10:21 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/24/2013 1:26 PM, SaPeIsMa wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "F Murtz" wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:kl7d83$rib$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Too bad It has not had the same effect on total murders.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Therefore, a reasonable person will accept that the 1996 gun
>>>>>>>>>>> control laws were a good change.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Has not changed the status quo discernibly.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They don't really care that the TOTAL number hasn't changed
>>>>>>>>> The fact that "murders by guns" prove them right.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> **PROVE that the total number has not changed.
>>>>>>>> PROVE that the same number of people would have been murdered,
>>>>>>>> if the 1996 gun control law changes had not been enacted.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In your proof, make reference to the fact that in the 18 years
>>>>>>>> prior to the 1996 gun control law changes, there were 13 mass
>>>>>>>> murders committed via the use of firearms in Australia and that
>>>>>>>> since 1996, there have been none.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No mass gun murders but there have been mass murders by other
>>>>>>> means which the gun laws did nothing to stop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **Are you a complete moron, or are you permanently drunk?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do DUI laws stop people from being raped?
>>>>>> Do laws pertaining to bank robbery stop people from driving whilst
>>>>>> drunk?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gun control laws are designed to address GUN RELATED crimes, you
>>>>>> idiot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Only a moron would think that making a law that inconveniences a
>>>>> lot of people for almost no purpose factually to address such a
>>>>> miniscule problem in the total homicide statistic is the most
>>>>> wonderful thing since sliced bread
>>>>
>>>> **That's just it: It doesn't inconvenience people.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That depends on your viewpoint. If someone wishes to purchase
>>> certain firearms or accessories, it would have inconvenienced them.
>>> You don't think it inconveniences people simply because you weren't
>>> in the targeted group.
>>>
>>
>> **From your words, we can infer that you consider a minor
>> inconvenience, for a minority of people, worth trading the deaths of
>> 10,000 people for.
>>
>> Disgusting.
>>
>
> NO, what is disgusting is assholes like you trying to twist comments into
> something they are not. Trying to put your words into someone else's
> mouth.
>
Notice that he has no problems with the "convenience" traded for the deaths
of far more people when it comes to other things like cars, etc..
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
