XPost: aus.politics.guns, can.talk.guns, uk.politics.guns   
   From: trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio.com.au   
      
   "10x" <10x@teluös.net> wrote in message   
   news:et0js4l9uqhb396rq4uc7n63nt6bq4qjh8@4ax.com...   
   > On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 08:02:32 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>"10x" <10x@teluös.net> wrote in message   
   >>news:qn5is4db75g554dtb7aehiu326lsh6m7g7@4ax.com...   
   >>> On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:38:38 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"   
   >>>  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>"10x" <10x@teluös.net> wrote in message   
   >>>>news:qv4gs4tfj314ejgsrjgf3qr69pemnc2tkm@4ax.com...   
   >>>>> On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:25:31 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"   
   >>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>"10x" <10x@teluös.net> wrote in message   
   >>>>>>news:3hvfs4hv83larbqrrb51tk75qmr35larnr@4ax.com...   
   >>>>>>> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:42:23 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"   
   >>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>"10x" <10x@teluös.net> wrote in message   
   >>>>>>>>news:b6i9s4lsaf6so7lq3ks9ctb9crg16drjiq@4ax.com...   
   >>>>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 23:02:15 +1100, "Blinky Bill"   
   >>>>>>>>>    
   >>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> The exisiting laws are entirely adequate.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>What is your evidence for that? The US gun homicide rate certainly   
   >>>>>>>>>>suggests   
   >>>>>>>>>>otherwise.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Murder is against the law in the U.S.A.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>**Well that law doesn't work. Perhaps it should be removed from the   
   >>>>>>>>law   
   >>>>>>>>books. Is that your inference? Or are you trying to say something   
   >>>>>>>>else?   
   >>>>>>>>Perhaps you could elaborate.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> My point is that folks willing to break the law and taboo against   
   >>>>>>> murder are not going to care about a gun law or method of murdering   
   >>>>>>> others.  Firearms do not cause the intent to murder.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>**No. Your point was clear. [To paraphrase] You claim that "20,000"   
   >>>>>>gun   
   >>>>>>control laws don't work, so they should be dispensed with. I used your   
   >>>>>>specious claim to suggest that you should treat the laws surrounding   
   >>>>>>homicide the same way. People commit homicide. Therefore (in your   
   >>>>>>mind)   
   >>>>>>laws   
   >>>>>>which make homicide illegal are useless.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You certainly have a twist with words and logic.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>**It's my language of choice - Logic and reason.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> The gun control laws do not work to stop homicides.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>**Not directly, no. Gun control laws, in part, attempt to restrict the   
   >>>>availability of firearms to those who should not have them.   
   >>>   
   >>> Please define "those who should not have them"?   
   >>   
   >>**If you can't work that out, then there is little I can do for you. Are   
   >>you   
   >>really stupid, or are you being deliberately obtuse?   
   >   
   > What I have figured out is that if individuals can not be trusted with   
   > firearms in a society, then they can not be trusted with anything else   
   > that can be used as a weapon.  Individuals who are that dangerous need   
   > to be incarcerated or put into a position of very carefull   
   > supervision.   
      
   **You fail, yet again, to answer my questions. I shall repeat them:   
      
   Are you really stupid, or are you being deliberately obtuse?   
      
      
   > You honestly believe that someone who has no reservations about   
   > murdering other peopel will keep a promise to not touch guns?   
      
   **Non-sequitur. Good, strong, sane gun control laws have little to do with   
   promises.   
      
   >   
   >>> Places like Jamaica have very strict gun laws and very high homicide   
   >>> rates.   
   >>   
   >>**So? Is it your point that a third world nation has a crime problem? Is   
   >>that you point? This is hardly news. Poor nations tend to place their   
   >>resources into areas other than law and order. Developed nations tend to   
   >>place proportionally more of their resources into law and order.   
   >   
   > The U.S. is not a third world nation and it has a very high crime   
   > problem.  It has had a high crime problem for 200 years or more   
   > compared to the United Kingdom.   
      
   **Answer my questions please.   
      
   >   
   >>> Canada has the same gun laws in every jurisdiction yet the homicide   
   >>> rate with firearms varies from area to area.   
   >>   
   >>**So? We've already discussed the poorly thought out gun control laws in   
   >>Canada. Additional to that, the same can be said of any nation.   
   >   
   > What part of Canada's gun control is poorly thought out?   
      
   **Lack of compulsory firearms registration is the big one.   
   Additionally, the laws are not applied equally across the nation.   
   Some places in Canada (Ontario and Quebec) have tougher gun control laws   
   than other places.   
   There is poor enforcement of the laws.   
   There are poor controls over the sale of second hand guns.   
      
   Again: Examine the laws in AUSTRALIA and you will see an example of well   
   constructed and policed gun control laws.   
      
   > Police background checks on purchasers?   
   > Mandatory safety courses?   
   > Restrictions and prohibitions on the use of hadguns and some rifles.   
   > Police oversite on every firearm purchased in Canada?   
   > The gun registration system?   
   >   
   >>  If the laws worked the   
   >>> homicide rate /100,000 should be the same in all areas.   
   >>   
   >>**Bullshit. I'll bite. Why do you think that to be the case? Be precise in   
   >>your answer.   
   >   
   > You claim "bullshit". You tell me how it is bullshit please?   
      
   **I'm waiting for you to justify your nonsensical claim. I accept your   
   inability to justify the claim.   
      
   >   
   >>> There is no correlation between firearms, firearms laws, and the   
   >>> homocide rate.   
   >>   
   >>**Yes, there is. Examine the homicide rates in the following places:   
   >>   
   >>* Australia.   
   >>* The UK.   
   >>* Holland.   
   >>* Sweden.   
   >>* Germany.   
   >>* France.   
   >>* The USA.   
   >   
   > How come you left out Jamaica.   
      
   **I was careful to include developed nations, not third world shitholes.   
      
   > How come you didn't compare Mexico where private possession of   
   > firearms is strictly contolled?   
      
   **I was careful to include developed nations, not third world shitholes.   
      
   > Are you cherry picking your information?   
      
   **Not by choosing developed nations. Feel free to list any developed nation   
   as part of the comparison.   
      
   >   
   >>Now examine the firearms control laws in each of these places. See a   
   >>correlation?   
   >   
   > I see you contriving a correlation by cherry picking data sets.   
      
   **Not be using developed nations, rather than third world shitholes as   
   examples.   
      
   >   
   >>> And folks who do not have any respect for the law (and religious   
   >>> taboo) against murder are not going to be stopped by a gun law.   
   >>   
   >>**So, we should remove murder from the law books then? Is that your   
   >>contention? Don't bother prosecuting murderers, since they'll commit   
   >>murder   
   >>anyway? Sounds like a dumb idea to me.   
   >   
   > Yes removing murder from the law books is a dumb idea. Murder is   
   > murder whether it be done with a gun, knife, or blunt object.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)